Now, the government’s own research has confirmed that teen cannabis use has fallen dramatically since the legalization movement began picking up steam with the turn of the century. [...] steady decreases in the prevalence of marijuana dependence and abuse among adult marijuana users

Drug Warriors' minds are made up - don't confuse them with the facts.

The CDC study is of particular interest because the DEA just reaffirmed its prohibition of cannabis, maintaining the position that it has “no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.” We know the first part is absurdly wrong, as proof of its medical value is indisputable, and now the government’s own study shows that the “potential for abuse” is higher under prohibition.

DEA, 81 FR 53779-53781, August 12, 2016

Status of Research Into the Medical Uses for Marijuana

State-level public initiatives, including laws and referenda in support of the medical use of marijuana, have generated interest in the medical community and the need for high quality clinical investigation as well as comprehensive safety and effectiveness data. In order to address the need for high quality clinical investigations, the state of California established the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR, www.cmcr.ucsd.edu) in 2000 ''in response to scientific evidence for therapeutic possibilities of cannabis[9] and local legislative initiatives in favor of compassionate use'' (Grant, 2005). State legislation establishing the CMCR called for high quality medical research that would ''enhance understanding of the efficacy and adverse effects of marijuana as a pharmacological agent,'' but stressed the project ''should not be construed as encouraging or sanctioning the social or recreational use of marijuana.'' The CMCR funded many of the published studies on marijuana's potential use for treating multiple sclerosis, neuropathic pain, appetite suppression and cachexia. However, aside from the data produced by CMCR, no state-level medical marijuana laws have produced scientific data on marijuana's safety and effectiveness.

FDA approves medical use of a drug following a submission and review of an NDA or BLA. The FDA has not approved any drug product containing marijuana for marketing. Even so, results of small clinical exploratory studies have been published in the current medical literature. Many studies describe human research with marijuana in the United States under FDA-regulated IND applications.

However, FDA approval of an NDA is not the only means through which a drug can have a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. In general, a drug may have a ''currently accepted medical use'' in treatment in the United States if the drug meets a five-part test. Established case law (Alliance for Cannabis Therapeutics v. DEA, 15 F.3d 1131, 1135 (D.C. Cir. 1994)) upheld the Administrator of DEA's application of the five-part test to determine whether a drug has a ''currently accepted medical use.'' The following describes the five elements that characterize ''currently accepted medical use'' for a drug[10]:

i. the drug's chemistry must be known and reproducible

''The substance's chemistry must be scientifically established to permit it to be reproduced into dosages which can be standardized. The listing of the substance in a current edition of one of the official compendia, as defined by section 201 G) of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. 321G), is sufficient to meet this requirement.''

ii. there must be adequate safety studies

''There must be adequate pharmacological and toxicological studies, done by all methods reasonably applicable, on the basis of which it could fairly and responsibly be concluded, by experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of drugs, that the substance is safe for treating a specific, recognized disorder.''

iii. there must be adequate and well- controlled studies proving efficacy

''There must be adequate, well- controlled, well-designed, well-conducted, and well-documented studies, including clinical investigations, by experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of drugs, on the basis of which it could be fairly and responsibly concluded by such experts that the substance will have the intended effect in treating a specific, recognized disorder.''

iv. the drug must be accepted by qualified experts

''The drug has a New Drug Application (NDA) approved by the Food and Drug Administration, pursuant to the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. 355. Or, a consensus of the national community of experts, qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of drugs, accepts the safety and effectiveness of the substance for use in treating a specific, recognized disorder. A material conflict of opinion among experts precludes a finding of consensus.'' and

v. the scientific evidence must be widely available

''In the absence of NDA approval, information concerning the chemistry, pharmacology, toxicology, and effectiveness of the substance must be reported, published, or otherwise widely available, in sufficient detail to permit experts, qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of drugs, to fairly and responsibly conclude the substance is safe and effective for use in treating a specific, recognized disorder.''

Marijuana does not meet any of the five elements necessary for a drug to have a ''currently accepted medical use.''

