Miesiąc: lipiec 2022

We Liked July’s Action for Cannabis Stocks – New Cannabis Ventures

You’re reading a copy of this week’s edition of the New Cannabis Ventures weekly newsletter, which we have been publishing since October 2015. The newsletter includes unique insight to help our readers stay ahead of the curve as well as links to the week’s most important news.


5 weeks ago, we posted here about how “extremely oversold” cannabis stocks were at the time. In that newsletter, we pointed out that investor sentiment was overly negative at that time, and we believe that investors are still not that optimistic about the sector.

July was a great month for cannabis stocks. It was a very short month for traders at only 20 days, but the bullishness that we expressed in June paid off. Our three model portfolios at 420 Investor gained 19.3-21.7% during the month, substantially more than the index.

During July, the Global Cannabis Stock Index rallied by 4.3%, which was less than half of the return of the S&P 500, which gained 9.2%. While our sector lagged, it was the first monthly gain in 17 months. We lifted off of the lowest closing price in its almost 10-year history on June 30th.

This past week, our sector lost 4.6%, while the S&P 500 gained 4.3%, skewing the relative performance for the month. Despite lagging, we are encouraged by the action. MSOs, as measured by the American Cannabis Operators Index, rallied sharply during the month. That index gained 18.8% during the month. We will be publishing a piece later today that explains the move. Looking at the MSO stocks in the Global Cannabis Stock Index, all six rallied, with Cresco Labs, up 36.6%, and Green Thumb Industries, up 14.8%, leading the way. We wrote about the performance last week, and there were three decliners of more than 20% that held that index back. The median of the index names beat the average by 1.2%.

We remain optimistic about the second half of the year, noting low valuations, negative sentiment and improving fundamentals due to several states launching adult-use ahead.

TILT Holdings, a combination of leading cannabis companies that deliver products and services to businesses operating in the industry, will report its second quarter earnings on August 15th. Analyst expectations show for 15% annual growth for Q2 revenue at $56 million with adjusted EBITDA expected to be $5 million. TILT Holdings, which rallied 17.7% in July, has a unique business model, an ancillary company with cannabis operations in three states with a fourth launching soon. Earlier this month, the company, in partnership with Shinnecock Indian Nation of New York, broke ground on a historic, tribally-owned cannabis enterprise in Southampton, N.Y.

Get up to speed by visiting the TILT Holdings Investor Dashboard that we maintain on their behalf as a client of New Cannabis Ventures. Click the blue Follow Company button in order to stay up to date with their progress.


Cannabis technology company Fyllo offers regulatory software solutions as well as marketing solutions for the industry. We last spoke with CEO and Founder Chad Bronstein in 2020 when the company was in the process of integrating the acquisition of CannaRegs. In this exclusive interview, we catch up to see how the company has progressed since.

The Global Cannabis Stock Index posted a gain for the first time in 17 months, rising 4.3% in July. The index, which includes 26 names, is down 53.1% this year so far after a 26% decline in 2021. We discuss both the strongest and weakest stocks in this exclusive.


XS Financial has provided a $15 million capital expenditure lease facility to Green Dragon / Eaze with an immediate drawdown of more than $2 million to purchase equipment. The equipment will result in improvements to existing processing facilities and buildouts for their Colorado and Florida expansions. “Having access to non-dilutive financing is a huge win for our shareholders,” said Trey Handley, CFO of Green Dragon/Eaze.


Despite strong performance of its Zig-Zag and Stoker products, Turning Point Brands reported Q2 net sales decreased 16.1% year-over-year to $102.9 million. Combined net sales for Zig-Zag and Stoker’s Products demonstrated resilience decreasing 0.9% for the quarter.

Tilray Brands reported Q4 cannabis revenue was down 3% sequentially at $53.3 million. Chairman and CEO Irwin D. Simon said, “Over the past year, we have accelerated the optimization of our operations and sharpened execution against our most profitable core business opportunities in medical, adult-use, wellness, and beverage-alcohol across Canada, Europe, and the U.S.”

To get real-time updates download our free mobile app for Android or Apple devices, like our Facebook page, or follow Alan on Twitter. Share and discover industry news with like-minded people on the largest cannabis investor and entrepreneur group on LinkedIn.

Get ahead of the crowd! If you are a cannabis investor and find value in our Sunday newsletters, subscribe to 420 Investor, Alan’s comprehensive stock due diligence platform since 2013. Gain immediate access to real-time and in-depth information and market intelligence about the publicly traded cannabis sector, including daily videos, weekly chats, model portfolios, a community forum and much more.

Use the suite of professionally managed NCV Cannabis Stock Indices to monitor the performance of publicly-traded cannabis companies within the day or over longer time-frames. In addition to the comprehensive Global Cannabis Stock Index, we offer a family of indices to track Canadian licensed producers as well as the American Cannabis Operator Index and the Ancillary Cannabis Index.

View the Public Cannabis Company Revenue & Income Tracker, which ranks the top revenue producing cannabis stocks.

Stay on top of some of the most important communications from public companies by viewing upcoming cannabis investor earnings conference calls.

Discover upcoming new listings with the curated Cannabis Stock IPOs and New Issues Tracker.

Alan & Joel

Get ahead of the crowd by signing up for 420 Investor, the largest & most comprehensive premium subscription service for cannabis traders and investors since 2013.

Alan Brochstein, CFA
Based in Houston, Alan leverages his experience as founder of online community 420 Investor, the first and still largest due diligence platform focused on the publicly-traded stocks in the cannabis industry. With his extensive network in the cannabis community, Alan continues to find new ways to connect the industry and facilitate its sustainable growth. At New Cannabis Ventures, he is responsible for content development and strategic alliances. Before shifting his focus to the cannabis industry in early 2013, Alan, who began his career on Wall Street in 1986, worked as an independent research analyst following over two decades in research and portfolio management. A prolific writer, with over 650 articles published since 2007 at Seeking Alpha, where he has 70,000 followers, Alan is a frequent speaker at industry conferences and a frequent source to the media, including the NY Times, the Wall Street Journal, Fox Business, and Bloomberg TV. Contact Alan: Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | Email

Get Our Sunday Newsletter

Is cannabidiol effective against COVID-19? – News-Medical.Net

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is caused by infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has caused over 6.4 million deaths to date.

A new Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research journal study discusses the utility of cannabidiol (CBD) in treating the inflammatory symptoms of COVID-19. This treatment approach could help arrest or reduce the progression of COVID-19, thereby potentially decreasing its severity and mortality rate.

