Intoxicating Cannabis Products in Vape Shops: United States, 2023.

INTRODUCTION: Since 2020, many types of intoxicating cannabis products have entered the U.S. market. Hemp-derived intoxicating cannabis products, including hexahydrocannabinol and delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol, pose concerns regarding their youth-oriented marketing, potency, and health effects. Some states have attempted to ban, restrict, or regulate their sale. However, the effectiveness of these laws and their enforcement is unclear. This study provides insights into the retail landscape of intoxicating cannabis products sold across the U.S. METHODS: In November-December 2023, researchers systematically identified, called, and completed brief surveys with 520 U.S. vape shops: (n=10 per state, n=10 in District of Columbia, n=10 in Puerto Rico). The survey assessed the availability of 6 commonly sold intoxicating cannabis products. Data were analyzed by regulatory context. Analyses were conducted in 2024. RESULTS: A total of 74% of vape shops sold any intoxicating cannabis products. Intoxicating cannabis products were sold in 43% of shops in states with delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol bans, 53% in states with substantial regulations (intended to support safe use), 90% in states with significant restrictions (intended to limit potency/availability), and 92% in states with limited/no regulations. Intoxicating cannabis products were sold in vape shops in each state except Washington and Alaska, both of which banned hemp-derived intoxicating cannabis products and had active retail of legalized nonmedical cannabis. CONCLUSIONS: Taking licensed dispensaries into consideration, intoxicating cannabis products can be purchased in retail stores located in all 50 states; Washington, District of Columbia; and Puerto Rico. Intoxicating cannabis products are widely available in vape shops, even in most states with relevant bans/restrictions. Enhanced laws, surveillance, and enforcement are needed. The 2024 Farm Bill and state laws should explicitly prohibit hemp-derived intoxicating cannabis products.

Overview of State Laws Restricting Alcohol Outlet Density in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Complementing the extensive research literature demonstrating that increased alcohol outlet density is associated with excessive alcohol consumption and related harms, this article synthesizes information on the types of alcohol outlet density restrictions in US state-level laws. DESIGN: Statutes and regulations related to alcohol outlet density in all 50 states and the District of Columbia in effect as of January 1, 2022, were collected using Westlaw. State-level density restrictions were coded according to 4 variables and overlaid with existing research on state-specific local authority to regulate outlet density. Alcohol outlet density laws in Michigan and Massachusetts were analyzed in detail as case studies. SETTING: United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: US state-level licensing laws restricting alcohol outlet density. RESULTS: Thirty-three states and the District of Columbia have state-level licensing laws that limit alcohol outlet density. Of those, 25 have population-based restrictions, 8 have distance-based restrictions, 7 have quotas, and 6 require the licensing agency to consider density-related factors. Within the same group of 34 jurisdictions, 22 apply restrictions to both on- and off-premises outlets, 5 apply them only to on-premises outlets, and 7 apply them only to off-premises outlets. Among the 32 states where localities lack authority to license alcohol outlets, two-thirds have state-level laws restricting outlet density. State-level density restrictions also exist in approximately two-thirds of the states where localities have licensing authority. Case studies of Michigan and Massachusetts highlight how state-level density restrictions operate in practice. CONCLUSIONS: Two-thirds of jurisdictions have state-level alcohol outlet density restrictions, with population-based restrictions being the most common. In addition, outlet density restrictions may exist regardless of limits on local control and whether localities with authority to enact density restrictions have done so. Policymakers and others can reference this assessment to identify examples and opportunities to strengthen the alcohol policy environment in any given state.

Eye-tracking to examine differences in alcohol product appeal by sex among young people.