Firstly, the chemistry of marijuana, as defined in the petition, is not reproducible in terms of creating a standardized dose. The petition defines marijuana as including all Cannabis cultivated strains. Different marijuana samples derived from various cultivated strains may have very different chemical constituents including delta9-THC and other cannabinoids (Appendino et al., 2011). As a consequence, marijuana products from different strains will have different safety, biological, pharmacological, and toxicological profiles. Thus, when considering all Cannabis strains together, because of the varying chemical constituents, reproducing consistent standardized doses is not possible. Additionally, smoking marijuana currently has not been shown to allow delivery of consistent and reproducible doses. However, if a specific Cannabis strain is grown and processed under strictly controlled conditions, the plant chemistry may be kept consistent enough to produce reproducible and standardized doses.

As to the second and third criteria; there are neither adequate safety studies nor adequate and well-controlled studies proving marijuana's efficacy. To support the petitioners' assertion that marijuana has accepted medical use, the petitioners cite the American Medical Association's (AMA) 2009 report entitled ''Use of Cannabis for Medicinal Purposes.'' The petitioners claim the AMA report is evidence the AMA accepts marijuana's safety and efficacy. However, the 2009 AMA report clarifies that the report ''should not be viewed as an endorsement of state-based medical cannabis programs, the legalization of marijuana, or that scientific evidence on the therapeutic use of cannabis meets the same and current standards for a prescription drug product.[11]''

Currently, no published studies conducted with marijuana meet the criteria of an adequate and well-controlled efficacy study. The criteria for an adequate and well-controlled study for purposes of determining the safety and efficacy of a human drug are defined under the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in 21 CFR 314.126. In order to assess this element, FDA conducted a review of clinical studies published and available in the public domain before February, 2013. Studies were identified through a search of PubMed[12] for articles published from inception to February 2013, for randomized controlled trials using marijuana to assess marijuana's efficacy in any therapeutic indication. Additionally, the review included studies identified through a search of bibliographic references in relevant systematic reviews and identified studies presenting original research in any language. Selected studies needed to be placebo-controlled and double-blinded. Additionally, studies needed to encompass administered marijuana plant material. There was no requirement for any specific route of administration, nor any age limits on study subjects. Studies were excluded that used placebo marijuana supplemented by the addition of specific amounts of THC or other cannabinoids. Additionally, studies administering marijuana plant extracts were excluded.

The PubMed search yielded a total of 566 abstracts of scientific articles. Of these abstracts, a full-text review was conducted with 85 papers to assess eligibility. Of the studies identified through the search of the references and the 566 abstracts from the PubMed search, only 11 studies met all the criteria for selection (Abrams et al., 2007; Corey-Bloom et al., 2012; Crawford and Merritt, 1979; Ellis et al., 2009; Haney et al., 2005; Haney et al., 2007; Merritt et al., 1980; Tashkin et al., 1974; Ware et al., 2010; Wilsey et al., 2008; Wilsey et al., 2013). These 11 studies were published between 1974 and 2013. Ten of these studies were conducted in the United States and one study was conducted in Canada. The identified studies examine the effects of smoked and vaporized marijuana for the indications of chronic neuropathic pain, spasticity related to Multiple Sclerosis (MS), appetite stimulation in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients, glaucoma, and asthma. All studies used adult subjects.

The 11 identified studies were individually evaluated to determine if they successfully meet accepted scientific standards. Specifically, they were evaluated on study design including subject selection criteria, sample size, blinding techniques, dosing paradigms, outcome measures, and the statistical analysis of the results. The analysis relied on published studies, thus information available about protocols, procedures, and results were limited to documents published and widely available in the public domain. The review found that all 11 studies that examined effects of inhaled marijuana do not currently prove efficacy of marijuana in any therapeutic indication based on a number of limitations in their study design; however, they may be considered proof of concept studies. Proof of concept studies provide preliminary evidence on a proposed hypothesis involving a drug's effect. For drugs under development, the effect often relates to a short-term clinical outcome being investigated. Proof of concept studies often serve as the link between preclinical studies and dose ranging clinical studies. Thus, proof of concept studies generally are not sufficient to prove efficacy of a drug because they provide only preliminary information about the effects of a drug.