Study: Cannabidiol As a Treatment for COVID-19 Symptoms? A Critical Review. Image Credit: r.classen / Shutterstock.com

Study: Cannabidiol As a Treatment for COVID-19 Symptoms? A Critical Review. Image Credit: r.classen / Shutterstock.com


COVID-19 is associated with a wide spectrum of presentations from mild to life-threatening disease. The hyper-inflammatory reaction to SARS-CoV-2 is thought to be responsible for severe symptoms that involve multiple organ systems.

A wide range of drugs has been evaluated for their ability to mitigate COVID-19 severity. These includes dexamethasone, a powerful corticosteroid with anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive activity; remdesivir, a nucleoside analog that inhibits viral replication; hydrochloroquine, an immunomodulatory antimalarial drug, convalescent plasma containing specific antibodies to the virus, as well as SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies.

Of these, only dexamethasone has shown an unequivocal improvement in the outcomes of a specified patient group. Notably, this steroid has not been evaluated for its utility in treating early COVID-19.

Meanwhile, remdesivir is useful only for hospitalized patients, with a relatively long treatment course that requires parenteral administration. Moreover, immunomodulators may have systemic effects.

Monoclonal antibodies are currently approved for use in patients with early disease who are at high risk for severe COVID-19.

Paxlovid and molnupiravir have been given emergency use authorization (EUA) for  the treatment of high-risk COVID-19-positive patients. These agents are suitable only for those with early symptoms who are not receiving any other treatment for severe COVID-19.

The need for safe and effective early interventions has prompted investigations into potentially useful drugs for COVID-19. One of these is CBD, which acts on the endocannabinoid CB1 and CB2 receptors in the brain, as well as adenosine A2A receptors. These receptors are widespread in the human body.

CBD received approval in 2018 as an orphan drug for the treatment of one form of epilepsy. It is also known to have immunosuppressive and anti-inflammatory effects due to the expression of CB2 receptors in immune cells in the gut, lungs, and immune organs.

CBD in low doses may potentiate the intoxication caused by other cannabis metabolites, specifically tetrahydrocannabidiol (THC); however, it appears to counteract such effects at high doses. Importantly, CBD is not known to cause dependence or addiction.

Side effects of CBD include sleepiness, fever, poor appetite, abnormal behavior, and euphoria. Further research is needed to determine the relevance of these side effects following chronic use.

The current review summarizes current knowledge about CBD effects on COVID-19-related inflammation and respiratory symptoms from studies published between September and December 2020.

Study findings

Of the nine papers eligible for inclusion in the study, five were in vivo studies and three were in vitro studies using human tissues. None of the animal models had COVID-19; however, they were used to determine the effect of CBD on acute lung inflammation or injury, asthma, and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

CBD was reported to decrease multiple inflammatory cytokines and reduce ARDS symptoms. Inflammatory infiltration of the lungs, as well as reduced protein exudation, inflammatory cytokine levels, and myeloperoxidase levels, were observed in response to CBD. Asthma-related inflammation was similarly reduced.

In the in vitro human tissue models, CBD treatment was associated with a lower expression of A2A receptors and reduced inflammation. As compared to dexamethasone, CBD reduced inflammatory signaling induced by lipopolysaccharide, which is a potent bacterial inflammation-inducing antigen

A single human randomized clinical trial (RCT) of CBD treatment in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 was also available. To this end, no significant improvement was reported for CBD as compared to controls for the prevention of severe disease, reduced symptom duration, lower cytokine levels, reduced lung damage, hospitalization, or mortality. Psychological symptoms were also not different between groups.

A single open-label trial reported reduced burnout and emotional fatigue following treatment with CBD in frontline COVID-19 workers. However, 10% of the study participants reported serious adverse events, though all recovered completely.

In one recent study not included in the current review, researchers identify some indications of a replication-inhibitory effect of CBD on SARS-CoV-2 that is mediated by the endoplasmic reticulum. Data from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative database was cited, which showed lower rates of positive COVID-19 test results with CBD treatment.


While current evidence does not support the use of CBD in COVID-19 treatment, there remains an urgent need for more studies to be conducted. These should explore different dosage levels with CBD of a specified purity for prophylactic and therapeutic use, given the promising anti-inflammatory activity observed with this molecule in vitro.

Drug interactions also need to be explored, especially as COVID-19 treatment currently involves the use of many anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory drugs.

Its anti-inflammatory properties could also be detrimental in suppressing the immune response, which might suppress the ability to fight off infections so that the risk might be higher for viral and respiratory infections.”

Taken together, there is inadequate evidence to support or reject CBD in COVID-19 treatment.

Journal reference:
  • Holst, M. Nowak, D., & Hoch, E. (2022). Cannabidiol As a Treatment for COVID-19 Symptoms? A Critical Review. Cannabis and Cannabidiol Research. doi:10.1089/can.2021.0135.

Delta-8 Debate: Employment and Trademark Litigation in CBD and Cannabis Reaches New High – JD Supra

A recent federal court ruling that attempted to set down a distinct line between marijuana and low-THC products (like CBD and delta-8) has led many to make broad conclusions as to what it means for various products. Courts have struggled with drawing the line on these products with everything from employment decisions to intellectual property.

These courts, like the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in May 2022, are following the precedent of attempting to clarify the federal rights held by companies selling products with marijuana (illegal under federal law, but legal for medical and/or adult use in some states) and products with CBD or delta-8 THC (generally a grey area under federal law and legal in certain circumstances only in some states). As a result of this trend in federal courts, companies may see an increasing number of employment, American Disability Act (ADA) and intellectual property disputes related to CBD and other hemp-based products.

Most recently, for example, in AK Futures LLC v. Boyd Street Distro, LLC, a producer and distributor of delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-8 THC) sued another producer for trademark and copyright infringement on its delta-8 THC e-cigarettes. 35 F.4th 682 (9th Cir. 2022). Without disputing whether it was selling counterfeits or infringing on the copyright, the defendant challenged the legality of plaintiff’s delta-8 THC product and plaintiff’s ability to maintain any federal trademark or copyright.

After extensive briefing and an appeal, the 9th Circuit held that delta-8 THC products were “lawful” under the plain language of the 2018 Agriculture Improvement Act (the Farm Act) because they are “removed [as] ‘hemp’ from the definition of marijuana in the Controlled Substances Act.” The 9th Circuit denied all of defendant’s arguments that the Farm Act did not extend to protect delta-8 THC.

