Marijuana Toking by Teens Does Not Increase Because Medical Weed Is Legal -- Study

By Dennis Romero Thu., Jun. 21 2012 at 2:13 PM

josephadams

Updated with feedback from one of the study's authors, at the bottom. First posted at 9:03 a.m.

America's teen tokers are using pot at the highest rate in 30 years, we reported in 2011. You might think that the availability of legal, medical marijuana in 17 states and counting might have some influence.

It's not true, say the American authors of a just-released study, "Medical Marijuana Laws and Teen Marijuana Use," published by Institute for the Study of Labor in Bonn, Germany.

There's nothing to tie kids' more-ravenous smoking lately to legally available chronic, they argue:

They looked at data from 1993 through 2009 from the Centers for Disease Control's Youth Risky Behavior Survey and came to this conclusion, according to a summary:

Their results provided no evidence that legalization led to increases in the use of marijuana at school, the likelihood of being offered drugs on school property, or the use of other substances.

The work's a little fishy, if you ask us:

First, researchers avoided the Monitoring the Future data that showed historic high (pardon the pun) levels of teen pot use, which would have suggested a correlation between the rise in cannabis dispensaries and the increase in kids toking.

Second, the research is not peer reviewed.

Finally: It's being presented by the same Institute for the Study of Labor that has put out some pretty weird marijuana science in the past.

The researchers seem to be using their "study" to discount efforts to eradicate dispensaries and keep them far from schools.

Co-author Benjamin Hansen, assistant professor of economics at the University of Oregon, went so far as to say:

... The data often showed a negative relationship between legalization and marijuana use.

Yeah, widely available pot is totally discouraging teenagers from toking. What were these researchers smoking?

[Update at 2:13 p.m.]: Hansen responded to a few of our concerns:

He told the Weekly that the study is actually in the process of being peer-reviewed.

And he says that researchers wanted to use the Monitoring the Future data but that it does not break out its numbers on a state-by-state basis: As such, teen pot use couldn't be measured in states where medical marijuana is legal.

In terms of why pot use might actually decrease in medical-legal states (he says it does), Hansen theorizes:

1. Less drug dealers might supply to youth, as they now start up legal dispensaries, and don't want to risk their business by selling to someone underage without a prescription. 2. More adults might be using marijuana due to the decreased punishments. The increase in adult demand would drive prices up, which would result in a decrease in quantity which teens demand (their demand curve doesn't shift, its just a movement along the demand curve).

[@dennisjromero / djromero@laweekly.com / @LAWeeklyNews]

Tags:

cannabis, dispensaries, marijuana, medical marijauana, pot shops, study, teens, weed

We Recommend

Alex23sweeet

I smoke weed instead of rock

CannaWes

The important point from the Monitoring the Future Study is that teen pot use has NEVER been constrained by supply. Since the first study in 1976, and each and every year since, over 80% of high school seniors have said pot is "fairly easy" or "very easy" to get. They don't need a dispensary to score pot like grandma does. http://monitoringthefuture.org/data/11data/fig11_1.pdf

Christopher Neal

Dude, you want us to send our kids to China? You are either smoking too little or too much...

darkcycle

Mr. Romero, the dispensaries exist to sell to patients. Street level drug dealers do not make that sort of distinction. If you disallow the dispensaries (who, incidentally, pay taxes, register with the States and municipalities, and are open to inspection by official personnel), you simply carve out a much larger niche for the black market. Yes, there HAS been diversion of medical marijuana to people who are not valid patients. That is not the point. There is diversion of legal prescription pain killers, yet we don't tell people in pain: "Sorry. Because somebody somewhere once took a pain pill that they did not really need, somewhere, at some time, you must suffer." At least those of us with a trace of human compassion don't, that is. You very well may. And don't try that old hogwash about Marinol being a legal medication and that therefore medical marijuana is just a scam. Marinol doesn't WORK for the majority of patients who try it, whereas marijuana DOES. Seriously, the public has left you behind on this one, Mr. Romero, and so have many of the States. Soon, it will be MOST of the States. Only the Federal Government and those with a stake in the institution of prohibition remain steadfastly against medical marijuana. And soon States will be voting on whether to allow marijuana to be consumed by adults, in the privacy of their own homes! Time to polish up the old resume and maybe find something else to carp about, don't you think?

Mark A. Horowitz

You got a study that shows the opposite? Or just being your usual lovably contrarian selves?

Benjamin Hansen

I thought I would share a letter I recently wrote to Dennis regarding a few questions he raised in his article. Dennis, I wanted to take a minute to answer two questions you raised regarding our working paper. First, I want to answer your question about Monitoring the Future. I would absolutely love to have used the Monitoring the Future database. Indeed, the trends between the YRBS and the MTF are very highly correlated with each other (.95 in the aggregate). However, they do not make the data available with any state level identifiers. That means using their data it is impossible to identify states which laws pass, and those which didn't. So I would have like to have added that dataset to our analyses, and indeed I have tried for years to get access to the data with state level identifiers, but they won't release any geographic identifiers. Blame them, not us. Next, I wanted to answer why their might be a decrease. We consistently get estimates which are slightly negative. Medical marijuana could drive down you use for a couple reasons (there are also some reasons it could go up, so in essence we estimate which the effects dominate). 1. Less drug dealers might supply to youth, as they now start up legal dispensaries, and don't want to risk their business by selling to someone underage without a prescription. 2. More adults might be using marijuana due to the decreased punishments. The increase in adult demand would drive prices up, which would result in a decrease in quantity which teens demand (their demand curve doesn't shift, its just a movement along the demand curve). If you have other questions I am happy to answer them. Best, Benjamin Hansen