In addition to the lack of published adequate and well-controlled efficacy studies proving efficacy, the criteria for adequate safety studies has also not been met. Importantly, in its discussion of the five-part test used to determine whether a drug has a ''currently accepted medical use,'' DEA said, ''No drug can be considered safe in the abstract. Safety has meaning only when judged against the intended use of the drug, its known effectiveness, its known and potential risks, the severity of the illness to be treated, and the availability of alternative remedies'' (57 FR 10504). When determining whether a drug product is safe and effective for any indication, FDA performs an extensive risk-benefit analysis to determine whether the risks posed by the drug product's side effects are outweighed by the drug product's potential benefits for a particular indication. Thus, contrary to the petitioner's assertion that marijuana has accepted safety, in the absence of an accepted therapeutic indication which can be weighed against marijuana's risks, marijuana does not satisfy the element for having adequate safety studies such that experts may conclude that it is safe for treating a specific, recognized disorder.

The fourth of the five elements for determining ''currently accepted medical use'' requires that the national community of experts, qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of drugs, accepts the safety and effectiveness of the substance for use in treating a specific, recognized disorder. A material conflict of opinion among experts precludes a finding of consensus. Medical practitioners who are not experts in evaluating drugs are not qualified to determine whether a drug is generally recognized as safe and effective or meets NDA requirements (57 FR 10499-10505).

There is no evidence that there is a consensus among qualified experts that marijuana is safe and effective for use in treating a specific, recognized disorder. As discussed above, there are not adequate scientific studies that show marijuana is safe and effective in treating a specific, recognized disorder. In addition, there is no evidence that a consensus of qualified experts have accepted the safety and effectiveness of marijuana for use in treating a specific, recognized disorder. Although medical practitioners are not qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of drugs, we also note that the AMA's report, entitled ''Use of Cannabis for Medicinal Purposes,'' does not accept that marijuana currently has accepted medical use. Furthermore, based on the above definition of a ''qualified expert'', who is an individual qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a drug, state-level medical marijuana laws do not provide evidence of a consensus among qualified experts that marijuana is safe and effective for use in treating a specific, recognized disorder.

As to the fifth part of the test, which requires that information concerning the chemistry, pharmacology, toxicology, and effectiveness of marijuana to be reported in sufficient detail, the scientific evidence regarding all of these aspects is not available in sufficient detail to allow adequate scientific scrutiny. Specifically, the scientific evidence regarding marijuana's chemistry in terms of a specific Cannabis strain that could produce standardized and reproducible doses is not currently available.

Alternately, a drug can be considered to have a ''currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions'' (21 U.S.C. 812(b)(2)(B)), as allowed under the stipulations for a Schedule II drug. Yet, as stated above, currently marijuana does not have any accepted medical use, even under conditions where its use is severely restricted.

In conclusion, to date, research on marijuana's medical use has not progressed to the point where marijuana is considered to have a ''currently accepted medical use'' or a ''currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.''

- - - - - - - - - -

[9] In this quotation the term cannabis is interchangeable with marijuana.

[10] 57 FR I 0499, 10504–06 (March 26, 1992).

[11] In this quotation the term cannabis is used interchangeably for marijuana.

[12] The following search strategy was used, ‘‘(cannabis OR marijuana) AND (therapeutic use OR therapy) AND (RCT OR randomized controlled trial OR ‘‘systematic review’’ OR clinical trial OR clinical trials) NOT (‘‘marijuana abuse’’[Mesh] OR addictive behavior OR substance related disorders).’’

https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/12CBD2B55C34FBF585257AFB00554299/$file/11-1265-1416392.pdf

Americans for Safe Access, et al., v. Drug Enforcement Administration, No. 11-1265 (D.C. Cir. 22 January 2013) slip op

[21]