Importantly, because the court ruled delta-8 THC products were federally legal under the Farm Act, companies selling such products could benefit, at least with respect to federal copyright and trademark laws. Despite the 9th Circuit’s broad proclamation on delta-8, delta-8 remains on the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) July 2022 List of Controlled Substances. Also not fully addressed by the court is DEA’s September 2021 letter to the Alabama Board of Pharmacy explicitly noting delta-8 THC “synthetically produced from non-cannabis materials is controlled under the [Controlled Substances Act] as a ‘tetrahydrocannabinol.’” Finally, the opinion does not differentiate the panoply of state laws that prohibit or have warned against delta-8, such as those in Kansas, Minnesota, New York, Oregon and Virginia.

Similar to copyright and trademark protection, trade secret protection for companies developing marijuana strains or selling THC-based products also remains a concern. While these companies have important confidential information in grow methods, laboratory processes, customer lists and pricing, it is still undecided whether these companies will benefit from federal trade secret laws like the Defend Trade Secrets Act.

At least one court in California has offered some protection. In Silva Enters. v. Ott, defendants allegedly stole customer information from a marijuana consultant, and they argued that plaintiffs could not maintain a claim “for misappropriation of trade secrets because ‘there is no trade secret protection for ongoing illegal activities.’” No. 2:18-cv-06881, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223854, *13 (C.D. Cal. 2018). The district court rejected defendants’ argument, stating that the Controlled Substance Act, though it makes cannabis illegal for plaintiffs, “does not immunize defendants from federal law.” Id. (emphasis added). Based on this case dealing with marijuana and the continued distinction between marijuana and low-THC products, the latter may be more likely to enjoy trade secret protection under state and federal law.

Finally, employee rights and employer accommodations are also in flux. In Huber v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc., an employee tested positive for THC and was terminated based on the employer’s policies and government contract that required termination for a failed test. No. 20-3059, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87139 (E.D. La. 2022). After the plaintiff-employee sued the employer under the ADA, the employer moved for summary judgment, arguing that employees who test positive for THC are automatically removed from the ADA’s protections.

The Eastern District of Louisiana denied the employer’s motion partly because the employee alleged that she was using “non-psychoactive hemp-based CBD oil” under a doctor’s prescription to manage chronic migraines. The court noted that a reasonable accommodation required that her employer “provide some way to account for and excuse a false positive” test, since she had sought an accommodation for her use of CBD oil. Thus, a jury will have to determine whether the employer should have engaged in the interactive accommodations process after the employee tested positive for an otherwise restricted drug. While this decision is not currently binding on other courts or employers, employers may face more scrutiny for automatic terminations of employees who test positive for THC, especially if the employee raises a facially valid claim to CBD use.

Despite these court opinions, things remain in a state of flux, and litigation on these issues continues to proliferate. Ultimately, courts are continuing their trend toward protecting federal rights related to the use, sale or distribution of “hemp” products and “hemp-derived CBD,” while those same activities for marijuana still face federal scrutiny. These courts are attempting to draw a clear distinction between these two products — making the processes and verifiability of THC levels and the source of the CBD in products more important than ever.  

Cannabis cultivation in CT could be linked to big money investors. Experts say that 'should be no surprise.’ – CT Insider

Before budding entrepreneurs can start selling cannabis across Connecticut, hundreds of square feet of the plant must thrive in cultivation facilities. The earliest news about those entrepreneurs has generated mixed reactions.

Despite a rigorous system that vetted early businesses vying to grow cannabis in the state, some members of the state cannabis community have raised concerns about those enterprises’ ties to business and politics. However, others argue those concerns ignore the realities of the cannabis industry, which is on the verge of experiencing significant growth.

“Folks with capital are interested in this industry — it’s a billion dollar industry that is on the brink of going federally legal,” said DeVaughn Ward, senior legislative counsel for Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington D.C.-based nonprofit.

This month, the state Department of Consumer Protection announced the names of the 16 applicants pre-approved by the state cannabis equity council for so-called social equity cultivation licenses. Those applicants could be among the first cannabis growers in the state if they secure final approvals from DCP.

The state established strict criteria for these so-called social equity cultivators, which entrepreneurs from “disproportionately impacted areas” of Connecticut must own. State law mandates that these areas have “a historical conviction rate for drug-related offenses greater than one-tenth, or an unemployment rate greater than ten percent.”

The social equity process is just one pipeline toward cannabis licensing, according to DCP. Potential cultivators had a one-time application period of three months to seek these special licenses.

The law also imposes an annual income cap on social equity applicants. They cannot make more than three times Connecticut’s median household income. In addition, the social equity applicant must own at least 65 percent of the cultivation business.

A handful of high-profile names are attached to some of the social equity cultivators: some as applicants, others as investors. Hartford City Councilwoman Tiana Hercules is the social equity applicant in one of the ventures through a partnership with cannabis company Ayr Wellness. Former State Sen. Art Linares — the husband of Stamford Mayor Caroline Simmons — is a financial backer for another of the businesses.

“The fact that these licenses are connected to folks who have means — it should be no surprise,” Ward said. “These are huge, capital-intensive endeavors.”

Navigating the application process

The state maintains those high profile names changed nothing about the process. The Social Equity Council, the organization that oversees Connecticut’s cannabis equity initiatives, told Hearst Connecticut Media that it had a thorough — and at times, blind — process for reviewing these applicants.

“The council took their responsibility very, very seriously,” council executive director Ginne-Rae Clay said. “Folks think that a lot of this was being done in back offices.”

DCP says 41 businesses applied for social equity cannabis cultivation licenses. The consultancy CohnReznick reviewed documents from all those applicants, and when the Social Equity Council was presented with them, it was without any identifying information.

The consultants from CohnReznick are from out of state and “don’t know any of the applicants,” said Clay.

The Social Equity Council was also highly concerned with ensuring “true ownership” among the social equity applicants, DCP Deputy Commissioner Andréa Comer explained. Comer also chairs the Social Equity Council.

“True ownership means that the social equity applicant will control the board votes and the management decisions,” she said. The council prioritized making sure that people from disproportionately impacted areas were the owners of these businesses long-term.

But those safeguards haven’t stopped some cannabis advocates from raising eyebrows at the social equity cultivator announcement.

“I think … certain people are more prepared to be able to fill out the extensive application work,” New England Craft Cannabis Alliance Director Joseph Raymond Accettullo said. Accettullo is an advocate for existing cannabis cultivators, who he thinks were boxed out of the social equity application process by high licensing costs. The social equity licensing fee in Connecticut costs $3 million, something that industry experts have scrutinized throughout 2022.

Accettullo is among them, and his critiques of the social equity application process are not new. Even given the stringent limits on who can qualify as a social equity applicant, he believes that the state must lower licensing fees to better target people hurt by the War on Drugs.

