CBD OIL

Cannabis is more potent but fewer young people view it as harmful. Those two points of interests are underlined in a 2021 World Drug Report released June 24 by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), which suggested a worldwide ban on cannabis advertising.

From UNODC World Drug Report

The percentage of delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the main psychoactive component in cannabis, rose from about 4% to 16% in the U.S. between 1995-2019, and from about 6% to 11% in Europe between 2002–2019, according to UNODC findings outlined in the five-booklet report.

According to the report, delta-9 is responsible for the development of mental health disorders in long-term, heavy users of cannabis, yet the percentage of adolescents perceiving cannabis as harmful has decreased by as much as 40% during the same period—the latter finding is supported by surveys of schoolchildren and young adults in the U.S. and Europe, according to the UNODC.

“Lower perception of drug use risks has been linked to higher rates of drug use, and the findings of UNODC’s 2021 World Drug Report highlight the need to close the gap between perception and reality to educate young people and safeguard public health,” UNODC Executive Director Ghada Waly said in a statement.

From UNODC World Drug Report

The UNODC did not cite where it derived its conclusion regarding mental health disorders being linked to cannabis use in the section of the report it was mentioned. Cannabis Business Times reached out to UNODC for a comment, seeking clarity of a study or scientific entity supporting that claim, but has not yet received a response.

A team of researchers writing in the July 28, 2007, edition of the British peer-reviewed general medical journal The Lancet stated that consuming cannabis could boost one’s risk of a psychotic illness later in life by 40% or more.

As the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) revealed the week after that edition was published, the authors of the study affirmed that the association “does not necessarily reflect a causal relation” between consuming cannabis and triggering psychotic behavior. In other words, there could be a spurious, or third-party, relationship responsible for the correlation.

Paul Armentano, who was a senior policy analyst for NORML in 2007, said there were several explanations for the observed correlation.

“Individuals suffering from mental illness such as schizophrenia tend to use all intoxicants— particularly alcohol and tobacco—at greater rates than the general population,” he said in 2007. “Not surprisingly, many of these individuals also use cannabis.”

Also in the 2021 World Drug Report’s findings and conclusions, UNODC stated that aggressive marketing of cannabis products with high THC content by private firms as well as promotion through social-media channels can worsen what the UN’s office calls a perception-versus-reality problem among young people.

As a result, the UNODC is calling for a comprehensive ban on cannabis advertising, promoting and sponsoring, which “would ensure that public health interests prevail over business interests,” as stated in the report. Such a ban would need to apply across all jurisdictions, and the measure could work in a way similar to the provisions of the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, according to the report.

That 2003 WHO treaty collected 168 signatures, including the U.S., although the U.S. is one of six signees that has yet to ratify it. In 2019, the largest cigarette and smokeless tobacco companies spent $8.2 billion on advertising and promotional expenses in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, the U.S. does have certain restrictions and regulations in place for advertising and promoting tobacco, according to the Food and Drug Administration.

An advertising ban for the cannabis industry would work opposite of public health interests, Rosie Mattio said in a June 24 tweet, following the release of the UNODC report. Mattio is the founder and CEO of New York-based Mattio Communications, a public relations firm serving more than 50 cannabis clients.

“Advertising is one of the most effective ways regulated companies can educate consumers and patients,” Mattio said. “This will ultimately hamper the industry’s efforts to bring safe and accessible cannabis to adults around the world.”

According to the World Drug Report, more investment is needed for research into the harm that the non-medical use of cannabis poses to health and to better define the range of health conditions for which cannabis products may be an effective treatment.

Global monitoring of the impact of laws that allow for the medical and non-medical use of cannabis is key, the UNODC report stated.

“This will need to go beyond the trends in cannabis use in a single country to assessing the frequency and patterns of cannabis consumption, health and socioeconomic consequences and market developments in both the licit and the illicit sectors around the world,” it said. “One important aspect to evaluate is the impact of cannabis legalization on the perception of risks associated with cannabis use, particularly among young people, beyond the countries where this legalization is taking place; it would also be critical to assess the risk perceived by young people in low-income countries.”

