Smoking, vaping, eating: Is legalization impacting the way people use cannabis?

Borodovsky, Jacob T.; Crosier, Benjamin S.; Lee, Dustin C.; Sargent, James D.; Budney, Alan J.

doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2016.02.022

Cited by 207 publications

(170 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

160

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Some participants used the same vaporiser for both products (switching cartridges between marijuana concentrates and nicotine solutions), while others reported owning devices for each. Although past studies showed that vaping was less common than smoking marijuana among a convenience sample of adults, 16 given the rapid growth of the marijuana vaporiser industry 23 24 and the growing popularity of electronic vaporisers, especially in states with legalised medical marijuana, 16 it is essential to study perceptions and practices related to electronic vaporisers for marijuana.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Traversing the triangulum: the intersection of tobacco, legalised marijuana and electronic vaporisers in Denver, Colorado: Table 1

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo explore the intersection of tobacco, legalised marijuana and electronic vaporiser use among young adults in the ‘natural laboratory’ of Colorado, the first state with legalised retail marijuana.MethodsWe conducted semistructured interviews with 32 young adults (18–26 years old) in Denver, Colorado, in 2015 to understand the beliefs and practices related to the use of tobacco, marijuana and vaporisers.ResultsWe found ambiguity about whether the phrase ‘to smoke’ refers to the use of tobacco or marijuana products. Smoking marijuana blunts (emptied cigarillo or tobacco wrap filled with marijuana) was common, but few interpreted this as tobacco use. Marijuana vaporisers were used to circumvent public consumption laws (eg, while at work or when driving). Young adults considered secondhand tobacco smoke dangerous, but perceived secondhand marijuana smoke as benign.DiscussionUsing tobacco products as a delivery method for marijuana (eg, blunts) might be increasing and normalising tobacco use among young adults. Surveillance should explicitly ask about use of tobacco products for marijuana. Marijuana vaporisers, often indistinguishable from nicotine vaporisers, may be used to circumvent public consumption laws; communities concerned about use of marijuana in public spaces should include vaporisers (for nicotine or marijuana) in smoke-free regulations. Tobacco, marijuana and electronic vaporisers should be studied together, rather than separately. This approach is essential in informing research and policy as more US states and countries worldwide move to legalise marijuana.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Traversing the triangulum: the intersection of tobacco, legalised marijuana and electronic vaporisers in Denver, Colorado: Table 1

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, although we did not have information about the methods of cannabis use among parents, which would affect the level of possible SCS exposure, recent evidence indicates the vast majority of cannabis use occurs via smoking, whereas edible forms account for <10% of use among US adults. 28,29 Future researchers need to obtain specific estimates of the degree to which level of exposure is changing among children in the home. Researchers using biomarkers of cannabis and tobacco exposure in children of different ages and in households implementing varying degrees of protection (eg, household smoking bans) are needed to advance the field.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in Cannabis and Cigarette Use Among Parents With Children at Home: 2002 to 2015

Goodwin

Cheslack‐Postava

Santoscoy³

et al. 2018

Pediatrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: In this study, we investigated trends in cannabis use among parents with children at home in the United States and estimated changes in prevalence of any cannabis use and daily cannabis use among parents who identified as cigarette smokers and nonsmokers with children in the home from 2002 to 2015. METHODS: The National Survey on Drug Use and Health is an annual, nationally representative, cross-sectional study conducted in the United States. Using logistic regression models, associations between cigarette smoking and any past-month and daily past-month cannabis use among parents with children in the home from 2002 to 2015 were estimated. Moderation of these associations by demographics and trends over time was examined. RESULTS: Past-month cannabis use among parents with children in the home increased from 4.9% in 2002 to 6.8% in 2015, whereas cigarette smoking declined from 27.6% to 20.2%. Cannabis use increased from 11.0% in 2002 to 17.4% in 2015 among cigarette-smoking parents and from 2.4% to 4.0% among non–cigarette-smoking parents (P value for trends <.0001). Cannabis use was nearly 4 times more common among cigarette smokers versus nonsmokers (17.4% vs 4.0%; adjusted odds ratio = 3.88 [3.16–4.75]), as was daily cannabis use (4.6% vs 0.8%; adjusted odds ratio = 3.70 [2.46–5.55]). The overall percentage of parents who used either cigarettes and/or cannabis decreased from 29.7% in 2002 to 23.5% in 2015. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to decrease secondhand smoke exposure via cigarette smoking cessation may be complicated by increases in cannabis use. Educating parents about secondhand cannabis smoke exposure should be integrated into public education programs on secondhand tobacco smoke exposure.