Looking long term

Just because high-profile names are involved doesn’t mean that the system isn’t accomplishing its goals, said Ward, who is based in Connecticut.

“I do know Black men and Black women who were awarded these licenses and are exactly who the legislature was trying to attempt to get one of these opportunities to,” he said. Additionally, the current public information also does not fully capture who the social equity applicants are, according to Ward.

For example, a social equity cultivator could have multiple social equity applicants within the overall structure. Even though documents from the Secretary of the State’s office in broad strokes show who is involved in a company, more granular data will become available once all the applicants cinch final approval, according to DCP.

But beyond these early announcements and the conversation surrounding them, Ward said that the success of Connecticut’s social equity pipelines cannot be judged based on rough sketches of what the business will look like before they start growing cannabis and succeeding (or failing) in the industry.

“(The state) still has other licenses to roll out, you know?” Ward said. “This is really premature.”


Michigan Marijuana Legalization: Correlations Among Cannabis Use, Mental Health, and Other Factors – Cureus

Introduction: There are health implications with the statewide legalization of recreational marijuana that are still not fully understood and require further examination. This study evaluates the prevalence of marijuana use in patients being treated for a variety of conditions and whether correlations exist between marijuana use, mental health conditions, and concomitant use of psychotropic medications.

Methods: Data were collected from an electronic medical record (EMR) as part of a retrospective chart audit. A total of 500 charts were reviewed during a six-month timeframe from December 1, 2018 to May 31, 2019 with the start date approximating the timing of when marijuana became recreationally legalized in the State of Michigan.

Results: This study demonstrated a point prevalence of 15.8% since 79 of the 500 charts reviewed had marijuana use documented. Additionally, marijuana users were more likely to have a history of cocaine use, schizophrenia, antipsychotic use, and tobacco use.

Conclusion: Trends identified in this study provide a comparison point for the local prevalence of marijuana use immediately post state-wide legalization, with a projected increasing trend due to the removal of legal barriers.


In the United States (U.S.), the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 [1] prohibited the use of marijuana at the federal level. The controversy of marijuana legalization and its implications have gained traction politically and socially over the past decade. Although marijuana remains illegal at the federal level, there are currently 27 states that have decriminalized the possession of small quantities of marijuana, 36 states have legalized the medicinal use of marijuana, and 18 states within the US have legalized marijuana for recreational use [1]. During Michigan’s General Election on November 6, 2018, Ballot Proposal 18-1 was passed by a majority vote (56% in favor to 44% opposed) [1], making Michigan the first Midwest state to legalize recreational marijuana. When Proposal 18-1 went into effect on December 6, 2018, marijuana use became regulated similar to how alcohol sales are controlled. The public health impact of marijuana legalization remains controversial with unintentional intoxication risks in children, the combined use of marijuana with other drugs, driving safety concerns while using marijuana, and the unknown risk of other potential health problems such as pulmonary disorders or psychosis with chronic use of marijuana [2]. Supporters of legalization synthesize that there may be a decline in marijuana use in adolescents and a decrease in other illicit drugs by creating more robust policies and regulations for marijuana use and efficient use of law enforcement resources. With the lack of sufficient data available for the assurance of safety and efficacy of marijuana or standardization of dosing, professional medical associations like the American Society of Addiction Medicine, American Psychiatric Association, and American Medical Association oppose the legalization of marijuana [2]. Additionally, opposers are concerned legalization will create an increase in use and a potential increase in adverse health effects [2].

There are many implications of the statewide legalization of recreational marijuana that are still not fully understood and require additional investigation. Frequent cannabis use has been shown to increase after the legalization of cannabis [2]. In 2018, cannabis was the most commonly used substance worldwide with an estimated 192 million users globally [3]. Active marijuana use has been associated with problems including cognitive impairment, loss of motivation and coordination, memory and sleep disturbances, hyperemesis syndrome, psychological dependency, and mental health disorders such as schizophrenia, anxiety, and depression [4]. Heavier users of marijuana are shown to experience a first-episode psychosis [5,6], and an increasing number of patients being managed for psychosis/psychotic conditions are also reporting active marijuana use [7]. The long-term sequelae of these complications are not well studied, and as a result, may lead to increased disability and increased economic strain on healthcare systems [8]. Furthermore, previous literature indicates marijuana, specifically cannabidiol, may be useful for pain management [4,9], however, studies also revealed that the co-use of marijuana with opioids (also commonly used in treating pain) or alcohol has been shown to worsen overall health outcomes when compared to using opioids alone [10,11]. This is important to note since previous medical literature found a correlation in patients using marijuana with concomitant opioid use compared to non-opioid users [12,13].

Further implications include the correlation between active marijuana use and acute injuries, including fatal motor vehicle accidents (MVAs) [14,15] and workplace injuries [4]. The incidence of acute injuries secondary to MVAs should be examined as previous studies have shown that drug-impaired driving has become a major public safety concern in the US with marijuana as the most commonly detected drug other than alcohol in US drivers [14,15].

An additional concern with the legalization of marijuana is the normalization and increased social acceptance of marijuana use with increased legalization at a national level with increased distribution commercially. According to the Michigan Marijuana Regulatory Agency’s monthly report, in June 2020, there were 271 active licensed establishments in the State of Michigan for medical and recreational marijuana purposes, 123 of these include commercial retailers [16]. As marijuana continues to gain societal acceptance, its consideration as an “illicit drug” by the public becomes debatable, especially when used for medicinal purposes [17]. With some research showing the therapeutic benefits of marijuana, patients may not consider marijuana as a drug. Therefore, asking patients about their drug use raises concern about whether marijuana use is being monitored appropriately with unintentional or intentional reporter bias [18].

The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of marijuana use among patients in the Mid-Michigan region that were evaluated in the emergency department (ED) or outpatient setting being treated for conditions associated with cannabis use, including mental health conditions and secondarily, acute injuries. The secondary aims of this study evaluated whether correlations exist between marijuana and acute injuries including work-related injuries and MVAs, co-usage with other pharmacological treatments, including opioids and psychotropic agents, and evaluate how the status of marijuana use is being documented by physicians and other health professionals.

This article was previously presented as a poster at the 2019 Michigan State Medical Society Foundation Annual Scientific Meeting on October 24, 2019.

