Skip to main content

Tag: regulations

Report calls for more cohesion, public health focus to US cannabis laws

Written by David Brown on . Posted in Business, Cannabis News, Government, International.

A new report from researchers in the US is calling on that country’s federal government to take the lead in more strictly regulating cannabis with an eye on public health. 

The report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) in the United States was compiled by members of the NASEM’s Committee on the Public Health Consequences of Changes in the Cannabis Policy Landscape.

Looking at countries like Canada and Uruguay that took a stricter public health focus to legalization, researchers say the US federal government needs to bring more cohesion to the dozens of various state-legal models allowing some form of medical and/or non-medical adult-use access to cannabis.

The US approach to legalization has generally been more focused on revenue generation for various levels of government through taxation and regulatory fees, as well as private businesses. At the same time, both Canada and Uruguay put policies in place that emphasized public health concerns over private profits or even personal liberties. 

The report also calls on the US federal government to close hemp regulatory loopholes in the 2018 Farm Bill that have led to a proliferation of under-regulated semi-synthetic cannabinoids like delta-8THC.


“Existing state cannabis policies were developed without a public health strategy. State-to-state variations in regulations limit public health efforts to prevent harmful use. In contrast, some countries, such as Canada and Uruguay, have adopted more measured approaches with stricter government control over cannabis products and how they are sold or consumed. Such stricter regulatory frameworks may better protect public health.”

The committee was tasked with recommending a harm reduction approach to cannabis policy and setting a policy research agenda for the next five years.

“There is an urgent need for a coordinated public health approach to cannabis policy in the U.S.,” said Steven Teutsch, chair of the committee that wrote the report and senior fellow at the Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics at the University of Southern California. 

“Our report shows that cannabis policy often focuses on regulating sales and revenue first, and protecting public health second. Now is the time for the federal government to create guidance for states that have legalized cannabis in the interest of protecting the public’s health.”

Many of the recommendations mirror the approaches to legalizing and regulating cannabis taken by Canada and Uruguay, models the report explores in-depth as well. From the report:

“Existing state cannabis policies were developed without a public health strategy. State-to-state variations in regulations limit public health efforts to prevent harmful use. In contrast, some countries, such as Canada and Uruguay, have adopted more measured approaches with stricter government control over cannabis products and how they are sold or consumed. Such stricter regulatory frameworks may better protect public health.”

In contrast, the state-legal approach in the US has meant little oversight for things like age-gating or enforcing advertising restrictions. The report also expresses significant concern about how the current “ambiguous definition of hemp” in the 2018 Farm Bill has led to a largely unregulated market for semisynthetic intoxicating cannabinoids.

The report includes several recommendations:

  • Congress should refine the definition of “hemp” to clearly state that no form of tetrahydrocannabinol or semi-synthetic cannabinoid derived from hemp is exempt from the Controlled Substances Act.
  • In conjunction with other federal agencies, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention should conduct research on and develop best practices for protecting public health for states that have legalized cannabis, drawing from tobacco and alcohol policies. These best practices should encompass marketing restrictions (e.g., on advertising and packing), age restrictions, physical retail and retail operating restrictions, taxation, price restrictions, product design, and measures to limit youth access. Other strategies for protecting public health that warrant identification of best practices include reducing cannabis-impaired driving, promoting state retail monopoly, and encouraging cultivation practices that limit contamination of both products and the environment. The best practices should be reconsidered and updated periodically as new research emerges. 
  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in conjunction with its federal, state, tribal, and territorial partners, should create an adaptable public health surveillance system for cannabis. This surveillance system should include, at a minimum, cannabis cultivation and product sales, use patterns, and health impacts. It should also include all the essential components of a public health surveillance system: a surveillance plan, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, data dissemination, a link to action, and regular evaluation.
  • The U.S. Pharmacopeia has established product quality and analytical standards for cannabis inflorescence (flower) and is developing standards for cannabis extracts incorporated into pills and edibles. As these standards are completed, state cannabis regulators should adopt and enforce them to ensure the safety and quality of all legal cannabis products.
  • State cannabis regulators should require training and certification for all staff at cannabis retail outlets who interact with customers. The training should address the effects of cannabis on humans, prevention of sales to minors, warnings about cannabis-impaired driving, cannabis use in pregnancy, high-concentration or high-potency products, and how to identify signs of impairment. The effectiveness of the training should be assessed, and the content updated as new scientific information about the positive and negative impacts of cannabis emerges.
  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in coordination with other relevant agencies, should develop and evaluate targeted public health campaigns directed mainly toward parents and vulnerable populations (e.g., youth, those who are or are likely to become pregnant, adults over age 65) about the potential risks of cannabis; how to identify risky behaviour, such as the use of cannabis in combination with alcohol or prescription drugs; and risk mitigation strategies, such as lower-risk use guidelines and safe storage. These public health campaigns should include discouraging unhealthy use, such as the use of cannabis in combination with other substances (alcohol, tobacco, or drugs), and the increased risk associated with the use of high-concentration or high-potency products.
  • Congress should remove restrictions on the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) from studying the impacts of cannabis legalization. The ONDCP should be allowed to support research on the impacts of changes in cannabis policy.
  • Jurisdictions responsible for the enforcement of cannabis laws should endeavour to regularly gather and report detailed data concerning the use of criminal enforcement tools to enforce cannabis policies. 
  • State cannabis regulators should systematically evaluate and, if necessary, revise their cannabis social equity policies to ensure they meet their stated goals and minimize unintended consequences. Policymakers should meaningfully engage affected community members when developing or revising these policies.
  • Where states have legalized or decriminalized adult use and sales of cannabis, criminal justice reforms should be implemented, and records automatically expunged or sealed for low-level cannabis-related offences.
  • The National Institutes of Health; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; state, local, and tribal health authorities; and private entities should support a research agenda focused on:
    • public health outcomes of different approaches to cannabis regulation
    • efficacy of tests used to determine cannabis impairment
    • health effects of cannabis use (by product, amount, and frequency) by specific populations
    • health effects of emerging cannabis products, and • mitigation of the risks of cannabis use.

Industry: Cannabis rule changes a step in the right direction, but more is needed

Written by Dave Dormer on . Posted in Insight.

Proposed regulatory changes to the federal cannabis framework are a good step toward bolstering the industry, but some retailers, producers, and consultants say more needs to be done to help it grow and thrive.

Health Canada announced the proposed changes in early June, and a 30-day consultation period, which ends July 8, is now underway. (Note: Implementation of any proposed changes could take several months or more).

They cover everything from allowing cut-out windows and transparent packaging for dried and fresh cannabis products, plants, and seeds, to adjusting or removing some licencing requirements for producers, to quadrupling the threshold for micros from 200 m2 to 800 m2.

The proposed amendments also align with recommendations in the federal government’s expert panel’s final report on the Legislative Review of the Cannabis Act.

“For us, on a very functional level, it would be really nice to be able to tell the difference between one product and another without getting a magnifying glass out.”

Andrea Dobbs, Village Bloomery

“I think a lot of them are common sense, kind of much-needed for a very long time and it’s good to see that they are finally being implemented,” said consultant Deepak Anand, the principal with ASDA Consultancy Services.

“I wouldn’t say anything is bad. Definitely lots is missing.”

Two proposals Anand would recommend involve medical cannabis — allowing in-person access at pharmacies and removing the tax.

“We’ve had tax on medical cannabis for a very long time, cannabis is one of the only products, or the only product out there in Canada, that is a pharmaceutical product that is being taxed,” he said.

“The second, obviously, would be increased access, so certainly being able to both get this dispensed, but also received at a pharmacy would be another step in the right direction.”

The expert panel report calls for expanding the existing model, which permits online sales, to allow for in-person cannabis access at pharmacies.

Given that it has been nearly six years since legalization, Anand says the government needs to pick up the pace around some changes.

“It definitely is frustrating to see it moving so slowly,” he said. “If you think proactively and the way the government works, these things always take a very long time, but action was needed years ago. I think we are on the right path but it is a slow process.”

“That’s not to say it can’t be a step in the right direction, it’s just not something that will benefit who it is intended to benefit until those other pieces arrive as well.”

Walker Patton, Woody Nelson

The proposed changes to packaging — allowing cut-out windows on packaging for dried or fresh cannabis products and cannabis seeds, allowing transparent containers, and allowing lids to be a different colour than the container — will enable consumers to make more informed choices, says Andrea Dobbs, co-founder of Village Bloomery, a cannabis retailer in Vancouver.