Background: Advertising of traditional alcopops contains elements that appeal to youth, especially females. Supersized alcopops are marketed differently than traditional alcopops and contain up to 5.5 standard alcoholic drinks. Young females are more likely to underestimate the alcohol content of supersized alcopops, putting them at higher risk of overconsumption. Similar to supersized alcopops, beer is packaged in large cans and in the same areas of store shelves.Objective: This study examined among young people whether supersized alcopops versus beer products disproportionately appealed to females.Methods: Eleven adolescents (13-17 years old) and 72 college students (21-26 years old) were recruited during 2019-2020. Participants viewed 19 photos of convenience store display cases containing both supersized alcopop and beer products. While viewing each image, participants were instructed to click on the beverage that looked the "coolest" (i.e. most appealing). Eye-tracking hardware and software measured the amount of time participants visually fixated on each product. Participants completed a survey to record demographic characteristics.Results: Compared to males (n=25), females (n=58) fixated on supersized alcopops for 6.8 seconds longer (95%CI 0.3,13.3). Females also had 3.7 times the odds of selecting a supersized alcopop as the product they found most appealing compared to males (95%CI 1.68,8.01), adjusting for amount of time visually fixating on supersized alcopops, which was also a significant predictor.Conclusions: Young females' strong preference for supersized alcopops is concerning given they disproportionately underestimate their potency, relative to males, and are more likely to obtain dangerously high BAC levels from consuming one or two supersized alcopops.

Underage drinkers' first experience consuming a popular brand of supersized alcopop.

BACKGROUND: Supersized alcopops are sugar sweetened beverages with high alcohol concentration; Four Loko is the most commonly consumed brand among underage drinkers. OBJECTIVES: The current study examined the prevalence and correlates of Four Loko consumption, as well as drinking location, beverage source, quantity consumed, and alcohol-related consequences among students who consumed the product before age 21. METHODS: Undergraduate drinkers (n = 1,019; 53.5% female) attending public universities in Florida, Montana, and Virginia completed a classroom survey. Multivariable logistic regression models examined first-time Four Loko experiences among students under age 21 at the time of the drinking episode (n = 336). RESULTS: Among drinkers, 46% had consumed Four Loko. The vast majority (93%) drank the product before age 21. During their first Four Loko drinking episode, 57% consumed at least one can and 10% drank two or more cans. Among underage drinkers, being male (AOR = 6.8), paying for the Four Loko (AOR = 3.1), and earlier age of alcohol initiation (AOR = 0.8) were associated with greater odds of drinking at least one can. Among underage drinkers who finished at least one can, 36% blacked out and 21% vomited. The odds of blacking out and vomiting were greater if the participant drank at least one can (AOR = 6.0, AOR = 4.0). Students in states that sold Four Loko with higher alcohol-by-volume were more likely to blackout (AOR = 2.0) and vomit (AOR = 2.5). CONCLUSIONS: Delaying the age of first alcohol use may have protective effects on supersized alcopop consumption. Increased enforcement of existing laws is needed to prevent underage access to Four Loko. Further, laws that reduce the alcohol content of Four Loko may reduce negative consequences associated with its consumption.

The Federal Trade Commission's mandated Four Loko labeling fails to facilitate accurate estimation of alcohol content by college students.

BACKGROUND: Four Loko, the leading supersized alcopop brand, is a pre-mixed alcoholic beverage containing up to 5.5 standard alcoholic drinks in a can. In 2013, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) mandated the addition to Four Loko cans of a label indicating its alcohol content in standard drinks, presented as "alcohol per serving" and "servings per container." OBJECTIVE: The current study investigated whether college students accurately estimate the alcohol content in cans of Four Loko bearing the FTC mandated labels. METHOD: Undergraduate student drinkers (n = 833; 51.6% women) in three states (Florida, Montana, and Virginia) were provided an empty Watermelon Four Loko can and asked to determine the number of standard drinks it contained, using 12-ounce regular beer (Budweiser) equivalents. In Florida and Virginia, Watermelon Four Loko contains 4.70 standard alcoholic drinks; in Montana, it contains 3.13. RESULTS: More than 60% of Florida students and more than 70% of Virginia students underestimated Four Loko's alcohol content by one or more standard drinks, compared to 45% of Montana students. Multivariable logistic regression analysis found the following variables were associated with greater odds of underestimating Four Loko's alcohol content by one or more standard alcoholic drinks: being female (AOR = 2.2), having never seen nor heard of Four Loko (AOR = 1.9), and residing in Florida (AOR = 1.7) or Virginia (AOR = 2.8) versus Montana. CONCLUSIONS: Students were far less likely to underestimate alcohol content for 8% alcohol-by-volume (abv) cans compared to those with higher alcohol concentrations. Thus, policies restricting supersized alcopops' abv may help consumers better estimate their alcohol content.

Price of Four Loko in Large U.S. Cities, 2018.