B. The DEA’s Denial of the Petition to Initiate Proceedings to Reschedule Marijuana

On the merits, Petitioners claim that the DEA’s final order denying their request to initiate proceedings to reschedule marijuana was arbitrary and capricious. Under the terms of the CSA, marijuana cannot be rescheduled to Schedules III, IV, or V without a “currently accepted medical use.” 21 U.S.C. § 812(b)(3)-(5). To assess whether marijuana has such a medical use, the agency applies a five-part test: “(1) The drug’s chemistry must be known and reproducible; (2) There must be adequate safety studies; (3) There must be adequate and well-controlled studies proving efficacy; (4) The

[22]

drug must be accepted by qualified experts; and (5) The scientific evidence must be widely available.” See Denial, 76 Fed. Reg. 40,552, 40,579. The DEA’s five-part test was expressly approved by this court in Alliance for Cannabis Therapeutics, 15 F.3d at 1135. Because the agency’s factual findings in this case are supported by substantial evidence and because those factual findings reasonably support the agency’s final decision not to reschedule marijuana, we must uphold the agency action.

Under the Administrative Procedure Act, a court may set aside an agency’s final decision only if it is “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A). “We will not disturb the decision of an agency that has ‘examine[d] the relevant data and articulate[d] a satisfactory explanation for its action including a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.’” MD Pharm. Inc. v. DEA, 133 F.3d 8, 16 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (quoting Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 (1983)). Furthermore, the agency’s interpretation of its own regulations “must be given controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.” Thomas Jefferson Univ. v. Shalala, 512 U.S. 504, 512 (1994). The CSA also directs this court to review the agency’s findings of fact for substantial evidence. See 21 U.S.C. § 877. Under this standard, we must “ask whether a reasonable mind might accept a particular evidentiary record as adequate to support a conclusion.” Dickinson v. Zurko, 527 U.S. 150, 162 (1999). Petitioners do not seriously dispute the propriety of the five-part test approved in Alliance for Cannabis Therapeutics. Thus, they are left with the difficult task of showing that the DEA has misapplied its own regulations. Petitioners challenge the agency’s reasoning on each of the five factors. However,

[23]

“[a] drug will be deemed to have a currently accepted medical use for CSA purposes only if all five of the foregoing elements are demonstrated.” Denial, 76 Fed. Reg. at 40,579. In this case, we need only look at one factor, the existence of “adequate and well-controlled studies proving efficacy,” to resolve Petitioners’ claim.

In its scientific and medical evaluation, DHHS concluded that “research on the medical use of marijuana ha[d] not progressed to the point that marijuana [could] be considered to have a ‘currently accepted medical use’ or a ‘currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.’” Id. at 40,560. As noted above, DHHS’ recommendations are binding on the DEA insofar as they rest on scientific and medical determinations. 21 U.S.C. § 811(b).

"In 2014, after Colorado legalized the recreational use of cannabis, we began hearing that teen use was declining ..."

Your linked chart demonstrating that decline ends in 2013, one year before legalization.

Your spam is not relevant to the topic of the article.

Is it ever? copying and pasting is all nolu spam knows how to do.

In 2014, after Colorado legalized the recreational use of cannabis, we began hearing that teen use was declining – contrary to prohibitionist propaganda. Real-world data were beginning to prove that the black market, created through government prohibition, is a prime driver of negativities associated with drugs.

The link at teen use was declining goes to another Free Thought Project article from 2014.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/study-shows-decline-teen-marijuana-colorado-legalization/]

Contrary to Fear Mongers: Study Shows Decline in Teen Marijuana Use in Colorado Since Legalization

Jay Syrmopoulos September 4, 2014

Denver- A recent survey, overseen by the state Department of Public Health, shows that fewer Colorado high school students are smoking marijuana since it was legalized in the state.

The survey, Healthy Kids Colorado, was given in 2011 and showed that 39 percent of high school students had ever used marijuana, but when the survey was administered in 2013, after legalization, that number had dropped to 37 percent.