Materials & Methods

Data was collected using a retrospective chart abstraction of 500 randomly selected adults (over the age of 18) seen in the Mid-Michigan region over a six-month timeframe between December 1, 2018 to May 31, 2019. Diagnoses were based on the 10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10) codes that have been correlated with active marijuana use such as anxiety, depression, schizophrenia, falls, cannabis use disorders, MVA, and acute injuries. Cannabis use disorders mentioned in this study include cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (F12.988), cannabis abuse (F12.10), cannabis dependence (F12.20), and cannabis intoxication (F12.92). Table 1 shows a comprehensive list of the ICD-10 diagnoses and their corresponding ICD-10 codes that were used as inclusion criteria for this study. Data were extracted using a standardized variable abstraction form of randomly selected charts meeting the ICD-10 inclusion criteria. This study was approved by the Hospital Institutional Review Board (IRB).

ICD-10 Diagnoses ICD-10 Code
Cannabis related disorders F12
Motor- or Nonmotor-vehicle accident, type of vehicle unspecified V89
Unspecified fall W11
Injury unspecified T14.90
Encounter for exam and observation following work accident Z04.2
Acute pain due to trauma G89.11
Mood [affective] disorders F30-F39
Anxiety, dissociative, stress-related, somatoform, and other non-psychotic mental disorders F40-48
Schizophrenia, schizotypal, delusional, and other non-mood psychotic disorders F20-F29

Statistical analysis was done using SPSS Statistics version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) [19]. To assess inter-rater reliability, Cohen’s Kappa was calculated in assessing the agreement between two raters for variables with binary outcomes, with a mean Cohen’s Kappa of 0.802, indicating substantial agreement and inter-rater reliability. Descriptive statistics were provided including mean (standard deviation) for body mass index (BMI) and count (percentage) for categorical variables. Confidence intervals for proportion were constructed based on a one-sample z-test. The two-sample t-test was used to test whether the average BMI is different between marijuana and non-marijuana users. The Chi-square test examined the association between marijuana use and sociodemographic variables including drug use. The Fisher’s exact test was the alternative to the Chi-square test when the cell count was small. All the analytical results were significant when p-values were less than or equal to 0.05.


A total of 79 encounters of the 500 (15.8%) charts reviewed had marijuana use documented. Sociodemographic factors were compared between marijuana users and non-marijuana users. It was found that 46.8% of marijuana users were female compared to 67.9% of non-marijuana users, while males had a higher prevalence of marijuana use at 53.2% (Table 1). It was also found that 62.0% of marijuana users were unemployed compared to 58.0% of non-marijuana users that were unemployed (Table 1). The relationship between marijuana and cocaine use was significant (p<0.001). Marijuana users were more likely to report cocaine use than were non-marijuana users with 10.1% of marijuana users reporting cocaine use vs. 0.5% of non-marijuana users (Table 2). The relationship between marijuana and tobacco use was also significant, (Chi2 (2)=44.81 [p<0.001]). Marijuana users were more likely to report previous or current tobacco use than were non-marijuana users (Table 2). The relation between marijuana use and schizophrenia was significant (p=0.018). Marijuana users were more likely to have schizophrenia than were non-marijuana users with 6.3% of marijuana users and 1.4% of non-marijuana users (Table 2). This study also found a higher prevalence of marijuana use in patients taking antipsychotics (19.0%) compared to non-marijuana users (10.0%) (Table 2), achieving statistical significance (Chi2 (1)=5.348 [p=0.021]).

Variable Non-Marijuana User (n=421) Marijuana User (n=79) P-value Test Statistics
Illicit Substance Use         
Cocaine use  2 (0.5%) 8 (10.1%) <0.001 Exact
Rx Meds Abuse  4 (1.0%) 10 (12.7%) <0.001 Exact
Other Sub use  4 (1.0%) 3 (3.8%) 0.083 Exact
Nicotine Status     <0.001 Chi2*(2)=44.81 
Current Smoker 64 (15.2%) 34 (43.0%)    
   Non-smoker 236 (56.1%) 16 (20.3%)    
Former Smoker 107 (25.4%) 23 (29.1%)    
E-Cigarettes 3 (0.7%) 3 (3.8%)    
  Smokeless Tobacco 9 (2.1%) 3 (3.8%)    
Anxiety 273 (64.9%) 44 (55.7%) 0.120 Chi2(1)=2.40
Depression 169 (40.1%) 36 (45.6%) 0.370 Chi2(1)=0.81 
Schizophrenia 6 (1.4%) 5 (6.3%) 0.018 Exact
Bipolar disorder 23 (5.5%) 6 (7.6%) 0.460 Chi2(1)=0.55 
Unspecified injury 5 (1.2%) 0 (0.0%) 1.000 Exact
Motor-vehicle accident 13 (3.1%) 3 (3.8%) 0.727 Exact
Fall 42 (10.0%) 8 (10.1%) 0.970 Chi2(1)=0.00
Cannabis-related disorders 0 (0.0%) 11 (13.9%) <0.001 Exact
Psyc Mgmt Antidepressants 253 (60.1%) 40 (50.6%) 0.120 Chi2(1)=2.46
Psyc Mgmt Antipsychotics 42 (10.0%) 15 (19.0%) 0.020 Chi2(1)=5.35
Psyc Mgmt Stimulants 14 (3.3%) 7 (8.9%) 0.034 Exact
Psyc Mgmt Mood Stabilizers 3 (0.7%) 1 (1.3%) 0.499 Exact
Psyc Mgmt Anxiolytics 157 (37.3%) 25 (31.7%) 0.720 Chi2(1)=1.35

Of the 500 patients reviewed, 62 had documented co-use of marijuana and other prescribed psychotropic(s), including antidepressants, antipsychotics, stimulants, mood stabilizers, and/or anxiolytics (see Table 3). Of the 62 with psychotropic and marijuana co-usage, 61.3% had a history of anxiety and 50% had a history of depression.

Variable Non-Marijuana User (n=421) Marijuana User (n=79)  P-value Test Statistics 
n (%) / n (Mean (S.D.)) n (%) / n (Mean (S.D.))
Prevalence    15.80%    
Sex      <0.001 Chi211)=12.95
  Female 286 (67.9%) 37 (46.8%)
  Male 135 (32.0%) 42 (53.2%)
Ethnicity     0.106 Chi2*(1)=2.61 
  White 378 (90.0%) 66 (83.5%)
  Black 25 (6.0%) 10 (12.7%)
  Hispanic 9 (2.1%) 3 (3.8%)
  Asian 2 (0.5%) 0 (0.0%)
  Other 4 (1.0%) 0 (0.0%)
Care Setting     <0.001 Chi2(1)=23.27 
  Outpatient 387 (91.9%) 58 (73.4%)
  ED 34 (8.1%) 21 (26.6%)
BMI 403 (31.0 (7.7)) 73 (29.4 (8.6)) 0.110 t=1.61 
Employment Status     <0.001 Chi2(1)=24.92
  Unemployed 244 (58.0%) 49 (62.0%)
Insurance Type     0.322 Chi2*(1)=1.01 
  Employee sponsored 195 (46.3%) 32 (40.5%)
  State sponsored  222 (52.7%) 47 (59.5%)
  None 1 (0.2%) 0 (0.0%)
Using Marijuana to manage        
  Anxiety   11 (13.9%) (6.29%, 21.56%)**    
  Pain Management   14 (17.7%) (9.30%, 26.14%)**    

Of the 500 patients reviewed, 62 had documented co-use of marijuana and other prescribed psychotropic(s), including antidepressants, antipsychotics, stimulants, mood stabilizers, and/or anxiolytics (Table 4). Of the 62 with psychotropic and marijuana co-use, 61.3% had a history of anxiety and 50.0% had a history of depression.