Underlying findings outlined in UNODC’s 2021 World Drug Report, as it relates to cannabis, include:

• Roughly 200 million people used cannabis in 2019, representing 4 percent of the global population. The figure is highest in North America (14.5 percent) and lowest in Asia (2 percent).
• The number of cannabis users has increased by nearly 18 percent over the past decade
• Between 2009–2019, quantities seized fell by 35 percent, largely because of dramatic declines in North America partly linked to legalization of non-medical cannabis in some jurisdictions.
• Excluding North American data, global seizures were 36 percent higher in 2019 than in 2009.
• Diverse cannabis products have become more potent yet the number of adolescents regarding the drug as harmful is declining rapidly, a trend that risks increasing the negative impact of cannabis on younger generations.
• An increase in cannabis use has been observed in many countries during the pandemic.

The full report is available here: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/wdr2021.html

With a stroke of his pen last week, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont finally brought to fruition a goal that activists have been chasing for years: legalizing cannabis statewide. The newly signed bill allows adults to carry up to an ounce and a half and store up to five ounces at home or in their car’s trunk or glove box. 

Advocates for cannabis equity are satisfied with the final legislation, but the road to get there was a bumpy one. And while the passing of legalization in Connecticut is a significant victory, there’s still a long way to go toward ensuring the state creates a fair industry. 

Industry lobbyists closely involved in the state’s legislative process talked to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary about the bill’s winding path to becoming law and the debate between the legislature and Lamont over the definition of equity.

How We Got Here

Despite Connecticut passing decriminalization in 2011 and establishing a medical program in 2012, efforts to pass adult-use legalization had stalled in recent years. In 2018, a legalization bill passed a House committee vote but failed to advance further. The next year saw another legalization bill and even more debate, but lawmakers ultimately failed to drum up enough votes – despite the support of Lamont, then the newly seated governor.

In 2020, Lamont proposed a legalization framework that was gaining legislative support until the coronavirus pandemic forced the session to end early. This year, with tri-state neighbor New York passing legalization in March and the effects of COVID-19 lessened by vaccine rollouts, cannabis advocates were confident they’d finally make it across the finish line.

It wouldn’t be easy. After running out of time in the regular session because of a lack of Republican support in the House, lawmakers had to return for a special session on June 16. But a late amendment added by the Senate during the special session put the entire effort at risk after Lamont threatened a veto over the prioritization of cannabis licenses, bringing up a debate on who should be prioritized in the adult-use market.

Who should be considered an equity applicant?

According to Jason Ortiz, Executive Director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) and longtime Connecticut cannabis advocate, the veto threat came about after a disagreement over qualifications for equity licenses. “We fought to include those who had criminal histories and the governor refused to allow them into the program. He really didn’t understand the point of equity programs,” said Ortiz in an email to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary. “It got particularly twisted when he tried to say inclusion of those with criminal histories would benefit the wealthy.”

Lamont’s office put out a statement opposing the amendment, which would have prioritized applicants convicted for any cannabis crime: “This last-minute amendment creates equity in name only by allowing these individuals expedited opportunity to obtain access to the marketplace.” The statement went further, claiming the new amendment would allow “just about anyone with a history of cannabis crimes” to be prioritized as an applicant, even if they came from a background of wealth.

Despite the governor’s disapproval, prioritizing industry access for those with cannabis convictions is a standard practice. Illinois, Michigan, New York, and California are just a few of the states that include a cannabis arrest as part of the criteria to qualify as an equity applicant. 

After some debate and pushback from equity advocates, the amendment was ultimately shelved. The updated legalization bill passed both chambers of the legislature and was signed into law. Adult-use dispensary sales aren’t projected to begin until late 2022 at earliest, but the new possession limits will go into effect July 1.

What happens next for cannabis equity in Connecticut?

No one knows for sure. Despite Lamont reiterating the importance of social justice measures in the upcoming industry, details are still scarce on exactly how that will happen. We do know that 50% of all licenses will be set aside for social equity applicants, who will also be eligible for special grants and training. Under the law, a new 15-person Social Equity Council will create guidelines on how those harmed by cannabis prohibition should be prioritized in the state’s legal industry.

And though activists viewed the removal of the special session amendment as a setback, they were overall happy with the end result. 

“We had a list of seven key components we wanted,” said Ortiz. “Home grow for all, equity license set-asides, inclusion of tribal nations, protections for students and parents, labor peace agreements, funds dedicated for community investment, jobs programs for the formerly incarcerated. We got all seven. So, on that front, it’s a complete success.”

Whatever comes next, it’s likely that equity advocates will be heavily involved—as they were in the runup to legalization. 

