Sociodemographic differences in young adults' recall of tobacco and cannabis marketing online and in television/film

Examining Factors Associated with Cannabis Use Among Sexual and Gender Minority and Cisgender Heterosexual Emerging Adults in California

Purpose: We explored correlates of cannabis risk and examined differences between sexual and gender minority (SGM) and cisgender heterosexual emerging adults (ages 18-29) in California. Methods: We recruited 1491 participants aged 18-29 years for a cross-sectional online survey. Ordinal logistic regressions assessed associations between minority stress (discrimination and internalized homophobia [IH]), social support (perceived social support and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer+ [LGBTQ+] community connectedness), and cannabis risk scores (low, medium, and high risk of developing problems related to their cannabis use). We also explored differences in cannabis risk scores by sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI). Results: Higher everyday discrimination scores were associated with increased odds of self-scoring in a higher cannabis risk range (adjusted odds ratio = 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.31-1.79). We found no significant associations for IH, LGBTQ+ community connectedness, or social support on cannabis risk scores. There were also no statistically significant differences by SOGI groups; however, SOGI did moderate the relationship between IH and cannabis risk score such that the slope for IH was 0.43 units higher for cisgender sexual minority women compared to cisgender sexual minority men (95% CI = 0.05-0.81). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that experiences of everyday discrimination are important contributors to developing cannabis-related problems and IH may have more pronounced effects for sexual minority women compared to sexual minority men. More research is needed to better understand risk and protective factors of cannabis risk to inform the development of culturally tailored interventions for SGM emerging adults.

Cannabis Use Differences Among Sexual Minority Versus Heterosexual Females and Males in Oklahoma: The Roles of Mental Health, Cannabis Perceptions, and Cannabis Marketing Exposure

INTRODUCTION

Despite the high cannabis use rates among sexual minority (SM) individuals, less research has examined factors related to cannabis use among SM (vs. heterosexual) individuals, especially in places with legal medical cannabis retail markets and high structural stigma, like Oklahoma.

METHODS

Data were from a survey of Oklahoma adults, including 3020 females (18.6% SM) and 2279 males (10.1% SM). Bivariate analyses examined associations of sexual identity with cannabis-related factors (i.e., perceived harm, positive attitudes, marketing exposure, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms) and cannabis use and use severity (i.e., past 30-day use, daily/near-daily use, cannabis use disorder [CUD] symptoms). Logistic regression examined associations of sexual identity and cannabis-related factors with cannabis use and use severity among females and males, separately.

RESULTS

SM (vs. heterosexual) females reported greater odds of past 30-day cannabis use and daily/near-daily use, lower harm perceptions, greater marketing exposure, and higher rates of depressive/anxiety symptoms. Lower harm perceptions and greater marketing exposure were associated with greater odds of past 30-day use, whereas marketing exposure was associated with greater odds of daily/near-daily use. SM (vs. heterosexual) males reported greater odds of daily/near-daily use and higher rates of depressive/anxiety symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

SM (vs. heterosexual) females reported higher rates of cannabis use, whereas SM (vs. heterosexual) females and males reported higher rates of daily/near-daily cannabis use. Potential targets for cannabis-related health campaigns aimed at reducing use differences include correcting misinterpretations of harm that may emanate from cannabis marketing efforts among females and addressing depressive symptoms among males.

Descriptive cross-sectional survey of tobacco and cannabis restrictions on state and local film incentives in the USA

BACKGROUND

Reducing tobacco depictions in media has significant health benefits because tobacco placements in films normalise tobacco use and are linked to youth initiation. Cannabis depictions may have similar effects. Placing restrictions on film incentives has been suggested; however, it remains an unexplored strategy for reducing tobacco depictions. We investigated whether states and localities that offer film incentives have established funding restrictions to deter tobacco or cannabis depictions.

METHODS

We conducted a descriptive cross-sectional survey of official state and local government websites in the USA that listed film incentives. We coded policy level (ie, state, local), incentive type (ie, tax credit, rebate), incentive amounts, programme qualifiers and presence and characteristics of tobacco and cannabis restrictions.

RESULTS

Quantifiable tax incentives at the state level offered over $1.6 billion to producers. Among 50 US states and Washington, DC, 39 provided film incentives: 4 restricted tobacco and 0 restricted cannabis. Among the 238 local film offices we identified, 24 offered incentives; 5 restricted tobacco and 1 restricted cannabis. All the incentive restrictions excluded tobacco or cannabis purchases from reimbursement; there were no penalties for tobacco or cannabis depictions.

CONCLUSIONS

Film incentives are large financial commitments that may undermine public health since they allow depictions of tobacco and cannabis that contribute to initiation and use. Few states or localities limit film incentives related to tobacco or cannabis, and the existing restrictions are unlikely to deter depictions or product placement. Restrictions on incentives are an underused tool for deterring tobacco and cannabis depictions in film.