Following my research in my last blog post, I was left yearning to inquire what concrete data does exist, for the sake of my own research. Therefore, I sought out a study published by JAMA Pediatrics titled “Association of State Recreational Marijuana Laws With Adolescent Marijuana Use”. This study, which surveyed 17 Colorado schools (2,982 students) and 30 Washington schools (5,509 students), aimed to explore two outcomes of interest: change of perceived harmfulness and frequency of use. Both pre- and post-legalization data, collected by means of participating 8th, 10thand 12thgraders, was examined and compared to states without legal recreational cannabis. The cross-sectional survey itself, from Monitoring the Future, showed data spanning from 2010-2015. JAMA Pediatricsused such data to “…examine the association between legalization of recreational marijuana use in Washington and Colorado in 2012 and the subsequent perceived harmfulness and use of marijuana by adolescents” (Cerda et al. 142). In the article, the results revealed a decline in perceived harmfulness from 2010-2012 and 2013-2015. In Washington, there was a decline rate of 14.2% (8thgraders) and 16.1% (10thgraders), and in non-legalized recreational cannabis states, a reduction in rates by 4.9% and 7.2%, respectively. The study didn’t suggest a substantial difference among 12thgraders or “…in any grade in Colorado compared to non-RML states” (Cerda et al. 145). As for the rate of change in adolescent use, the data used the same time frame. Although statistical deviations and mathematical ‘p’ values are involved, the article’s data exhibited an increase in use among Washington 8thand 10thgraders, as well as 8thand 10thgraders in non-recreational legalized states. No considerable difference was recorded among 12thgraders, or “…for any of the 3 grades in Colorado” (Cerda et al. 142). The article concludes with a discussion of limitations of the study, as well as, possible reasons for outcomes.
As my intuition had suggested, credible research does exist. But, to my astonishment, the results are contrasting to any preconceived notion I may have possessed. Mainly, after analyzing this research, I question this: Why is there such a notable difference between Colorado and Washington, both of whom share similar recreational marijuana laws? How is it that the results vary so greatly, especially if the laws were ratified in the same year? The article says, “Colorado had a very developed medical marijuana dispensary system prior to legalization, with substantial advertising to which youth were already exposed.” (Cerda et al. 148) With a more developed dispensary system, less of a stigma may exist in Colorado. I think this “acceptance” could account for the practically unchanging rates in use and perceived harmfulness, subsequent to recreational cannabis legalization. In my opinion, it’s possible that marijuana became more accessible in Colorado following medical legalization; henceforth, the change may have been greater in the wake of medicinal legalization as opposed to recreational.
I think it’s also important to consider the margin of difference in surveyed Colorado students vs. surveyed Washington students. The sample population in Washington is almost double that of Colorado, and the larger the population, the more accurate the results. If, per say, the sample populations were equivalent, would Colorado’s results differ? I believe it’s also important to examine the difference between Washington’s cannabis laws as opposed to Colorado’s. To clarify could the difference in the structure of their laws matter? To further my research, I would like understand those variations, if they exist.
Works Cited
Cerdá, Magdalena, et al. “State Recreational Marijuana Laws and Adolescent Marijuana Use.” JAMA Pediatrics, vol. 171, no. 2, pp. 142-149, doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.3624.
That sounds like a very useful study for your project! That's interesting that the results suggest students view marijuana as less dangerous than in the past, but this didn't necessarily change their USE of the substance. Maybe teens are able to view something as not incredibly dangerous but still choose not to use it, perhaps for legal reasons? Like alcohol, this is a substance that no one in this study could access legally.
ReplyDeleteAnd, let's just say that marijuana use among teens did/does increase after legalization: is this automatically a bad thing? On the one hand, of course! On the other hand, might we as a state/society have to "accept" some underage use of this substance in the same way we do with alcohol? Is some teen use an acceptable "cost" to the overall benefit of making the substance available for adults?
It sounds like a valid resource to use, I question why 9th and 11th graders were not tested. Did they mention the reason for skipping grade levels? It does seem like a great amount difference in students being tested from Colorado and Washington. Legalization of marijuana I would think most likely stayed about the same as for usage in teens. Their going to access it any way they can and it's been around for quiet some time. It's weird to me that our legalization process is different then Washington. I would assume as states and something so new we would all try to be on the same flow system. I think as a state we are someday going to have to accept the underage use of this substance.
ReplyDelete