“Advocates for equity—not even just cannabis advocates, but larger organizations like the NAACP in Connecticut—they were very involved in standing up for what we demanded in terms of legalization, so it had to be equitable,” said Shanita Penny, an advisor to the Coalition for Cannabis Policy, Education and Regulation (CPEAR) and member of its in-house Center of Excellence think tank. “We at no point were willing to accept legalization in any way—it had to address and repair the damage from the War on Drugs.”

Connecticut, a state of roughly 3.6 million people with a population almost 80% Caucasian, will need to face the dual challenge of rapidly scaling its industry while prioritizing those harmed by prohibition. Currently, its medical program supports only four licensed cannabis growers. Nevada, a state with about 500,000 fewer residents, has over 130 licensed cultivators in its adult-use industry. 

For now, attention turns to the formation of the new social equity council and the state’s Department of Consumer Protection, which will be responsible for issuing licenses.

“We have to be adamant that the people appointed to the social equity commission are knowledgeable and also focused on empowering the communities most impacted,” said Ortiz. “We won a battle, but the war is far from over.”

 

With a stroke of his pen last week, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont finally brought to fruition a goal that activists have been chasing for years: legalizing cannabis statewide. The newly signed bill allows adults to carry up to an ounce and a half and store up to five ounces at home or in their car’s trunk or glove box. 

Advocates for cannabis equity are satisfied with the final legislation, but the road to get there was a bumpy one. And while the passing of legalization in Connecticut is a significant victory, there’s still a long way to go toward ensuring the state creates a fair industry. 

Industry lobbyists closely involved in the state’s legislative process talked to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary about the bill’s winding path to becoming law and the debate between the legislature and Lamont over the definition of equity.

How We Got Here

Despite Connecticut passing decriminalization in 2011 and establishing a medical program in 2012, efforts to pass adult-use legalization had stalled in recent years. In 2018, a legalization bill passed a House committee vote but failed to advance further. The next year saw another legalization bill and even more debate, but lawmakers ultimately failed to drum up enough votes – despite the support of Lamont, then the newly seated governor.

In 2020, Lamont proposed a legalization framework that was gaining legislative support until the coronavirus pandemic forced the session to end early. This year, with tri-state neighbor New York passing legalization in March and the effects of COVID-19 lessened by vaccine rollouts, cannabis advocates were confident they’d finally make it across the finish line.

It wouldn’t be easy. After running out of time in the regular session because of a lack of Republican support in the House, lawmakers had to return for a special session on June 16. But a late amendment added by the Senate during the special session put the entire effort at risk after Lamont threatened a veto over the prioritization of cannabis licenses, bringing up a debate on who should be prioritized in the adult-use market.

Who should be considered an equity applicant?

According to Jason Ortiz, Executive Director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) and longtime Connecticut cannabis advocate, the veto threat came about after a disagreement over qualifications for equity licenses. “We fought to include those who had criminal histories and the governor refused to allow them into the program. He really didn’t understand the point of equity programs,” said Ortiz in an email to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary. “It got particularly twisted when he tried to say inclusion of those with criminal histories would benefit the wealthy.”

Lamont’s office put out a statement opposing the amendment, which would have prioritized applicants convicted for any cannabis crime: “This last-minute amendment creates equity in name only by allowing these individuals expedited opportunity to obtain access to the marketplace.” The statement went further, claiming the new amendment would allow “just about anyone with a history of cannabis crimes” to be prioritized as an applicant, even if they came from a background of wealth.

Despite the governor’s disapproval, prioritizing industry access for those with cannabis convictions is a standard practice. Illinois, Michigan, New York, and California are just a few of the states that include a cannabis arrest as part of the criteria to qualify as an equity applicant. 

After some debate and pushback from equity advocates, the amendment was ultimately shelved. The updated legalization bill passed both chambers of the legislature and was signed into law. Adult-use dispensary sales aren’t projected to begin until late 2022 at earliest, but the new possession limits will go into effect July 1.

What happens next for cannabis equity in Connecticut?

No one knows for sure. Despite Lamont reiterating the importance of social justice measures in the upcoming industry, details are still scarce on exactly how that will happen. We do know that 50% of all licenses will be set aside for social equity applicants, who will also be eligible for special grants and training. Under the law, a new 15-person Social Equity Council will create guidelines on how those harmed by cannabis prohibition should be prioritized in the state’s legal industry.

And though activists viewed the removal of the special session amendment as a setback, they were overall happy with the end result. 

“We had a list of seven key components we wanted,” said Ortiz. “Home grow for all, equity license set-asides, inclusion of tribal nations, protections for students and parents, labor peace agreements, funds dedicated for community investment, jobs programs for the formerly incarcerated. We got all seven. So, on that front, it’s a complete success.”

