The federal government will host a “frank and open discussion” this spring with representatives from the industry, academia, and law enforcement to discuss “the best way forward in realizing meaningful cannabis breathalyzers technology and implementation”.
This two-day meeting, which will be hosted by NIST, a part of U.S. Department of Commerce in Boulder Colorado on the 16th and 17th of April, has been scheduled.
A NIST representative sent MEDCAN24 a draft agenda. Topics to be covered include the challenges of designing and developing marijuana breathalyzers, obstacles for prosecutors in drugged driving cases, and ways NIST could partner with others to further advance technology.
NIST will publish a report containing the findings from the “Building the Path Forward for Meaningful Marijuana Breathalyzer Recognition” workshop.
The NIST representative stated that more information will be forthcoming about this event.
Contrary to alcohol, marijuana does not have a widely accepted “field test” that can be used to detect if someone is impaired.
Researchers at NIST, University of Colorado Boulder and NIST concluded in a 2023 federally-funded report that “the evidence doesn’t support the notion that THC detection as a simple measurement can reliably determine recent cannabis usage.”
Kavita Jeerage said that more research was needed before a cannabis breathalyzer could produce meaningful results. She is a materials researcher at NIST and a co-author. The results of a breathalyzer can be a life-changing event for a person, and they should feel confident that the test is accurate.
Recently, an American Department of Justice (DOJ) researcher questioned if THC concentrations are a reliable measure of impairment.
Frances Scott of the National Institute of Justice Office of Investigative and Forensic Sciences (NIJ), under DOJ said that “states may need to get away from this idea” on a recent podcast.
Scott has questioned whether the “per se”, THC-based limits that have been set by some states for drivers are effective. This allows a driver to be accused of driving under the influence if they exceed the THC limit. She said that there is no way of assessing impairment due to THC as we do with alcohol.
Scott said that there is a complication: “If you compare chronic and infrequent marijuana users, their THC concentrations are very different. They have effects that differ.” The same level of effect, if that’s what you want to call it, would be associated with very different THC concentrations in blood between chronic users and infrequent users.
This issue was examined last year in a study funded by the federal government. The researchers identified two ways to more accurately test for recent THC consumption, taking into account the fact that cannabinoids and their metabolites may remain present in a patient’s body for months or weeks after use.
THC impairment has been an important topic for legislators and researchers, especially when it comes to driving laws.
A study preprint published on The Lancet in October by an 8-author team from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Canada, Health Canada and Thomas Jefferson University of Philadelphia identified and analyzed a dozen peer-reviewed publications measuring “the degree to which there is a linear correlation between driving outcome and blood THC”.
The paper concludes, “Consensus is that blood THC does not correlate linearly with driving.” The paper concluded that this is a surprising result, since blood THC levels are used to determine whether a driver is impaired by cannabis.
The majority of states with legal cannabis measure THC intoxication based on whether someone’s THC blood levels fall below a specific cutoff. According to the study, relying solely on blood THC levels may not be an accurate way of determining whether someone is driving impaired.
The authors of the review stated that “Ten papers found no correlation” between THC levels in blood and driving or any other measure. [standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP)]It can be speed, following a car, overall performance, reaction time or driving style. “The two papers which did show a significant correlation were both from the same research and showed a relationship between blood THC, SDLP and speed as well as following distance.”
Researchers behind a federally-funded study announced earlier last year that they had developed new methods to improve the selectivity and accuracy of popular forensic tests, which would allow better detection of Delta-9 THC in blood.
According to a congressional report from 2023 for the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Bill (THUD), the House Appropriations Committee continues to “support the development of a standard objective to measure impairment by marijuana and an associated field sobriety to ensure road safety.”
John Hickenlooper, a Colorado Democrat Senator had written to the Department of Transportation in an earlier year asking for an update regarding a federal research report that was examining the barriers that were preventing the creation of a standardized marijuana test on roads. The department was required to complete the report under a large-scale infrastructure bill that President Joe Biden signed, but it missed its reporting deadline.
A study published in 2019 concluded that those who drive at the legal THC limit—which is typically between two to five nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood—were not statistically more likely to be involved in an accident compared to people who haven’t used marijuana.
Separately, the Congressional Research Service in 2019 determined that while “marijuana consumption can affect a person’s response times and motor performance … studies of the impact of marijuana consumption on a driver’s risk of being involved in a crash have produced conflicting results, with some studies finding little or no increased risk of a crash from marijuana usage.”
Another study from 2022 found that smoking CBD-rich marijuana had “no significant impact” on driving ability, despite the fact that all study participants exceeded the per se limit for THC in their blood.
As far back as in 2015, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the United States concluded that there is “difficulty to establish a relation between a person’s THC plasma or blood concentration and performance-impairing effects.” They also added that it was “inadvisable” to predict effects based solely on blood THC levels.
NHTSA also said in a report released last year that there is “relatively limited research” to support the notion that THC levels in blood are able to be used as a measure of impairment. This raises questions about laws that have been passed in some states which set limits “per se”.
The report noted that although several states had established legal per se cannabis impairment definitions, there was relatively little support for their link to accident risk. This report stated that “Unlike research consensus which establishes the clear correlation between [blood alcohol content] “Drug concentrations in the blood do not directly correlate with driving impairment.
GOP Senator Pushes RFK Jr. On ‘Preventing The Expansion Of Marijuana’ As Trump’s Health Secretary
Mike Latimer is the photographer.