BACKGROUND: Supersized alcopops are flavored alcoholic beverages that contain up to 5.5 standard alcoholic drinks in a single can. Limited research suggests Four Loko-the most commonly consumed supersized alcopop by underage drinkers-is among the least expensive ready-to-drink alcohol products on the U.S. market. This is a public health concern because alcohol prices are inversely associated with consumption and related harms, particularly among youth. This study investigated Four Loko's retail price per volume of alcohol in large U.S. cities. METHODS: This study used multistage random sampling to collect data in the largest city of each state and Washington, DC. A simple random sample of 5 ZIP codes from each city was selected and entered into Four Loko's website product locator. Within ZIP codes, up to 4 stores were randomly selected and contacted by telephone. Retailers were interviewed about Four Loko in regard to: availability, volume, alcohol by volume (abv), price for 1 can, and discounts for purchasing more than 1 can. RESULTS: The sample included 344 retail stores with Four Loko in stock. Average price per standard alcoholic drink (i.e., 14 g of absolute alcohol) was $0.54 for Four Loko products. Taking into account volume, price, and discounts, an average of 17 standard alcoholic drinks could be purchased via Four Loko with $10. Adjusted analysis using linear regression showed that availability of bulk price discounts and higher abv (14% vs. 12%) were associated with lower price per drink. CONCLUSION: This study verifies that Four Loko is among the least expensive ready-to-drink alcohol available for purchase in the United States. Given that consuming a single supersized alcopop constitutes binge drinking and is therefore unsafe, regulatory agencies should consider a variety of steps to reduce the availability and abv of these products and increase their retail price in order to reduce and prevent unsafe alcohol consumption.

State Policies Targeting Alcohol Use during Pregnancy and Alcohol Use among Pregnant Women 1985-2016: Evidence from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

BACKGROUND: Most states have at least one policy targeting alcohol use during pregnancy. The public health impact of these policies has not been examined. We sought to examine the relationship between state-level policies targeting alcohol use during pregnancy and alcohol use among pregnant women. METHODS: Data include state-level alcohol and pregnancy policy data and individual-level U.S. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data about pregnant women's alcohol use from 1985 to 2016 (N = 57,194). Supportive policies include mandatory warning signs, priority substance abuse treatment, reporting requirements for data and treatment purposes, and prohibitions on criminal prosecution. Punitive policies include civil commitment, Child Protective Services reporting requirements, and child abuse/neglect. Analyses include logistic regression models that adjust for individual- and state-level controls, include fixed effects for state and year, account for clustering by state, and weight by probability of selection. RESULTS: Relative to having no policies, supportive policy environments were associated with more any drinking, but not binge or heavy drinking. Of individual supportive policies, only the following relationships were statistically significant: mandatory warning signs was associated with lower odds of binge drinking, and priority treatment for pregnant women and women with children was associated with higher odds of any drinking. Relative to no policies, punitive policy environments were also associated with more drinking, but not with binge or heavy drinking. Of individual punitive policies, only child abuse/neglect was associated with lower odds of binge and heavy drinking. Mixed policy environments were not associated with any alcohol outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Most policies targeting alcohol use during pregnancy do not seem to be associated with less alcohol consumption during pregnancy.

Differential Effects of Pregnancy-Specific Alcohol Policies on Drinking Among Pregnant Women by Race/Ethnicity.

Purpose: Alcohol use during pregnancy is a significant public health concern. Nearly all U.S. states have enacted policies targeting alcohol use during pregnancy, but there has been little research examining their impact, particularly across racial/ethnic groups. Methods: Using data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and about eight state-level, pregnancy-specific alcohol policies from 1985 to 2016, the aim of this study was to examine the differential effects of these policies on drinking among pregnant women by race/ethnicity. Results: We found evidence of differential effects for priority treatment, prohibitions on criminal prosecution, and civil commitment policies. In relation to priority treatment policies, effects benefited versus harmed different racial/ethnic groups depending on whether the priority treatment policies were for pregnant women only or if they gave priority to both pregnant women and pregnant women with children. Conclusions: Findings from this study suggest that benefits and harms from these policies do not appear to be equitably distributed across different racial/ethnic groups. Research considering the impact of alcohol/pregnancy policies should consider differential effects by race/ethnicity.