Whatever comes next, it’s likely that equity advocates will be heavily involved—as they were in the runup to legalization. 

“Advocates for equity—not even just cannabis advocates, but larger organizations like the NAACP in Connecticut—they were very involved in standing up for what we demanded in terms of legalization, so it had to be equitable,” said Shanita Penny, an advisor to the Coalition for Cannabis Policy, Education and Regulation (CPEAR) and member of its in-house Center of Excellence think tank. “We at no point were willing to accept legalization in any way—it had to address and repair the damage from the War on Drugs.”

Connecticut, a state of roughly 3.6 million people with a population almost 80% Caucasian, will need to face the dual challenge of rapidly scaling its industry while prioritizing those harmed by prohibition. Currently, its medical program supports only four licensed cannabis growers. Nevada, a state with about 500,000 fewer residents, has over 130 licensed cultivators in its adult-use industry. 

For now, attention turns to the formation of the new social equity council and the state’s Department of Consumer Protection, which will be responsible for issuing licenses.

“We have to be adamant that the people appointed to the social equity commission are knowledgeable and also focused on empowering the communities most impacted,” said Ortiz. “We won a battle, but the war is far from over.”

 

With a stroke of his pen last week, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont finally brought to fruition a goal that activists have been chasing for years: legalizing cannabis statewide. The newly signed bill allows adults to carry up to an ounce and a half and store up to five ounces at home or in their car’s trunk or glove box. 

Advocates for cannabis equity are satisfied with the final legislation, but the road to get there was a bumpy one. And while the passing of legalization in Connecticut is a significant victory, there’s still a long way to go toward ensuring the state creates a fair industry. 

Industry lobbyists closely involved in the state’s legislative process talked to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary about the bill’s winding path to becoming law and the debate between the legislature and Lamont over the definition of equity.

How We Got Here

Despite Connecticut passing decriminalization in 2011 and establishing a medical program in 2012, efforts to pass adult-use legalization had stalled in recent years. In 2018, a legalization bill passed a House committee vote but failed to advance further. The next year saw another legalization bill and even more debate, but lawmakers ultimately failed to drum up enough votes – despite the support of Lamont, then the newly seated governor.

In 2020, Lamont proposed a legalization framework that was gaining legislative support until the coronavirus pandemic forced the session to end early. This year, with tri-state neighbor New York passing legalization in March and the effects of COVID-19 lessened by vaccine rollouts, cannabis advocates were confident they’d finally make it across the finish line.

It wouldn’t be easy. After running out of time in the regular session because of a lack of Republican support in the House, lawmakers had to return for a special session on June 16. But a late amendment added by the Senate during the special session put the entire effort at risk after Lamont threatened a veto over the prioritization of cannabis licenses, bringing up a debate on who should be prioritized in the adult-use market.

Who should be considered an equity applicant?

According to Jason Ortiz, Executive Director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) and longtime Connecticut cannabis advocate, the veto threat came about after a disagreement over qualifications for equity licenses. “We fought to include those who had criminal histories and the governor refused to allow them into the program. He really didn’t understand the point of equity programs,” said Ortiz in an email to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary. “It got particularly twisted when he tried to say inclusion of those with criminal histories would benefit the wealthy.”

Lamont’s office put out a statement opposing the amendment, which would have prioritized applicants convicted for any cannabis crime: “This last-minute amendment creates equity in name only by allowing these individuals expedited opportunity to obtain access to the marketplace.” The statement went further, claiming the new amendment would allow “just about anyone with a history of cannabis crimes” to be prioritized as an applicant, even if they came from a background of wealth.

Despite the governor’s disapproval, prioritizing industry access for those with cannabis convictions is a standard practice. Illinois, Michigan, New York, and California are just a few of the states that include a cannabis arrest as part of the criteria to qualify as an equity applicant. 

After some debate and pushback from equity advocates, the amendment was ultimately shelved. The updated legalization bill passed both chambers of the legislature and was signed into law. Adult-use dispensary sales aren’t projected to begin until late 2022 at earliest, but the new possession limits will go into effect July 1.

What happens next for cannabis equity in Connecticut?

No one knows for sure. Despite Lamont reiterating the importance of social justice measures in the upcoming industry, details are still scarce on exactly how that will happen. We do know that 50% of all licenses will be set aside for social equity applicants, who will also be eligible for special grants and training. Under the law, a new 15-person Social Equity Council will create guidelines on how those harmed by cannabis prohibition should be prioritized in the state’s legal industry.