“At least if you have three different cultivars, maybe the lid will be the difference. For us, on a very functional level, it would be really nice to be able to tell the difference between one product and another without getting a magnifying glass out,” Dobbs said.

“I think it’s going to be easier. When we start to talk to people about things that are quote, sativa, or equatorial, or whatever we want to call them … we’ll be able to talk about the shape of the bud. People will be able to see it in a more holistic way … it would be easy for me to say, ‘This is machine-trimmed and this is hand-trimmed, do you see the difference?’”

Dobbs says she would have liked to see the proposed changes crafted using more of an environmental lens.

Reducing some licensing requirements will allow for more product diversity.

“I like that they are not going to make people get a licence to process things like the stalk and the root,” said Dobbs. “This should be a completely closed-circle industry because every single piece of this plant is useful. I’m hoping to see a lot more products … paper, rope, canvas. I want to see more plastics, I want to see more fabrics, more paper, who knows, maybe the stalk will become the package one day. Let’s make it more accessible and not make someone get a Health Canada licence to do that.”

The changes are positive from a producer perspective, but more needs to be done, said Walker Patton, chief commercial officer at Woody Nelson, an LP in southeast British Columbia.

“One of the things that stood out to me which I thought was kind of neat was them (increasing) the canopy for micros, but then I quickly realized after talking to some folks on that side of things that that isn’t worth much when you don’t have the capital to expand. And the market price doesn’t exactly support the production of craft cannabis right now.”

“I think a lot of them are common sense, kind of much-needed for a very long time and it’s good to see that they are finally being implemented.”

Deepak Anand, ASDA Consultancy Services.

Ancillary supports are needed, he said.

“If there was capital available or the market price was higher and this was a more profitable industry, or the taxes were lower, there’s a few difference mechanisms that could be changed in order to make that a great policy. But without those other mechanisms, it kind of misses the mark,” he said

“But that’s not to say it can’t be a step in the right direction, it’s just not something that will benefit who it is intended to benefit until those other pieces arrive as well.”

As for his own recommendations, Patton would like to see the 30-gram limit raised to allow for bulk purchases for personal use.

He would also like to see a standardized methodology for cannabinoid and terpene testing.

“It doesn’t really matter if they want to develop their own or adopt something like SGS’s or ASTM’s, we just need consistency from one lab to the next,” he said. “There’s a reason why international labs aren’t generating the same inflated THC test results that we’re seeing in the Canadian marketplace.”

Health Canada estimates the proposed changes could result in $41 million annually in “administrative and compliance cost savings” for stakeholders.

Some of the proposed changes include: 

  • Increasing the threshold for micros from 200 m2 to 800 m2 and the micro processing licence possession threshold from 600 kg to 2,400 kg of dried cannabis or its equivalent.
  • Increasing Nurseries’ canopy size for seed production from 50 m2 to 200 m2, allowing them to harvest up to 20 kg of flowering cannabis for seed production.
  • Removing the requirement for actual THC and CBD on product labels, only total THC and CBD. 
  • Increasing the number of permitted alternate Quality Assurance Persons (QAPs) to “one or more” from the current allowance of “up to two”.
  • Licensed processors would no longer be required to provide printed copies of the consumer information document with every cannabis product package sent.
  • Formalizing COVID-19 era “flexibilities”.
  • Adding grounds for suspension of any licences held by the same licence holder, should they have unpaid fees or have failed to submit a required statement of cannabis revenue for a licence as required under the Cannabis Fees Order. 
  • Amending the Industrial Hemp Regulations to remove the maximum THC concentration of 10 parts per million for industrial hemp grain derivatives, as well as the testing requirement, labelling for wholesale, and import and export requirements.
  • Allowing for differentiation in colour between the lid or cap of a container and the container itself.
  • Permitting cut-out windows on packaging for dried or fresh cannabis products and cannabis seeds, while upholding the exclusion of cut-out windows for all other classes of cannabis.
  • Allowing dried or fresh cannabis products, in addition to cannabis plants and cannabis seeds, to be packaged in transparent containers while maintaining existing rules prescribing opaque or translucent packaging of all other classes of cannabis.
  • Removing the cumulative 10 mg THC limit for an outermost container of edible cannabis product to allow greater flexibility in packing multiple immediate containers, as long as the immediate containers do not have more than 10 mg of THC each.
  • Removing the requirement to file an NNCP to Health Canada for dried and fresh cannabis products.