The percent of teens that reported use within the past month (current) also declined from 22 percent in 2011, to 20 percent in 2013.

image: http://cloudfront-media.reason.com/mc/jsullum/2014_08/marijuana-use-by-Colorado-teenagers.jpg?h=400&w=600

In spite of dire warning from prohibitionists who claimed that legalization would dramatically increase teen use, there has actually been a steady downward trend that has continued through the legalization of medical marijuana in 2001, the commercialization of medical marijuana in 2009 when the legal status of medical marijuana was solidified, and now through the legalization of cultivation and recreational use late in 2012.

This data comes from the Center for Disease Control’s (CDC) Youth Risk Behavior Survey to which Colorado submitted their data from the Health Kids Colorado Survey.

The link for recent survey is a Colorado.gov dead link.

https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/news/news-new-survey-documents-youth-marijuana-use-need-prevention [dead link]

The link for Youth Risk Behavior Survey is this bullshit link:

http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/index.htm

The bullshit link gives the following, in its entirety:

Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS)

New 2015 YRBS Sexual Minority Data Released!

Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) monitors six types of health-risk behaviors that contribute to the leading causes of death and disability among youth and adults, including—

• Behaviors that contribute to unintentional injuries and violence
• Sexual behaviors related to unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV infection
• Alcohol and other drug use
• Tobacco use
• Unhealthy dietary behaviors
• Inadequate physical activity

YRBSS also measures the prevalence of obesity and asthma and other priority health-related behaviors plus sexual identity and sex of sexual contacts.

YRBSS includes a national school-based survey conducted by CDC and state, territorial, tribal, and local surveys conducted by state, territorial, and local education and health agencies and tribal governments.

The below link actually goes to the Youth Risk Behavior Survey at the CDC.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/ss/ss6511a1.htm?s_cid=ss6511a1_e

[excerpts]

Results: In 2014, a total of 2.5 million persons aged =12 years had used marijuana for the first time during the preceding 12 months, an average of approximately 7,000 new users each day. During 2002–2014, the prevalence of marijuana use during the past month, past year, and daily or almost daily increased among persons aged =18 years, but not among those aged 12–17 years. Among persons aged =12 years, the prevalence of perceived great risk from smoking marijuana once or twice a week and once a month decreased and the prevalence of perceived no risk increased. The prevalence of past year marijuana dependence and abuse decreased, except among persons aged =26 years. Among persons aged =12 years, the percentage reporting that marijuana was fairly easy or very easy to obtain increased. The percentage of persons aged =12 reporting the mode of acquisition of marijuana was buying it and growing it increased versus getting it for free and sharing it. The percentage of persons aged =12 years reporting that the perceived maximum legal penalty for the possession of an ounce or less of marijuana in their state is a fine and no penalty increased versus probation, community service, possible prison sentence, and mandatory prison sentence.

Interpretation: Since 2002, marijuana use in the United States has increased among persons aged =18 years, but not among those aged 12–17 years. A decrease in the perception of great risk from smoking marijuana combined with increases in the perception of availability (i.e., fairly easy or very easy to obtain marijuana) and fewer punitive legal penalties (e.g., no penalty) for the possession of marijuana for personal use might play a role in increased use among adults.

[...]

The health effects associated with marijuana use are widely debated. However, regular use (i.e., daily or almost daily use) of marijuana or use during adolescence poses potential public health concerns, including reduced educational attainment, potential long-term health consequences, addiction in some users, increased risk for psychoses disorders, altered brain structure and function, and increased risk for injury from driving while under the influence (2–8).

Since 1971, NSDUH has been the principal national source of statistical information on the use of illicit drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. Several national- and state-level reports on substance use have been published by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) using NSDUH data (9). To date, no comprehensive national report has focused only on a specific substance (e.g., marijuana). This report is the first to present an overview of national estimates for marijuana use and related indicators for the U.S. civilian noninstitutionalized population aged =12 years using 2002–2014 NSDUH data. Findings from this report can provide federal, state, and local public health officials with information about behavioral trends for marijuana use and related indicators. Public health officials can use these findings to develop and implement targeted prevention activities to reduce youth initiation and use of marijuana. Findings can also be used to assess the quality, relevance, and timeliness of surveillance capacity to effectively monitor trends of marijuana use.