Variable Neither (n=100) Psychotropic only (n=321) Marijuana only (n=17) Co-usage (n=62) P-value Test Statistics (p-value)
Sex         0.598 Chi2(1)=0.28 
   Female 62 (62.0%) 224 (69.8%) 7 (41.2%) 30 (48.4%)
   Male 38 (38.0%) 97 (30.2%) 10 (58.8%) 32 (51.6%)
Ethnicity         0.375 Chi2*(1)=0.79 
White 85 (85.0%) 293 (91.6%) 13 (76.5%) 53 (85.5%)
Black 9 (9.0%) 16 (5.0%) 2 (11.8%) 8 (12.9%)
Hispanic 4 (4.0%) 5 (1.6%) 2 (11.8%) 1 (1.6%)
Asian 0 (0.0%) 2 (0.6%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
Other 0 (0.0%) 4 (1.3%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
Care Setting         0.005 Chi2(1)=7.71 
Outpatient 80 (80.0%) 307 (95.6%) 8 (47.1%) 50 (80.7%)
ED 20 (20.0%) 14 (4.4%) 9 (52.9%) 12 (19.4%)
BMI 88 (31.0 (7.5)) 315 (31.0 (7.7)) 12 (27.3 (4.6)) 61 (29.8 (9.2)) 0.169 t=-1.41 
Employment Status         0.046 Chi2(1)=4.00 
Employed 44 (44.0%) 133 (41.4%) 10 (58.8%) 20 (32.3%)
Insurance Type         0.107 Chi2(1)=2.59 
Employee Sponsored  44 (44.0%) 151 (47.0%) 4 (23.5%) 28 (45.2%)
State Sponsored 54 (54.0%) 168 (52.3%) 13 (76.5%) 34 (54.8%)
None 1 (1.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
Illicit Substance Use             
Active use 2 (2.0%) 1 (0.3%) 0 (0.0%) 5 (8.2%) 0.579 Exact 
Former use 1 (1.0%) 7 (2.2%) 3 (17.7%) 12 (19.4%) 0.874 Chi2(1)=0.03 
Cocaine Abuse  0 (0.0%) 2 (0.6%) 1 (5.9%) 7 (11.3%) 0.513 Chi2(1)=0.43
Heroin Abuse  0 (0.0%) 1 (0.3%) 0 (0.0%) 4 (6.5%) 0.572 Exact 
Rx Meds Abuse  0 (0.0%) 4 (1.3%) 2 (11.8%) 8 (12.9%) 0.900 Chi2(1)=0.02 
Other Sub Abuse  3 (3.0%) 1 (0.3%) 1 (5.9%) 2 (3.2%) 0.522 Exact
Nicotine Status         0.953 Chi2(1)=0.10
Current Smoker 16 (16.0%) 48 (15.0%) 9 (52.9%) 25 (40.3%)
Non-smoker 61 (61.0%) 175 (54.5%) 3 (17.7%) 13 (21.0%)
Former Smoker 21 (21.0%) 86 (26.8%) 5 (29.4%) 18 (29.0%)
E-Cigarettes 0 (0.0%) 3 (0.9%) 0 (0.0%) 3 (4.8%)
Smokeless Tobacco 2 (2.0%) 7 (2.2%) 0 (0.0%) 3 (4.8%)
Anxiety 37 (37.0%) 236 (73.5%) 6 (35.3%) 38 (61.3%) 0.056 Chi2(1)=3.65 
Depression 24 (24.0%) 145 (45.2%) 5 (29.4%) 31 (50.0%) 0.131 Chi2(1)=2.28
Schizophrenia 1 (1.0%) 5 (1.6%) 1 (5.9%) 4 (6.5%) 0.932 Chi2(1)=0.01 
Bipolar disorder 4 (4.0%) 19 (5.9%) 0 (0.0%) 6 (9.7%) 0.331 Exact 
Unspecified injury 2 (2.0%) 3 (0.9%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)  
Motor-vehicle accident 11 (11.0%) 2 (0.6%) 1 (5.9%) 2 (3.2%) 0.522 Exact 
Work-related injury 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)  0 (0.0%)  
Fall 31 (31.0%) 11 (3.4%) 4 (23.5%) 4 (6.5%) 0.061 Exact
Cannabis related disorders 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 4 (23.5%) 7 (11.3%) 0.238 Exact
Psyc Mgmt Antidepressants 0 (0.0%) 253 (78.8%) 0 (0.0%) 40 (64.5%) <0.001 Exact 
Psyc Mgmt Antipsychotics 0 (0.0%) 42 (13.1%) 0 (0.0%) 15 (24.2%) 0.032 Exact 
Psyc Mgmt Stimulants 0 (0.0%) 14 (4.4%) 0 (0.0%) 7 (11.3%) 0.336 Exact 
Psyc Mgmt Mood Stabilizers 0 (0.0%) 3 (0.9%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (1.6%) 1.000 Exact 
Psyc Mgmt Antiaxiolytics 0 (0.0%) 157 (48.9%) 0 (0.0%) 25 (40.3%) <0.001 Exact
Opioid Used >1 19 (19.0%) 63 (19.6%) 4 (23.5%) 16 (25.8%) 1.000 Exact 

Trends identified provide a comparison point for local prevalence of marijuana use post state-wide legalization, which was found to be 15.8% (Table 2). Of the 79 with marijuana documentation, 13.9% of patients reported marijuana use to manage their anxiety (CI = 6.3%, 21.6%), and 17.7% reported use for pain management (CI = 9.3%, 26.1%). This study found a higher prevalence of cannabis usage in patients taking anti-psychotics (19.0%) compared to non-marijuana users (10.0%) with a p-value of 0.020 (Table 2). Additionally, it is important to note that most clinicians did not document a lack of marijuana use specifically in those considered a non-marijuana user (1.2%), but rather documented no illicit drug use in general.