And though activists viewed the removal of the special session amendment as a setback, they were overall happy with the end result. 

“We had a list of seven key components we wanted,” said Ortiz. “Home grow for all, equity license set-asides, inclusion of tribal nations, protections for students and parents, labor peace agreements, funds dedicated for community investment, jobs programs for the formerly incarcerated. We got all seven. So, on that front, it’s a complete success.”

Whatever comes next, it’s likely that equity advocates will be heavily involved—as they were in the runup to legalization. 

“Advocates for equity—not even just cannabis advocates, but larger organizations like the NAACP in Connecticut—they were very involved in standing up for what we demanded in terms of legalization, so it had to be equitable,” said Shanita Penny, an advisor to the Coalition for Cannabis Policy, Education and Regulation (CPEAR) and member of its in-house Center of Excellence think tank. “We at no point were willing to accept legalization in any way—it had to address and repair the damage from the War on Drugs.”

Connecticut, a state of roughly 3.6 million people with a population almost 80% Caucasian, will need to face the dual challenge of rapidly scaling its industry while prioritizing those harmed by prohibition. Currently, its medical program supports only four licensed cannabis growers. Nevada, a state with about 500,000 fewer residents, has over 130 licensed cultivators in its adult-use industry. 

For now, attention turns to the formation of the new social equity council and the state’s Department of Consumer Protection, which will be responsible for issuing licenses.

“We have to be adamant that the people appointed to the social equity commission are knowledgeable and also focused on empowering the communities most impacted,” said Ortiz. “We won a battle, but the war is far from over.”

 

With a stroke of his pen last week, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont finally brought to fruition a goal that activists have been chasing for years: legalizing cannabis statewide. The newly signed bill allows adults to carry up to an ounce and a half and store up to five ounces at home or in their car’s trunk or glove box. 

Advocates for cannabis equity are satisfied with the final legislation, but the road to get there was a bumpy one. And while the passing of legalization in Connecticut is a significant victory, there’s still a long way to go toward ensuring the state creates a fair industry. 

Industry lobbyists closely involved in the state’s legislative process talked to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary about the bill’s winding path to becoming law and the debate between the legislature and Lamont over the definition of equity.

How We Got Here

Despite Connecticut passing decriminalization in 2011 and establishing a medical program in 2012, efforts to pass adult-use legalization had stalled in recent years. In 2018, a legalization bill passed a House committee vote but failed to advance further. The next year saw another legalization bill and even more debate, but lawmakers ultimately failed to drum up enough votes – despite the support of Lamont, then the newly seated governor.

In 2020, Lamont proposed a legalization framework that was gaining legislative support until the coronavirus pandemic forced the session to end early. This year, with tri-state neighbor New York passing legalization in March and the effects of COVID-19 lessened by vaccine rollouts, cannabis advocates were confident they’d finally make it across the finish line.

It wouldn’t be easy. After running out of time in the regular session because of a lack of Republican support in the House, lawmakers had to return for a special session on June 16. But a late amendment added by the Senate during the special session put the entire effort at risk after Lamont threatened a veto over the prioritization of cannabis licenses, bringing up a debate on who should be prioritized in the adult-use market.

Who should be considered an equity applicant?

According to Jason Ortiz, Executive Director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) and longtime Connecticut cannabis advocate, the veto threat came about after a disagreement over qualifications for equity licenses. “We fought to include those who had criminal histories and the governor refused to allow them into the program. He really didn’t understand the point of equity programs,” said Ortiz in an email to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary. “It got particularly twisted when he tried to say inclusion of those with criminal histories would benefit the wealthy.”

Lamont’s office put out a statement opposing the amendment, which would have prioritized applicants convicted for any cannabis crime: “This last-minute amendment creates equity in name only by allowing these individuals expedited opportunity to obtain access to the marketplace.” The statement went further, claiming the new amendment would allow “just about anyone with a history of cannabis crimes” to be prioritized as an applicant, even if they came from a background of wealth.

Despite the governor’s disapproval, prioritizing industry access for those with cannabis convictions is a standard practice. Illinois, Michigan, New York, and California are just a few of the states that include a cannabis arrest as part of the criteria to qualify as an equity applicant. 