High-alcohol-content flavored alcoholic beverages (supersized alcopops) should be reclassified to reduce public health hazard.

In the US, underage drinkers often consume supersized alcopop - a high-alcohol-content, ready-to-drink flavored alcoholic beverage that is currently regulated as beer. However, calculations in this paper illustrate how the high alcohol by volume and low price of supersized alcopops suggest that they rely on a larger proportion of additives for their alcohol content than permitted to meet the legal definition for beer. From a public safety perspective, it is urgently important that the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau assess the formulation of supersized alcopops - specifically, the percent of alcohol in the finished product that is derived from additives. Appropriate reclassification of supersized alcopops as distilled spirits would reduce youth access by resulting in increased price and reduced availability at the retail locations where youth most often obtain alcohol.

Review of State Laws Restricting Local Authority to Impose Alcohol Taxes in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Building on the extensive research literature demonstrating that increasing alcohol prices reduces excessive alcohol consumption and related harms, this article presents the results of a 50-state review of local authority to tax alcohol in the United States. METHOD: Between 2013 and 2015, legal databases and government websites were reviewed to collect and analyze relevant statutes, ordinances, and case law. Results reflect laws in effect as of January 1, 2015. RESULTS: Nineteen states allow local alcohol taxation, although 15 of those have one or more major restrictions on local authority to tax. The types of major restrictions are (a) restrictions on the type of beverage and alcohol content that can be taxed, (b) caps on local alcohol taxes, (c) restrictions on the type of retailer where taxes can be imposed, (d) restrictions on jurisdictions within the state that can levy taxes, and (e) requirements for how tax revenue can be spent. CONCLUSIONS: The number and severity of restrictions on local authority to tax alcohol vary across states. Previous research has shown that increases in alcohol taxes can lead to reduced excessive alcohol consumption, which provides public health and economic benefits. Taxes can also provide funds to support local prevention and treatment services. Local alcohol taxes therefore present an important policy opportunity, both in states that restrict local authority and in states where local authority exists but is underused.

Testing the results of municipal mixed-use zoning ordinances: a novel methodological approach.

Municipal mixed-use zoning (MUZ) is one public health strategy to create more walkable neighborhoods by reducing the separation of daily activities. This study uses a novel data-gathering methodology to evaluate municipal zoning ordinances in twenty-two California cities in conjunction with the walkability potential of resulting mixed-use zones, to explore the extent to which variations in uses mandated by MUZ ordinances are correlated with variations in walking opportunities. We find that, after controlling for population, socioeconomic status, and zone size, significant relationships exist between the range and precision of uses mandated by MUZ ordinances and the mixture and breadth of walking destinations in these zones. The study also demonstrates that analysis of municipal zoning codes and a novel data-gathering methodology yield valid data. The analysis of MUZ ordinances is a significant complement to other approaches to measuring walkability and can be used across cities.

State pre-emption, local control, and alcohol retail outlet density regulation.

The substantial health and economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption make its reduction a major public health and economic concern. The Community Preventive Services Task Force, based on a systematic review of the research literature, concluded that restricting alcohol retail outlet density through local land use and zoning regulations is an effective strategy for reducing these costs. Yet the implementation of the Task Force's recommendation is limited by state pre-emption, which determines the extent to which states allow local government to adopt policies and enact legislation. This article summarizes the state pre-emption doctrine, its status in the 50 states pertaining to alcohol retail outlet density regulation, and findings from state legal analyses conducted in six states. Data reflect state laws in effect as of January 1, 2012. Analyses were conducted during the 2012 calendar year. An examination of relevant state laws found five distinct pre-emption categories: exclusive state licensing, exclusive state licensing and concurrent local zoning, joint licensing, exclusive local licensing, and a mixed system. The analysis demonstrated wide variability across the states, ranging from exclusive state pre-emption to broad state delegation of authority to local governments. Pre-emption is applied differentially in many states based on retail outlet characteristics. In many cases, state pre-emption laws are ambiguous in terms of their application, leading to inconsistent and confusing court interpretations. Reforms targeting the adverse impact of state pre-emption on alcohol retail outlet density have the potential for reducing the harm associated with excessive alcohol consumption. State and local public health departments can support such reforms by implementing educational, analytic, monitoring, and technical assistance activities.