What is the likelihood that underage youth can obtain marijuana from licensed recreational marijuana outlets in California, a state where recreational marijuana is legal?

State licenses for medical marijuana dispensaries: neighborhood-level determinants of applicant quality in Missouri

BACKGROUND

When state governments impose quotas on commercial marijuana licenses, regulatory commissions use an application process to assess the feasibility of prospective businesses. Decisions on license applications are often met with formal appeals and legal challenges from rejected applicants. Although prior research has examined substate disparities in the availability of marijuana dispensaries, less attention has been given to the quality of license applications. The present study analyzed the relationship between neighborhood-level characteristics and the quality of prospective dispensary businesses.

METHODS

During Missouri's first applicant pool for medical marijuana dispensaries in 2019, a total of 606 census tracts contained the location site of at least one dispensary applicant. Using data from the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services and the American Community Survey, fractional and binary logistic regression models were used to estimate the relationship between census-tract characteristics and application outcomes.

RESULTS

License applications received higher evaluation scores when proposed dispensary sites were in census tracts with greater population densities and no majority in racial/ethnic composition. Census tracts with poorer socioeconomic conditions attracted a disproportionate share of low-scoring applicants from the bottom quartile of scores. These effects were stronger for certain application subsections, particularly those assessing the quality of an applicant's business plan and on-site security.

CONCLUSIONS

Some communities tend to attract prospective license holders who possess better quality resources, business practices, and industry experience. State disparities in commercial licensing requirements and application processes may lead to the inequities in legal product access found in some prior studies.

A First-Tier Framework for Assessing Toxicological Risk from Vaporized Cannabis Concentrates

Vaporization is an increasingly prevalent means to consume cannabis, but there is little guidance for manufacturers or regulators to evaluate additive safety. This paper presents a first-tier framework for regulators and cannabis manufacturers without significant toxicological expertise to conduct risk assessments and prioritize additives in cannabis concentrates for acceptance, elimination, or further evaluation. Cannabinoids and contaminants (e.g., solvents, pesticides, etc.) are excluded from this framework because of the complexity involved in their assessment; theirs would not be a first-tier toxicological assessment. Further, several U.S. state regulators have provided guidance for major cannabinoids and contaminants. Toxicological risk assessment of cannabis concentrate additives, like other types of risk assessment, includes hazard assessment, dose-response, exposure assessment, and risk characterization steps. Scarce consumption data has made exposure assessment of cannabis concentrates difficult and variable. Previously unpublished consumption data collected from over 54,000 smart vaporization devices show that 50th and 95th percentile users consume 5 and 57 mg per day on average, respectively. Based on these and published data, we propose assuming 100 mg per day cannabis concentrate consumption for first-tier risk assessment purposes. Herein, we provide regulators, cannabis manufacturers, and consumers a preliminary methodology to evaluate the health risks of cannabis concentrate additives.