After some debate and pushback from equity advocates, the amendment was ultimately shelved. The updated legalization bill passed both chambers of the legislature and was signed into law. Adult-use dispensary sales aren’t projected to begin until late 2022 at earliest, but the new possession limits will go into effect July 1.

What happens next for cannabis equity in Connecticut?

No one knows for sure. Despite Lamont reiterating the importance of social justice measures in the upcoming industry, details are still scarce on exactly how that will happen. We do know that 50% of all licenses will be set aside for social equity applicants, who will also be eligible for special grants and training. Under the law, a new 15-person Social Equity Council will create guidelines on how those harmed by cannabis prohibition should be prioritized in the state’s legal industry.

And though activists viewed the removal of the special session amendment as a setback, they were overall happy with the end result. 

“We had a list of seven key components we wanted,” said Ortiz. “Home grow for all, equity license set-asides, inclusion of tribal nations, protections for students and parents, labor peace agreements, funds dedicated for community investment, jobs programs for the formerly incarcerated. We got all seven. So, on that front, it’s a complete success.”

Whatever comes next, it’s likely that equity advocates will be heavily involved—as they were in the runup to legalization. 

“Advocates for equity—not even just cannabis advocates, but larger organizations like the NAACP in Connecticut—they were very involved in standing up for what we demanded in terms of legalization, so it had to be equitable,” said Shanita Penny, an advisor to the Coalition for Cannabis Policy, Education and Regulation (CPEAR) and member of its in-house Center of Excellence think tank. “We at no point were willing to accept legalization in any way—it had to address and repair the damage from the War on Drugs.”

Connecticut, a state of roughly 3.6 million people with a population almost 80% Caucasian, will need to face the dual challenge of rapidly scaling its industry while prioritizing those harmed by prohibition. Currently, its medical program supports only four licensed cannabis growers. Nevada, a state with about 500,000 fewer residents, has over 130 licensed cultivators in its adult-use industry. 

For now, attention turns to the formation of the new social equity council and the state’s Department of Consumer Protection, which will be responsible for issuing licenses.

“We have to be adamant that the people appointed to the social equity commission are knowledgeable and also focused on empowering the communities most impacted,” said Ortiz. “We won a battle, but the war is far from over.”

 

While delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) continues to be a hot topic in the cannabis industry, the conversation surrounding the cannabinoid has shifted to state talks of regulation.

As previously reported by Hemp Grower, 15 states have already issued bans on delta-8, while six additional states have pending legislation on the cannabinoid and other related THC isomers. 

RELATED: More States Take Action Against Delta-8 THC

Ohio is the next state to follow in the footsteps of those regulating delta-8, as the Ohio Department of Commerce released a set of regulations on delta-8 in medical cannabis products on June 15.

Before the release, the content of delta-8 in medical cannabis products did not have to be accurately depicted on the label. Now, under the new guidance, the exact amount of delta-8 must be listed on the product label, and “Delta-8 THC” must be entirely written on the packaging; “Delta-8” or “D8” are not permitted.

Cultivators, processors and testing laboratories must now test for delta-8 or any related THC isomers and analogs and report the results to the department’s inventory tracking system, the guidance states.

The new regulations also require licensees to provide the Ohio Medical Marijuana Control Program (MMCP) with a standard operating procedure (SOP) that describes how delta-8 will be used in compliance with the state code.

Additionally, licensees must now maintain a delta-8 supply chain record of purchases and production of delta-8, cannabidiol (CBD) or any other ingredient used in the production of medical cannabis.

While some of these regulations are straightforward, some caused confusion among medical cannabis businesses, Cincinnati.com reported.

Under the new regulations, the total THC content in medical cannabis products must not exceed 70%, including a combination of delta-9 THC and any other isomer—a change from the department’s initial classification of “total THC” just including delta-9, the news outlet reported.

However, the department argues that the state regulation cap refers to “tetrahydrocannabinol,” which includes all types of THC, and a spokesperson told Cincinaati.com that the department would soon change its definition in the rules to reflect that.

Furthermore, the release states that all regulations are effective immediately for the use of delta-8 in medical cannabis products; however, the guidance does not specify what will happen to the products already in inventory or those on store shelves, the news outlet reported.

MMCP stated in the guidance that its top priority is product safety. The control program will continue to monitor delta-8 and other THC isomers as they develop, as well as prohibit product ingredients and provide guidance as necessary.

While Pride month parades, community festivals and other celebrations have been underway all month long, many more events are set for this weekend before June winds down.

