Cited by 92Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesSmoking Behavior and Cessation

Public health impacts to date of the legalisation of medical and recreational cannabis use in the USA

Chiu, Vivian, Leung, Janni, Hall, Wayne, Stjepanović, Daniel, Degenhardt, Louisa·2021·Neuropharmacology

Abstract

The legality of cannabis use has been changing in a number of jurisdictions around the world. In the U.S., it has been legalised for medicinal and/or recreational uses in 34 jurisdictions and counting. This study leverages the decades-long experience of legalisation in the U.S. to provide an overview of the associated changes in public attitudes, cannabis markets and adverse health effects. We found a broad-based warming of public attitudes toward legalisation, potentially influenced by the increasingly positive portrayal of cannabis in media and declines in cannabis risk perceptions. Potency of cannabis products increased significantly while prices fell sharply. Although adults were less responsive to price changes than adolescents, adults who use cannabis regularly were sensitive to prices, with an estimated 10% price reduction leading to about 2.5% increase in the rate of use. Overall, past-year cannabis use has increased in adults since 2002, and adults over 26 years old who resided in states with medicinal cannabis laws were more likely to have used cannabis in the past 30 days, to have used daily, and to have higher rates of cannabis use disorders than adults who resided in states without legalised medicinal cannabis. Traffic fatalities involving cannabis temporarily increased in some states post-legalisation, and there were more presentations to medical services related to chronic regular cannabis use. There is suggestive evidence that adverse health consequences have increased among people who use cannabis regularly since legalisation. More robust research is needed to determine whether these effects of legalisation are temporary or long-term.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2021.108610

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 56 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chiu, V., Leung, J., Hall, W., Stjepanović, D., & Degenhardt, L.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Chiu, Vivian
Venue
Neuropharmacology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-08
Volume
193
Pages
108610
ISSN
0028-3908 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3161846483
Cited by
92
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 4
FWCI
2.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Keywords
cannabis legalization, medical cannabis, recreational cannabis, cannabis potency, cannabis use prevalence, cannabis use disorder, traffic fatalities, chronic cannabis use, adolescent cannabis use, state cannabis policy
MeSH terms
Recreational Drug Use, Adolescent, Adult, Cannabis, Drug and Narcotic Control, Humans, Legislation, Drug, Public Health, Public Opinion, United States, Medical Marijuana

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review