An estimated 55 million American adults (16.9%) currently use marijuana in 2022 [20]. This number has increased when compared to a previous study in 2018 from the Annals of Internal Medicine which found that 14.6% of US adults reported using marijuana in the past year [21]. In the U.S., it is common to observe an increasing prevalence of marijuana use after legalization, but it is unknown if it is due to perceived risk or regional attitudes toward marijuana [2]. This increase has been observed in Colorado where adult marijuana use increased by 94% in the year 2019 since it was legalization [22]. With the increase in demand, use, and legalization approaching a national level, it is important to note the drastic increase in the prevalence of marijuana use.

This study provides insight into the local prevalence of marijuana use post-state-wide legalization (15.8%). As the data were abstracted at a time to coincide with the beginning of statewide legalization, this can serve as a comparison point for future analyses of prevalence in the state of Michigan, especially once the full implementation of the law occurred in 2019 following the passage of recreational marijuana legalization. It will be important from a public health perspective to continue researching trends in the prevalence of marijuana use moving forward.

This study also offers insight into the patterns of marijuana use in patients with a history of anxiety, depression, schizophrenia, those concomitant cocaine use, tobacco use, and psychotropic management. This study found that marijuana users were more likely to have a history of psychiatric disorder as well as current antipsychotic management. This further supports the association of active marijuana use with psychosis and mental health disorders such as schizophrenia, anxiety, and depression [4]. This association is important to recognize from a clinical perspective as physicians and practitioners screen for mental health disorders in patients with concurrent marijuana use, since these patients may be at higher risk than non-marijuana users, but further research is needed in this area. Additionally, there has not been sufficient clinical research to determine the safe amount of cannabis use to lower chronic pain and taper off opioids. One study did suggest that the legalization of marijuana may lead to a decrease in opioid overdose deaths [23], but further research is still needed for validation of the results.


This study’s findings are subject to several limitations. Marijuana use screening is clinician and patient-dependent and thus, may be subject to reporting bias or clinician variability in screening methods. It is important to note that most clinicians did not document negative marijuana use in those considered a non-marijuana users (only 1.2% specifically documented non-marijuana use), but rather documented there was no illicit drug use in general. This may have led to the under-reporting of marijuana use since the legalization and increased accessibility of marijuana has led to greater societal acceptance that may have normalized marijuana as not being considered a drug (i.e., some patients may no longer consider it a drug or illicit substance). As marijuana undoubtedly continues to become more culturally acceptable secondary to its legalization and increase in access commercially, it will be critical for physicians and other healthcare professionals to query patients specifically on marijuana use in addition to illicit substance use when gathering a patient’s social history.

Furthermore, given the observational nature of this type of research study, correlations cannot determine whether there is a direct cause and effect relationship between marijuana use and other conditions. In addition, this study looked at only one healthcare system in one region in Michigan, therefore, the generalizability of these results may not apply to other regions in the State of Michigan or elsewhere.


This study provides insight into the outcomes of the recent statewide legalization of recreational marijuana in mid-Michigan, as it pertains to patients being treated for conditions shown to be correlated with marijuana use. Because there is no previous data on marijuana use prevalence in the adult population in this region of Michigan, it is difficult to conclude how prevalence has changed in this population before and after the legalization of marijuana. As this data was abstracted at a time to coincide with the beginning of the statewide legalization, this can potentially serve as a comparison point for future analyses of prevalence in the state of Michigan. It will be important from a public health perspective to continue researching epidemiologic data and trends in the prevalence of marijuana use moving forward to inform public policy. Additionally, data at the state and local levels are important to help officials develop a more targeted prevention plan to ultimately prevent dependence, abuse, and adverse health effects associated with marijuana use.

What is CBD Tea and How it Can Help You – One Green Planet

Cannabidiol (CBD) is a type of cannabinoid, a chemical that is naturally derived from cannabis (marijuana and hemp) plants. Unlike tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), CBD doesn’t cause the euphoria or “high” feeling that’s associated with cannabis. CBD has gained popularity in recent years as a promising natural remedy for many health issues.

What is CBD?

Cannabidiol, also known as CBD, comes from the hemp plant and is the “second most prevalent active ingredient in cannabis.” It’s typically taken in oil form to help with anxiety, depression, and other medical issues.

CBD oil is made the same way some essential oils are made. The most common extraction method is CO2 extraction which uses a pressurized chamber filled with CO2 and the hemp plant to extract the oil. Alcohol extraction is also popular and has been shown to preserve hemp well.

What is CBD Tea?

While CBD can be consumed in various forms, CBD tea has gained popularity for its beneficial effects for conditions such as seizures, anxiety, depression, inflammation, epilepsy, addiction, and insomnia, to name a few. Like other teas, CBD tea comes in a wide variety of flavors and can be made from scratch at home! It has a pleasant taste similar to regular tea and can be infused with other natural ingredients for a boost of flavor. Cinnamon, agave, lemon, and dairy-free cream can help mask the flavor of CBD if you’re not a fan of its strong taste. This powerful tea is refreshing and relaxing and can help heal a variety of ailments.

The Health Benefits of CBD

Prescription CBD is used as an anti-seizure medicine and is very effective. This is the most impressive benefit of this plant oil. Several studies suggest CBD oil can help with anxiety and insomnia. Customers often gravitate towards CBD for these benefits, and anecdotal research has demonstrated that it works quite well.

While CBD is often ingested, it can also be applied topically as an anti-inflammatory and pain reducer. A study from the European Journal of Medicine suggests that this oil can help soothe the effects of arthritis when applied to the skin.

How To Make CBD Tea

Source: RuthlessRogCBD/Youtube

To make CBD tea at home, first, gather your ingredients. You’ll need 1 CBD tea bag, hot water, and any other additions to add to the flavor of your tea. You can include fresh lemon peels, a cinnamon stick, a splash of creamer, and agave. In a mug, add the ingredients and the tea bag and fill with hot water. Let steep for about 5 minutes, and enjoy!

CBD is generally safe. However, similarly to any supplement, side effects and interactions can happen. It’s recommended to check with your doctor before trying it.

Get The Most Out Of Your CBD Hemp Tea

Source: Hemp By Nature Official/Youtube

In this video, learn how to get the most CBD possible out of hemp or cannabis tea. With a simple and advanced method,  look into the solubility of CBD and decarboxylation to help get as much CBD (or other cannabinoids) into your tea as possible!