Dispensaries across the country have been commemorating the month to honor and recognize the LGBTQ+ community with special events and promotions, but there are other ways the cannabis industry promotes inclusion behind the scenes all year long. However, there is also still more work to do. 

In this special guest interview, Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary asked three cannabis industry leaders from the LGBTQ+ community to share insights on how the industry can better support LGBTQ+ employees and customers, improve equity and elevate diverse perspectives and ideas. Excerpts from the conversation with Ian Hackett, chief marketing officer and head of compliance for Napa Valley Fumé, Clifton Lambert, director of human resources with Jushi Holdings Inc., and Niki Mohrlant, senior director of operations for Jushi’s Beyond/Hello dispensaries, are below. 

 

Q: What has your experience been working in the cannabis industry?

Clifton Lambert, director of human resources, Jushi: “It’s been overall positive. When you come into cannabis, you have to have a very different mindset. The people in this industry are really passionate about what we’re doing and understand how important cannabis is to the LGBTQ+ community. Being a part of the LGBT+ community myself, you do feel that you’re not always recognized the way you want to be. But cannabis just kind of opens up that door because of the connection between cannabis and that community. I’ve been able to be more myself with Jushi than many other places. People embrace it. And I think that we set the tone from the get-go to let people know that we welcome all kinds and encourage you to be yourself. We want you to feel comfortable here.” 

Niki Mohrlant, senior director of operations, Jushi: “To Clifton’s point, I would say it is super accepting. But also I think at this point in my own career, there’s this point of getting in positions where you can be the voice in the room and elevate others. And I think that because cannabis has just such a wide range of different people from all different sorts of backgrounds, for me, it’s just been this unique place to say, ‘Hey, you know, if we’re designing a dispensary, have we thought about genderless bathrooms?’ I don’t need to be the gay person in the room. I need to be the person who’s thinking without making assumptions. I’ve always been welcome to be that person who says, ‘Hey, it, it may not be broken, but we need to fix it.’ And we need to think about who is receiving this, what that journey is, whether it’s our customers or team members or our partners within the organization, what are the optics? How do we make decisions? How do we make considerations for every group and everybody all the time? And sometimes it’s hard. But the one thing that I try to encourage not only my peer group, but anybody around me is like, if you have something to say, you should say it. Then when people have ideas, saving space for them to be heard. And the cannabis industry is ripe for that.”

Ian Hackett, chief marketing officer and head of compliance, Napa Valley Fumé: “My first experience in the cannabis industry was meeting the team at Napa Valley Fumé, and they made me feel very welcome out of the gate. I was rather nervous going out to our farm for the first time, meeting the farm team was intimidating to me for some reason. Perhaps because it was in a very remote place [well outside of the city] and I didn’t have anyone to brief me on what to expect. When I finally got there, the general manager welcomed me with literally open arms and she said, ‘Please get in here, and I need your help.’ To Niki’s point of being that voice in the room that is heard and is respected, it’s not just the LGBTQIA+ voice, it’s the voice that brings a different perspective to the table. And I think that from an LGBTQIA+ community is important to have a voice at the table. I know that having my voice at our table has really helped us as a company move forward from what we plant to how we bring our products to customers. 

“However, I did have slightly different experiences going to trade shows. It wasn’t necessarily that I felt like an outsider, but I didn’t see any LGBTQIA+ representation at the trade shows I’ve been to so far. That is something that needs to change. I don’t let not seeing representation stop me. I think it’s where I am in my career. I am able to walk in, see the table, and take a seat. Now, I want to make room for others at the table to make sure we are building from a point of inclusion.”

Lambert: “We’ve been able to climb the ladder, and now we’re in a spot where we have the ability to raise our voices on important LGBTQ+ issues that affect the masses, and people feel that change. It’s been a rough road getting here, where the real work for change starts.”  

Q: What do some of those changes look like on the ground, and what are you and your companies doing to support LGBTQ+ employees?

Lambert: “One change that’s been most recognized is we added gender pronouns early on into our new hire orientations. Employees get to learn about those pronouns, and we explain to every employee what to do if you mess up and why we embrace this. We provide pronoun stickers for employees and customers so they can display their preferred pronouns. I’ve never seen that in any company ever before, where someone actually took the time to think about it and say, ‘Hey, we’re going to support this because this is something that really affects people, although others may not understand.’ We are here to help people understand in the best way we can and educate them on why we support it.

“We are really are serious about it because we want to make sure that everybody is equally represented and everybody is comfortable.”

