In states that still criminalize marijuana, a new study funded by the federal government found that there are significantly higher sales of hemp-derived cannabinoids like delta-8THC, which is less regulated.
The study was published on Wednesday in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Researchers from the University of California San Diego examined cannabis sales patterns for the research. They concluded that the “delta-8 THC use is highest” among the states which prohibit the use of marijuana.
In a study of 1,523 U.S. adult participants, only 7.7 percent admitted to using delta-8-THC. In states with strict cannabis prohibition, people are twice as likely (11%) to admit to using the cannabinoid.
In a recent press release, it was stated that “likewise, the use of delta-8 THC is significantly higher in states where there are no restrictions on its sales (10.5%) compared to those states which have taken measures to regulate (3.9%) or prohibit (4.5%) this compound.” The prevalence of Delta-8 THC usage was lower in adult states that allow both medical marijuana and non-medical marijuana use (5.5%) than states that only permit medical marijuana use (8.5%).
This study suggests that the use of delta-8 THC is lower and higher in places that prohibit marijuana usage, but that it’s highest in environments where there are restrictions on its use.
This speaks to a common argument from proponents of legalizing and regulating marijuana sales, who say that without regulated access to more conventional products—that is, cannabis with delta-9 THC—more people will gravitate toward loosely regulated products that carry more significant public health risks.
The findings indicate that marijuana use doesn’t stop just because a state has banned it. In a recent press release, Eric Leas (UC San Diego assistant professor and lead author of the study) said that people often turn to other alternatives because they are more easily accessible. It’s an example of public policy with unintended effects.
While much is unknown about the science of delta-8 THC—which emerged on the marketplace across the country after hemp and its derivatives were federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill—the prevailing sentiment among health experts is that it inherently poses greater public health given the lack of research into its effects compared to delta-9 THC.
Leas has called for an end to hemp-derived products that are intoxicating due to the uncertainty. Several lawmakers, both at the federal and state levels, have advocated for this type of policy change.
Delta-8-THC may be used to satisfy the need for marijuana where its use is forbidden.
“The numbers in this study confirm a pattern we have seen before in data on delta-8 THC internet searches published in the International Journal of Drug Policy: when safer, regulated access to marijuana is unavailable, people become interested in products that are available, even if they’re riskier,” he said. It is possible to prioritise public health by ensuring that cannabis products are safe and regulated, and preventing the sale of understudied or poorly-regulated items like delta-8.
Leas stated that many people believe something just because it is legal must also be safe. We’ve been seeing an increase in reports of toxicities and other negative outcomes linked to delta-8-THC. “A regulatory free for all only makes this worse.”
Authors of the study reported receiving funding from both the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of NIDA.
Leas explained that “understanding the people who use delta-8 THC and their experience can be used to help create smarter policy.” Leas said, “We must ensure that people are not caught in a policy void and relying upon products outside the scope of both scientific knowledge and safety regulations.”
Another study, published last year in the Journal of Medical Toxicology, determined that the rates of exposure to delta-8 THC reported by poison centers are lower in U.S. states that have legalized and regulated marijuana than those who banned this cannabinoid.
The report says its findings are consistent with past results showing that delta-8 THC internet queries were higher in states where recreational cannabis is illegal and that self-reported delta-8 use among 12th graders was higher in states without marijuana legislation.
Separately, federally funded research published late last year by the American Medical Association (AMA) found that people in states where marijuana is illegal are significantly more likely to have used products containing lesser-known cannabinoids like delta-8 THC, signaling that prohibition may “unintentionally promote” usage of such products.
—
MEDCAN24 has been tracking the hundreds of bills relating to cannabis, psychedelics or drug policies that have passed through state legislatures as well as Congress in this past year. Patreon subscribers who donate at least $25/month have access to the interactive maps and charts, as well as our hearing calendar.
Find out more about our marijuana law tracker. To gain access, become a Patreon supporter.
—
As some states take patchwork measures to regulate delta-8-THC and other cannabinoids derived from hemp or synthetically produced, federal lawmakers are also considering legislative provisions that would impose a ban on cannabinoids derived from hemp such as delta-8-THC.
Rand Paul, a Republican Senator from Kentucky (R), recently announced that he plans to hold a meeting with House members to “reach an agreement” regarding hemp regulation. This is in response to his objection to the proposal by Congress to prohibit products with “quantifiable amounts” of THC.
Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), for his part, told MEDCAN24 that he wasn’t concerned about any potential opposition to the hemp ban in the Senate—and he also disputed reports about the scope of what his legislation on the House side would do to the industry.
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) released a report in June stating that the legislation would “effectively” prohibit hemp-derived cannabinoid products. The CRS originally stated that a similar ban would also prevent the sale CBD, but for unknown reasons the report has been updated to remove that specific language.
The hemp language is largely consistent with appropriations and agriculture legislation that was introduced, but not ultimately enacted, under the last Congress.
Hemp stakeholders protested this proposal. An earlier version was included last year in the subcommittee’s base bill. It’s virtually identical to a provision of the 2024 Farm Bill that was attached by a separate committee last May via an amendment from Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL), which was also not enacted into law.
A leading alcohol industry association, meanwhile, has called on Congress to dial back language in the House spending bill that would ban most consumable hemp products, instead proposing to maintain the legalization of naturally derived cannabinoids from the crop and only prohibit synthetic items.
Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America (WSWA) President and CEO Francis Creighton said in a press release that “proponents and opponents alike have agreed that this language amounts to a ban.”
Separately, key GOP congressional lawmakers—including one member who supports marijuana legalization—don’t seem especially concerned about provisions in the bill despite concern from stakeholders that it would put much of the hemp industry in jeopardy by banning most consumable products derived from the plant.
MEDCAN24 would not be possible without the support of readers. Please consider making a Patreon monthly pledge if you depend on our cannabis journalism for information.
