|
Abstract
|
The article by Lorenzetti et al. highlights the challenges posed by the lack of agreed minimum standards for quantifying cannabis use or dosage [1]. It also demonstrates a collaborative approach to reach agreement on measures, with the potential for expansion to support a more comprehensive understanding of the impacts of cannabis regulation.
Canada's regulated retail cannabis market launched in October 2018, joining only Uruguay and a handful of US states that had previously legalized non-medical sales and use. Canada's Cannabis Act sets out clear objectives for legalization, focused upon public health and public safety [2]. It also mandates that a review of the administration, operation and impact of the act be conducted 3 years following implementation.
Currently, in 2021, more than 20 states in the United States have passed or are in the process of passing legislation permitting adult non-medical cannabis use and steps towards legal retail are being taken internationally, including in Mexico, Malta, Switzerland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Those considering legalization are looking to learn from the experience of those who have gone before. Also, Canada's legislative review of the Cannabis Act is poised to begin, opening a window during which public health, public safety, academia, government and industry, among others, will attempt to influence regulatory adjustments.
To monitor the impact of legalization Canada has invested in two national population surveys, the National Cannabis Survey and the Canadian Cannabis Survey, and has provided funds that are supporting research initiatives across the country [3]. Although many of these studies include measures of consumption, associated risk behaviour and source, there is limited comparability between them. Even Canada's two national surveys use different time-frames and sampling methods to report current rates of use and cannot be compared [4, 5]. In the absence of agreed measures, answers to basic questions concerning changes in consumption, product sources and risk behaviour are subject to variation.
Data on prevalence vary according to how a question is asked...
Language: en |