As for a NSDUH report specifically on Colorado marijuana usage:

http://www.rmhidta.org/html/FINAL%20NSDUH%20Results-%20Jan%202016%20Release.pdf

January 2016

The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact

Latest results for Colorado

Youth and Adult Marijuana Use

Introduction

• This report on marijuana use in Colorado is an update of the publication The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Volume 3.

• This report is a summary of some of the data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), an annual survey sponsored by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).

• The NSDUH data reported by SAMHSA is an average of two consecu tive years.

• Colorado legalized recreational marijuana in 2013 and retail marijuana businesses began operation in 2014.

• The findings are between the two-year average of full legalization (2013/2014) compared to the two-year average just prior to legalization (2011/2012).

Youth Findings

Past Month (Current ) Marijuana Use for Colorado Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old:

• In the two year average (2013/2014) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana, youth past month marijuana use increased 20 percent compared to the two year aver age prior to legalization (2011/2012)

• Nationally youth past month marijuana use declined 4 percent during the same time.

• The latest 2013/2014 results show Colorado youth ranked #1 in the nation for past month marijuana use, up from #4 in 2011/2012.

• Colorado youth past month marijuana use for 2013/2014 was 74 percent higher than the national average compared to 39 percent higher in 2011/2012.

[...]

College Age Findings

Past Month (Current) Marijuana Use for Colorado College Age Adults Ages 18 to 25 Years Old:

• In the two year average (2013/2014) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana, college age past month marijuana use increased 17 percent compared to the two year average prior to legalization (2011/2012).

• Nationally college age past month marijuana use increased 2 percent during the same time.

• The latest 2013/2014 results show Colorado college age adults ranked #1 in the nation for past month marijuana use, up from #3 in 2011/2012.

• Colorado college age past month marijuana use for 2013/2014 was 62 percent higher than the national average compared to 42 percent higher in 2011/2012.

[...]

Adult Findings

Past Month (Current) Marijuana Use for Colorado Adults Ages 26+ Years Old:

• In the two year average (2013/2014) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana, adult past month marijuana use increased 63 percent compared to the two year average prior to legalization (2011/2012).

• Nationally adult past month marijuana use increased 21 percent during the same time.

• The latest 2013/2014 results show Colorado adults ranked #1 in the nation for past month marijuana use, up from #7 in 2011/2012.

• Colorado adult past month marijuana use for 2013/2014 was 104 percent higher than the national average compared to 51 percent higher in 2011/2012.

Colorado’s good news on teen pot use

Teen marijuana use in Colorado found lower than national average

Colorado’s good news on teen pot use

When you can't find any study to present, Colorado newspaper articles will have to do.

I prefer actual reports. I understand why you do not. You prefer to dumpster dive.

http://www.aol.com/article/2016/06/21/colorado-teens-smoke-weed-less-now-that-its-legal/21399307/

The biannual poll by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment also showed the percentage of high school students indulging in marijuana in Colorado was smaller than the national average among teens.

According to the department, 21.2 percent of Colorado high school students surveyed in 2015 had used marijuana during the preceding 30 days, down from 22 percent in 2011, the year before voters statewide approved recreational cannabis use by adults 21 and older. The first state-licensed retail outlets for legalized pot actually opened in 2014.

Nationwide, the rate of pot use by teens is slightly higher at 21.7 percent, the study found.

Nationwide, the rate of pot use by teens is slightly higher at 21.7 percent, the study found. And what study would that be? A nationwide study by the Colorado Departent of Public Health and Environment?

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/06/22/colorados-good-news-on-teen-pot-use/

That’s why the recent data from the state’s Healthy Kids Colorado Survey, which shows marijuana use among high school students has not increased and is roughly the same as the national average, is so heartening.

