...
首页> 外文期刊>American journal of public health >Developing Public Health Regulations for Marijuana: Lessons From Alcohol and Tobacco
【24h】

Developing Public Health Regulations for Marijuana: Lessons From Alcohol and Tobacco

机译:制定大麻公共卫生法规:从烟酒中学到的教训

获取原文
           

摘要

Until November 2012, no modern jurisdiction had removed the prohibition on the commercial production, distribution, and sale of marijuana for nonmedical purposes—not even the Netherlands. Government agencies in Colorado and Washington are now charged with granting production and processing licenses and developing regulations for legal marijuana, and other states and countries may follow. Our goal is not to address whether marijuana legalization is a good or bad idea but, rather, to help policymakers understand the decisions they face and some lessons learned from research on public health approaches to regulating alcohol and tobacco over the past century. Marijuana legalization is no longer an abstract notion. In November 2012, voters in Colorado and Washington passed initiatives that not only made it legal to possess up to an ounce of marijuana for nonmedical purposes but also allow for-profit firms to supply the market. Colorado’s initiative additionally allows home production. Although marijuana remains illegal under federal law, policymakers in these states are now developing regulatory regimes that will allow licensees to produce and sell marijuana and other cannabis products, including infused candies and other edibles, to anyone who is aged 21 years or older. (“Marijuana” is an American term, customarily applied to the dried leaves and flowers of the cannabis plant. There are other cannabis plant products, including resin, which is referred to in the United States as “hashish.” The majority of cannabis consumed in the United States is in the form of marijuana, which is probably why initial state legalization statutes that have passed are specifically about “marijuana” although even these laws do not mean to be restrictive in their terms. For example, Washington speaks of “marijuana-infused” drinks and edibles, and Colorado’s Amendment 64 defines “marijuana” to be all possible products of the plant except industrial hemp.) Bills to legalize marijuana are being introduced in other states, and we will likely see more ballot initiatives in future elections. Although many jurisdictions have experimented with alternatives to strict marijuana prohibition, including decriminalization, medical marijuana, and the Dutch “coffee shops,” no industrialized nation has legalized the cultivation, processing, distribution, and supply of marijuana for recreational purposes in the modern era—not even the Netherlands. In the Netherlands, de facto legalization extends only to retail sales of up to 5 grams; wholesale distribution of marijuana to coffee shops remains illegal and is actively enforced. That is not to say that it has never been legal; in fact, marijuana was a legal commodity in the United States until the early 1900s. But regulatory policy on the cultivation, processing, distribution, and sale of marijuana and its derivative products is unprecedented in the modern era. Because there are no modern examples of marijuana regulation, policymakers are confronting many new questions about how to manage a marijuana market. Should the number of licensees be restricted, and, if so, how should those scarce licenses be allocated? Should vertical integration be allowed, or should there be separate licenses for growing, processing, and selling marijuana? What product safety requirements should be considered (in terms of specific ingredients allowed or disallowed), and who will be responsible for testing the product? How restrictive should licenses be in terms of permitted quantity and potency? Should taxes be assessed per unit weight, as a percentage of value (ad valorem), or on some other basis, such as Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content? Should marijuana be sold in conventional stores alongside other products or only in specialized venues? What about within-state Internet sales? Although the questions are new for marijuana, policymakers have grappled with similar questions pertaining to alcohol and tobacco, raising the question of what lessons can be learned from these 2 substances and applied to marijuana policy. We have summarized insights and ideas that grew out of a meeting of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drug policy experts hosted by the RAND Drug Policy Research Center on February 11, 2013, to foster discussions about how one might regulate marijuana to promote public health objectives assuming a decision to legalize has already been made. The arguments here do not necessarily reflect the opinions of every coauthor but, instead, reflect a general consensus of ideas that grew out of those discussions. The conference was filmed by C-SPAN. 1.
机译:直到2012年11月,没有任何现代司法管辖区取消了禁止将大麻用于非医疗目的的商业生产,分销和销售的禁令,甚至荷兰也没有。科罗拉多州和华盛顿州的政府机构现在负责发放生产和加工许可证,并制定合法大麻的法规,其他州和国家也可能会遵循。我们的目标不是解决大麻合法化是好事还是坏事,而是帮助政策制定者了解他们面临的决定以及在过去一个世纪中从公共卫生方法对酒精和烟草进行管制的研究中吸取的一些教训。大麻合法化不再是一个抽象的概念。 2012年11月,科罗拉多州和华盛顿州的选民通过了多项举措,这些举措不仅使其合法拥有非医学用途的一盎司大麻合法化,而且还允许营利性公司为市场提供大麻。科罗拉多州的倡议还允许家庭生产。尽管根据联邦法律大麻仍然是非法的,但这些州的政策制定者现在正在制定监管制度,允许被许可人向年龄在21岁以上的任何人生产和销售大麻和其他大麻产品,包括注入的糖果和其他食品。 (“大麻”是美国的一个术语,通常用于大麻植物的干叶和花朵。还有其他大麻植物产品,包括树脂,在美国被称为“大麻”。大部分大麻消费量为在美国,大麻是大麻的形式,这也许就是为什么最初通过的州合法化法规专门针对“大麻”的原因,尽管即使这些法律也不意味着对大麻的限制。例如,华盛顿说“大麻” -注入了饮料和食品,而科罗拉多州的第64号修正案将“大麻”定义为除工业大麻以外的所有可能的植物产品。)在其他州,也提出了使大麻合法化的法案,我们可能会在未来的选举中看到更多的投票倡议。尽管许多司法管辖区都尝试了严格的禁止大麻的替代方法,包括去犯罪化,医用大麻和荷兰的“咖啡店”,但没有一个工业化国家在现代时代将大麻的种植,加工,分配和供应用于娱乐目的合法化,甚至没有荷兰。在荷兰,事实上合法化仅扩展到零售量不超过5克的商品;大麻向咖啡店的批发分发仍然是非法的,并得到了积极执行。这并不是说它从未合法过;实际上,直到1900年代初,大麻在美国还是合法商品。但是,有关大麻及其衍生产品的种植,加工,分销和销售的监管政策在现代时代是空前的。由于没有现代的大麻法规实例,政策制定者面临着有关如何管理大麻市场的许多新问题。应该限制​​被许可人的数量吗?如果要限制,那么应该如何分配那些稀缺的许可?应该允许垂直整合,还是应该有单独的许可来种植,加工和销售大麻?应该考虑哪些产品安全要求(就允许或不允许的特定成分而言),谁来负责测试产品?许可证在许可数量和效力方面应有多严格的限制?是否应按单位重量,价值的百分比(从价税)或其他一些基础(例如Δ-9-四氢大麻酚(THC)含量)来评估税收?大麻应该在传统商店中与其他产品一起出售还是仅在专门场所出售?州内互联网销售情况如何?尽管对于大麻来说这是一个新问题,但政策制定者已经解决了与酒精和烟草有关的类似问题,提出了从这两种物质中可以吸取哪些教训并将其应用于大麻政策的问题。我们总结了2013年2月11日由RAND药物政策研究中心主办的酒精,烟草和非法药物政策专家会议所产生的见解和想法,以促进人们就如何调节大麻以促进公共卫生目标进行讨论。假设已经做出使合法化的决定。这里的论点并不一定反映每个合著者的观点,而是反映了从这些讨论中产生的观点的普遍共识。会议由C-SPAN摄制。 1。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号