Mohrlant: “Being the voice for room and thinking about the optics around where we choose locations, it’s the same thing. These conversations are not always popular. When you’re trying to close a real estate deal, and you’re like, ‘Yeah, but they don’t like gay people in this neighborhood.’ It may not be a popular comment, but it is a comment that should be had. I would go to HR and say, ‘Hey, just so you know, I’m super uncomfortable. They have a lot of discrimination issues in this community and this state, and I’m letting you know that technically, I don’t think I can be gay in the state, and they could fire me for working here. So I just want you to know that I’m aware, and I need you to be aware.’ We pick places all the time and we don’t always have all the best information to make those decisions.

“We started talking about badging, too. If you have a different pronoun or you change your name from what’s on your birth certificate or ID, what’s that process like? That’s always been a thing, if the state doesn’t allow for this, how do we put someone’s name on their name tag or on their badge that’s in line with the state government so that we’re not at risk. So there’s a lot of those little things that come up for people that we have to pay attention to all the time and keep pushing the states or keep pushing the community or keep pushing the jurisdiction to create a better experience for everybody regardless of how they identify.”

Q: How do you communicate the importance of inclusion and diversity to your teams and ensure that everyone is working toward creating a positive culture and environment? 

Hackett: “I think by making sure your HR team and the area leads are adequately trained on inclusivity and to make sure that they are aware of and understand the evolving, proper ways to engage with people is really important to create a positive environment for people to be themselves. Probably the most important as it relates to a positive culture. In the past, it’s where I’ve seen a lot of the most egregious violations is [in HR].”

Mohrlant: “How do you evolve the HR community to pay attention to this? Who are those people? And that’s a really good point because a lot of it starts even from a hiring recruiting standpoint. If you don’t have the voice in the room or the people in the seats, everyone’s scope is just a little bit more narrow.”

Lambert: “That’s our challenge every day in HR. I really am evaluating that over and over. That’s one thing that we’ve learned in this industry too, is that things change at such a rapid pace. And, of course, generations do the same thing. And making sure that when we’re interviewing folks for these roles, we make sure that diversity is always at the top of mind. Diversity just helps our company be better because you’re getting different thought processes from different people from different backgrounds. Your HR team has to be the champions. We have a lot of control in that process and must lead by example for the rest of the company. We’ve been super intentional in that area.”

Q: What can the industry do to better support the LBGTQ+ community, initiatives and take a lead in this space? What work needs to be done?

Hackett: “As an industry, be thoughtful about the products and experiences we are creating, how they are messaged and how they are marketed. In the cannabis industry, we have a unique opportunity to not only be honest, but we can do that while being creative. There were so many times in other industries like alcohol and tobacco, where they targeted—usually minorities—with a very false narrative that was really damaging to people. We have an opportunity to take those learnings are and take it in a much different direction.

“As Clifton just mentioned, I think companies and hiring managers really need to actively seek diversity in their candidate pool. It is very comfortable and common for people to just hire people they know. But that usually limits diversity. I think it’s about bringing the best talent to the role. I hear people say, well, I want them to have five years or 10 years or whatever years in the cannabis industry. I’d rather hear them say, this role needs to be able to manage a budget, or manage a grow. Or I need them to be able to keep our cultivation or our distribution practice in regulatory compliance. It’s very shortsighted from a diversity perspective, if we say you have to have 10 years of cannabis experience. The legacy market was very close-knit and we need to see more women, BIPOC, and LGBTQIA+ people enter the industry.”

Lambert: “I agree. Folks tend to hire people who look like them or who have similar beliefs or thought processes. It’s not something people do intentionally, but more attention should be focused on that area from the top. If you look at your business, and the diversity is limited, folks like us have to speak up. That’s what I love about this industry, I think we already have that platform established for us where we feel comfortable to speak up to say we need more diversity.”

Mohrlant: “The past year and a half has been so many things for so many people. My partner is in HR, as well, and one of the things that comes up is how to have these conversations. Did we say the right term? is it LGBTQ+? Is it people of color, or is it African American? I think everyone is so fearful to say the wrong thing. When can you have a safe space to have conversations to do it right? It should just be this authentic place.”

Hackett: “Sometimes you need to listen to the messages and not the words, and you can take those words and help the person understand why there is a better option for some of the words that have been chosen. As [cannabis] goes ‘mainstream,’ we must do so with inclusion and diversity as a foundational component instead of an afterthought.”

Editor’s Note: This interview has been edited for length and clarity.