In the 2016 NSDUH Final Report,

In the two year average (2013/2014) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana, youth past month marijuana use increased 20 percent compared to the two year aver age prior to legalization (2011/2012)

• Nationally youth past month marijuana use declined 4 percent during the same time.

That's so disheartening.

http://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUHsaeLongTermCHG2014/NSDUHsaeLongTermCHG2014.pdf

National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Comparison of 2002-2003 and 2013-2014 Population Percentages (50 States and the District of Columbia)

Actual statistical tables.

Table 2 at page 4

Marijuana Use in the Past Year, by Age Group and State: Percentages, Annual Averages, and P Values from Tests of Differences between Percentages, 2002-2003 and 2013-2014 NSDUHs

Table 3 at page 6:

Marijuana Use in the Past Month, by Age Group and State: Percentages, Annual Averages, and P Values from Tests of Differences between Percentages, 2002-2003 and 2013-2014 NSDUHs

https://www.scribd.com/document/323493516/National-Survey-on-Drug-Use-and-Health-Comparison-of-2002-2003-and-2013-2014-SAMSHA

http://www.rmhidta.org/html/2016%20FINAL%20Legalization%20of%20Marijuana%20in%20Colorado%20The%20Impact.pdf

The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado, The Impact

Volume 4, September 2016

Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area

www.rmhidta.org

- - - - - - - - - -

RM HIDTA - FINAL Denver Post HKCS Response

Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area

(RMHIDTA)

Colorado Youth Marijuana Use:

Up - Down - Flat?

Examine the Data and You Decide!

DENVER - On June 21, 2016, The Denver Post published an article "Survey: Pot use among Colorado teens flat," based on the recently-released 2015 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey (HKCS) recently released Rocky Mountain HIDTA has been inundated with inquiries regarding this article and, therefore, prepared a response for clarification and consideration by the reader. For purposes of this response, marijuana use refers to past month or past 30 days marijuana use that is the criteria used in the surveys. The most recent (2015/2016) Rocky Mountain HIDTA publications on the impact of marijuana legalization in Colorado reported:

Federal National Survey

• According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), an annual survey by the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA):

o When recreational marijuana was legalized in Colorado, youth ages 12 - 17 past month marijuana use increased 20 percent comparing the two-year average just prior to legalization (2011/2012) to the two-year average when legalized (2013/2014).

o The 2013/2014 survey results show Colorado youth ranked No. 1 in the nation fo rpast month marijuana use, up from No. 4 in 2011/2012.

o Colorado youth past month marijuana use for 2013/2014 was 74 percent higher than the national average (12.56 percent vs. 7.22 percent).

What do School Resource Officers Say?

• In a 2015 survey of 95 school resource officers, 90 percent responded that, since marijuana legalization, they have seen an increase in marijuana-related incidents in their schools.

• In the same survey, when asked where the students are getting their marijuana, 18 percent said from the black market and 81 percent cited friends who get it legally, parents, or marijuana businesses.

What do School Counselors Say?

• In a similar survey of 188 school counselors, 69 percent responded that, since marijuana legalization, they have seen an increase in marijuana-related incidents in their school.

• In the same survey, when asked where the students are getting their marijuana, 18 percent said the black market while 82 percent cited friends who get it legally, family members, or marijuana businesses.

State of Colorado Survey

Colorado recently released the results of their Healthy Kids Colorado Survey (HKCS) as reported in the Tuesday, June 21, 2016 issue of The Denver Post with the article titled, "Survey: Pot use among Colo. teens flat." The article does point out that the 2013 HKCS data shows 19.7 percent of teens had used marijuana in the past month compared to 21.2 percent in 2015. Although this is a 7.6 percent increase, the article states the increase is "not statistically significant."

The article states that, in 2009, the rate was 24.8 percent but failed to explain that the 2013 and 2015 surveys were much different sampling sizes and the survey method changed, thus impacting any comparisons.