show abstract

“…No two LCL are exactly the same and analytical strategies that rely on yes/no LCL comparisons may obfuscate important underlying policy heterogeneity. The provisions within each LCL that dictate how cannabis is produced and distributed may impact important public health metrics such as rates of cannabis use and use disorder, average cannabis THC content, and utilization of new methods of cannabis administration (Borodovsky, Crosier, Lee, Sargent, & Budney, 2016; Pacula, et al, 2015; Sevigny, Pacula, & Heaton, 2014). Analyzing the effects of specific LCL provisions is necessary to clarify the true impact of cannabis legalization and to guide effective regulation of legal cannabis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal cannabis laws, home cultivation, and use of edible cannabis products: A growing relationship?

Borodovsky

Budney

2017

International Journal of Drug Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Over half of U.S. states have enacted legal cannabis laws (LCL). In parallel, edible cannabis products (i.e., edibles) have presented new regulatory challenges. LCL provisions that dictate access to cannabis (e.g., home cultivation (HC) or dispensaries (DSP)) may impact edible production and use. This study examined relationships among HC and DSP provisions, cannabis cultivation, and edible use. Methods An online cannabis use survey was distributed using Facebook. Data were collected from 1813 cannabis-using adults. U.S. states were classified as states without LCL (Non-LCL) or LCL states that: (1) only permit DSP (LCL DSP-only), (2) only permit HC (LCL HC-only), or (3) permit HC and DSP (LCL HC+DSP). Analyses tested associations among these classifications, cannabis growing, and edible use and procurement. Results Individuals in LCL HC-only and LCL HC+DSP states were more likely to report currently growing cannabis at home (OR: 3.3, 95% CI: 1.7, 6.2; OR: 3.9, 95% CI: 2.4, 6.3, respectively) and past-month edible use (OR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.4, 3.4; OR: 2.9, 95% CI: 2.2, 3.9, respectively) than individuals in LCL DSP-only states. Regardless of state, those who had grown cannabis were more likely to have made edibles than those who had never grown cannabis (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.8, 2.6). Individuals in LCL HC-only states were more likely to have made edibles in the past month than individuals from Non-LCL (OR: 2.75, 95% CI: 1.5, 5.3) and DSP-only states (OR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.0, 4.4). Individuals in LCL HC+DSP states were more likely to have purchased edibles in the past month than individuals from Non-LCL (OR: 3.7, 95% CI: 2.4, 5.6) and DSP-only states (OR: 3.2, 95% CI: 1.8, 5.5). Conclusion Specific LCL provisions may differentially affect individuals’ propensity to grow cannabis and make, buy, and use edible cannabis products. Permitting home cultivation contributes to a greater probability of growing cannabis. Those who grow cannabis economize the plant by creating homemade edible cannabis products. Conversely, permitting dispensaries increases the likelihood of purchasing edibles. The psychoactive effects of edibles with unknown and variable cannabinoid content will be unpredictable. Policymakers should carefully consider how specific LCL provisions can affect patterns of cannabis edible product access and quality.

show abstract

Smoking, vaping, eating: Is legalization impacting the way people use cannabis?

Cited by 207 publications

References 33 publications

Traversing the triangulum: the intersection of tobacco, legalised marijuana and electronic vaporisers in Denver, Colorado: Table 1

Traversing the triangulum: the intersection of tobacco, legalised marijuana and electronic vaporisers in Denver, Colorado: Table 1

Trends in Cannabis and Cigarette Use Among Parents With Children at Home: 2002 to 2015

Legal cannabis laws, home cultivation, and use of edible cannabis products: A growing relationship?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About