CBD Stir Fry

CBD Stir Fry

Source: CBD Stir Fry

All of the elements from this stir-fry last for a good amount of time and take just a little prep work. The best part of this dish is perhaps the wild rice, which is in fact not rice at all. I discovered this way of ‘blooming’ wild rice a few years ago when I was teaching in Barcelona, and I’ve been taken by it ever since. A great way to increase variety in your meals is to include less common plants, and the ‘rice’ provides a different nutty texture and technique to this dish.

Related Content:

For more Animal, Earth, Life, Vegan Food, Health, and Recipe content published daily, subscribe to the One Green Planet Newsletter! Also, don’t forget to download the Food Monster App on the App Store. With over 15,000 delicious recipes, it is the largest meatless, vegan, and allergy-friendly recipe resource to help reduce your environmental footprint, save animals and get healthy! Lastly, being publicly funded gives us a greater chance to continue providing you with high-quality content. Please consider supporting us by donating!

NY Directs Authorities To Shut Down New Cheektowaga Weed Lounge – WIBX AM 950

The owner of a new cannabis lounge in Cheektowaga says he has unfairly been shut down by local authorities, per direction from New York State. The owner posted a letter addressed from the Town of Cheektowaga. The correspondence says that officials with Cheektowaga received guidance from the New York State Cannabis Control Board and Office of Cannabis Management to close the business. The reason stated in the letter claims that the Rolling 420s Lounge was operating without a legal cannabis permit.

Rolling 420s CEO Says There Is No License For His Business Model

The new and unique cannabis lounge opened in Cheektowaga. While adult-use recreational dispensaries and on-site consumption lounges aren’t open around New York State yet, this lounge is a bit different. The Roaring 420s Lounge is actually a private club where you have to be 21-years-old or over and a member. If you’re a member, you don’t purchase marijuana, you get samples. The club also provides other services, according to what CEO John Averill told Channel 7,

They will roll joints for you, they will pack bongs, they will provide you edibles, they will let you sample any item in their possession. None of the cannabis we have here is for sale, we don’t even buy it, it’s donated to us free of charge, we don’t allow anyone to leave with it. It’s not even guaranteed with the membership.

Essentially, the club offers private and exclusive membership. The Rolling 420s Lounge commented on the Instagram post above about seeking a license,

Do they have a license?

@gabbykuzara there is no license for what we do, nor one planned

Could The Real Issue Behind The Closure Be Taxation?

Voters In Oakland Approve Tax On Medical Marijuana

Getty Images


New York State predicts that the adult-use cannabis industry will generate millions, possibly billions of dollars in revenue. The state plans on taking its cut from all the money made with a robust taxation plan. In addition to taxing distributors of adult-use marijuana products in the state, there are two other taxes that consumers will pay once the first legal retail dispensaries and lounges open,

There is a state excise tax imposed on the sale of cannabis products by a retail dispensary to a cannabis consumer at 9 percent of the products’ price.

Third, there is a local excise tax imposed on the sale of cannabis products by a retail dispensary to a cannabis consumer at four (4) percent of the products’ price. This tax is distributed to local governments based on where the retail dispensary is located.

New York State Busts 52 Illegal Cannabis Storefronts And Trucks

Colorado Experiments With Liberalization Of Marijuana Laws

Getty Images


The Rolling 420s Lounge is not the only marijuana business to be closed by the state recently. New York State isn’t playing when it comes to cracking down on illegal cannabis sellers. Legal storefronts have not opened yet for adult use, but that hasn’t stopped enterprising people from setting up shop.

The Office of Cannabis Management recently identified fifty-two illicit cannabis stores in the state. Each of the vendors was sent cease and desist letters, requiring that they stop selling marijuana without a proper dispensary license.

These stores falsely depict their operations as legal cannabis dispensaries, but they are not licensed by New York State and are selling untested products that put public health at risk.

The state says that these stores are putting the public at risk. While that could be true, let’s keep it real, people have sold marijuana illegally for decades. The biggest difference now is the state’s ability to collect tax revenue on cannabis. Tremaine Wright, Chair of New York’s Cannabis Control Board said,

There are no businesses currently licensed to sell adult-use cannabis in New York State. Selling any item or taking a donation, and then 'gifting’ a customer a bag of untested cannabis does indeed count as a sale under New York’s Cannabis Law. You need a license to sell cannabis in New York. Licensed sales and a regulated market are the only way New York’s customers will be assured that the cannabis products they are purchasing have been tested and tracked from seed to sale. Sale of untested products put lives at risk. I implore these illegal store operators, and any other stores pretending to be legal operations, to stop selling cannabis products immediately.

Only dispensaries that are licensed to distribute medical marijuana are legally operating.

Here Are The 20 Towns In Erie County That Won’t Allow Marijuana

Bad Habits Cost More In New York State, There’s A 'Sin Tax’ On These 9 Items

New York State Banned Marijuana Smoke In 6 New Places

Times At Which A CBD Vape Pen Can Be Helpful – LA Weekly

This article was originally published on CBD Balm Salves. To View the original article, please click here.

CBD vape pens are getting more popular nowadays. For those who don’t know what a vape pen is, it is a small device that can be used to vape CBD-infused oil. The vapor will contain CBD and this vapor is inhaled by the user to get the effects of CBD. A vape pen is the fastest method to get the effects of CBD. The effects of CBD are felt within about 20 minutes when a vape pen is used. The effects can last between three to four hours.

The best advantage of a vape pen is the convenience of usage. You can carry it around without any hustle and there are no complications in using the device. Two types of vape pens include disposable vape pens and vape pen kits. Flavored CBD vape oil kits are available and are used in vape pen kits. You can choose from different flavors of vape oil kits. Make sure you are buying organic CBD products.

If you have doubts about when you should use CBD vape pens, then this article is for you.

Most people have to travel to their workplace. While traveling to your work you may have to face heavy traffic. Being stuck in traffic can be irritating and this can be a perfect time to use your CBD vape pen. CBD vape pen can help you to keep your cool and have a peaceful journey to your work. This practice can also be used while traveling home from your work.

More than 75% of working individuals are stressed out by their work. Most of these people are seeking a way to manage their stress and many people relieve their stress by smoking cigarettes. As we all know, cigarettes can cause several health issues. Instead of cigarettes, using a CBD vape pen during your lunch break can be of great help. CBD vape pens do not cause any health threats and can help you relieve your stress.

If you are afraid of using a vape pen while you are traveling, you can use it after you reach home. Most of us come home exhausted after work and using a vape pen at this time can help release the tension. By using CBD vape pens, you can find more happiness in the things you do after work like workouts, cooking, etc.

Advertising disclosure: We may receive compensation for some of the links in our stories. Thank you for supporting LA Weekly and our advertisers.