The article cites the Centers for Disease Control's Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) to indicate that "marijuana use among teens nationwide also remained flat..." They failed to mention that Oregon and Washington, states with legalized marijuana, and Minnesota did not participate in the 2015 YRBS. There were also ten states, including Colorado, with unweighted results because their state survey participation rate did not meet the 60 percent participation standard set by YRBS.

On June 22, 2016, The Denver Post Editorial Board released an editorial titled, "Colorado's good news on teen pot use," based on the 2015 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey. There are numerous important points related to the survey not addressed in the article and editorial:

Bad News (see Page 7)

• Marijuana use among Colorado high school junior and senior students increased 19 percent and 14 percent respectively from 2013 to 2015.

• Only 48 percent of high school students surveyed see marijuana as risky compared to 54 percent of those surveyed two years earlier.

• One out of 3 Denver high school juniors and seniors surveyed are marijuana users (a 20 percent increase from 2013 to 2015).

• There was nearly a 50 percent increase in the Boulder/Broomfield region high school junior and senior marijuana users.

• Region 12, consisting of Colorado mountain resort communities to include Grand (Grand Lake), Summit (Breckenridge and Keystone), Eagle (Vail and Beaver Creek), Pitkin (Aspen) and Garfield (Glenwood Springs) Counties, saw a 90 percent increase in marijuana users among their high school seniors and a 54.7 percent increase among sophomores.

• Region 11, consisting of Moffat, Rio Blanco, Jackson and Routt (Steamboat Springs) Counties saw increases of 22.2 percent for freshmen, 72.0 percent for sophomores, 18.8 percent for juniors and 57.3 percent for seniors.

• Ten out of the 17 regions, with sufficient participation to be counted, saw an overall increase in marijuana use.

Yes, There is Good News (See Page 7)

• Region 10, which includes Montrose and Gunnison, and four neighboring counties, had a major decrease in marijuana users in all four high school grades. This decrease was 51.8 percent among freshmen to 24.7 percent among seniors.

• Region 17, which includes Clear Creek, Park and Teller Counties, saw an overall 17.1 percent decrease including a 53.7 percent drop in freshmen marijuana users and a 34.3 percent drop in senior users. However, the survey does show an increase in sophomore users (12.7 percent) and junior users (7.6 percent).

• Seven out of 17 regions, with sufficient participation to be counted, saw an overall decrease in marijuana users.

• The question should be raised as to what message is getting through to students in the regions experiencing overall decreases in marijuana use but missing in those regions experiencing increases in use.

Other Potentially Pertinent Information

Jefferson County (the 2nd largest school district), Douglas County (the 3rd largest school district), El Paso County (Colorado Springs, 2nd largest metro area), and Weld County results were listed as N/A which means data not available due to low participation in the region. NOTE: This is a similar reason why HKCS results were considered unweighted by the national YRBS survey.

In 2015 the HKCS survey had a response rate of 46 percent, which is well below the 60 percent rate required by YRBS. Even though HKCS samples a large number of students, their participation rate is below the industry standard for weighted data.

Bottom Line

Is the Healthy Kids Colorado Survey "good news" and is Colorado teen marijuana use "flat?" The reader can examine the facts and data to make an informed decision. What is clear is that there is no overall pattern in the HKCS data; thus it is best to refrain from jumping to conclusions on such an important issue. The HKCS results are highly variable between class years and regions from major increases to major decreases.

Examples of variances include:

o There was a 57.5 percent increase in use among one region's freshmen while a 53.4 percent decrease in another.

o In one region there was a 72.0 percent increase in high school sophomore use but, in another, a 38.9 percent decrease.

o One region for juniors shows a 49.8 percent increase and another, 33.1 percent decrease.

o In one region, high school seniors had a 90.0 percent increase and in another a 34.3 percent decrease.

The key is to determine what factors contribute to these major variances across the state and to, therefore, learn what effective tools were used in those regions that successfully reduced marijuana use among some Colorado students.

###

"but failed to explain that the 2013 and 2015 surveys were much different sampling sizes and the survey method changed, thus impacting any comparisons.

They were doing the national Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), then in 2013 switched to their own Healthy Kids Colorado Survey (HKCS).