The use of cannabis for medical purposes is one of the most controversial issues today. There are many healthcare providers and researchers who are ready to support herbal cannabis therapy because it can be used as an effective pain reliever with minimal side effects (Corroon, Mischley, & Sexton, 2017; Grant, Atkinson, Gouaux, & Wilsey, 2012; Seneca, 2014). However, some people believe that the number and quality of adverse effects and the inability to control patients in their intentions to use cannabis can become a real challenge for support of cannabis legalization and its recognition as an appropriate and allowed treatment method (Whiting et al., 2015).
There is also an attempt to discuss why cannabis cannot be accepted as a legalized medication, defining such reasons as a lack of knowledge, the experience of stigma, and the possibilities of errors in statistical analysis that is usually preferred in analyzing such themes as pros and cons of cannabis, or the use of marijuana and other illegal substances (Bottorff et al., 2013; Schmarzo, 2013). Different methods can be used to discuss the chosen topic, and different outcomes may be observed because researchers can obtain new information and unique attitudes to cannabis and its medicinal worth.
Much attention is paid to the methods of gathering and analyzing the data about cannabis and its use in medicine and healthcare. Thompson (2009), Flom (2010), and Schmarzo (2013) underline the importance of statistics in the analysis and the implementation of the description as the main method to introduce a concept and develop its urgency. Seneca (2014) chooses quantitative findings from different published studies and their meta-analysis to evaluate pain intensity as an outcome of using cannabinoids. Statistical analysis is the method with the help of which all differences between baseline and the ratings of final pain intensity can be identified and explained (Seneca, 2014).
Whiting et al. (2015) focus on a systematic review of the literature taken from different databases to underline the depth of the problem and the necessity to formulate one properly evidenced solution. In the investigations of Bottorff et al. (2013), a semi-structured interview is used to gather the information. Such choice proves the effectiveness of qualitative methods in gathering information about the connection between cannabis and pain. Taking into consideration the fact that researchers find various effective methods to achieve their goals, the theme of cannabis as a pain reliever that has to be legalized can be discussed in different ways. Statistical analysis may be complex if people fail their attempts to discover and solve analytical errors (Schmarzo, 2013).
As soon as the methods for gathering information and its analysis are identified and proved as effective, it is necessary to make sure that researchers develop appropriate questions or hypotheses and introduce clear and informative answers and solutions. The discussion of cannabis and its relation to pain relief contains some controversial aspects. On the one hand, a moderate reduction in pain intensity can be observed with minimum side effects and the possibility to help patients (Seneca, 2014).
On the other hand, many adverse effects cannot be neglected by people who are going to use cannabis for medical purposes, including psychosis, sleep disorder, dependence, depression, anxiety, dizziness, fatigue, and euphoria (Whiting et al., 2015). At the same time, such factors as anxiety and depression are defined as the conditions that may be treated with the help of cannabis in case an appropriate dosage is defined, and the patient is under control of a caregiver (Corroon et al., 2017). Still, there are situations when the use of cannabis promotes the development of new negative outcomes and the necessity to take urgent actions. Therefore, it is not enough to investigate the pros and cons of cannabis legalizations for medical purposes. It is necessary to understand the nature and statistical worth of each factor identified.
The role of cannabis in treating various psychological and mental disorders is important indeed. Treatment with the help of cannabis can be used for management neuropathic pain and muscle spasticity (Grant et al., 2012). Many patients admit certain positive effects of cannabis in their attempts to reduce the level of pain. The point is that people may be afraid of cannabis because they do not understand what kind of help can be offered. Their lack of knowledge and trust and the inability to gain an understanding of its medical benefits can cause numerous doubts and challenges (Bottorff et al., 2013).
There are some cases when patients suffer from the lack of confidence and guidelines on how to choose a dosage, deliver cannabis as a medication, and follow all quality control issues (Corroon et al., 2017). People make mistakes in their decisions to increase a dose, prolonged treatment, and use cannabis without any portion of the control. Such mistakes lead to various types of analytical errors and promote the creation of statistics that scares ordinary people and puts the worth of cannabis as medication under a question (Schmarzo, 2013).
Negative arguments that can be introduced in the discussion of cannabis and its effects on pain millions of people suffer from regularly include the possible dependence on an illegal substance, energetic safety concerns, and low-quality evidence that can be used to support cannabis (Grant et al., 2012). As a rule, cannabinoids are associated with numerous short-term risks and insignificant improvements in nausea or appetite problems caused by chemotherapy (Whiting et al., 2015). Bottorff et al. (2013), as well as Seneca (2014), believe that the number of positive effects prevails the number of negative concerns that can be developed in regards to cannabis used for medical purposes. However, their poorly developed statistical analyses and the use of quantitative methods for gathering information promote the development of errors that can lead to a wrong or inappropriate understanding of the issues (Schmarzo, 2013).
In general, the investigations developed by Bottorff et al. (2013), Corroon et al. (2017), Grant et al. (2012), and Whiting et al. (2015) can be used to recognize the positive and negative aspects of cannabis usage in terms of reducing the level of pain people can suffer from. Though their qualitative and quantitative research cannot be defined as strong-quality evidence due to the possibility of analytical errors or poorly developed statements that mislead people, create wrong judgments, and do not introduce a whole picture of the situation.
The question of cannabis and its possible medical benefits remains to be under frequent discussions and is characterized as a problem with no clear solution given. There are still some people who want to believe that cannabis can help to treat patients. Many people do not trust caregivers who use cannabis as a method of treatment. Regarding the sources chosen for the systematic literature review developed above, it is hard to introduce a single hypothesis because several facts are used to support or oppose the use of cannabis for medical purposes to reduce pain.
References
Bottorff, J., Bissell, L., Balneaves, L., Oliffe, J., Capler, R., & Buxton, J. (2013). Perceptions of cannabis as a stigmatized medicine: A qualitative descriptive study. Harm Reduction Journal, 10(1), 1-10. Web.
Corroon, J., Mischley, L., & Sexton, M. (2017). Cannabis as a substitute for prescription drugs – A cross-sectional study. Journal of Pain Research, 10, 989-998. Web.
Flom, P. (2010). Do you need help with Steven’s typology? Web.
Grant, I., Atkinson, H., Gouaux, B., & Wilsey, B. (2012). Medical marijuana: Clearing away the smoke. The Open Neurology Journal, 6, 18-25. Web.
Schmarzo, B. (2013). Understanding type I and type II errors. Web.
Seneca, M. (2014). Meta-analysis of herbal cannabis therapy for chronic pain. UNF Theses and Dissertations, 503, 1-36. Web.
Thompson, C. (2009). Descriptive data analysis. Air Medical Journal, 28(2), 56-59. Web.
Whiting, P., Wolff, R., Deshpande, S., Nisio, M., Duffy, S., Hernandez, A.,… Kleijnen, J. (2015). Cannabinoids for medical use: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA, 313(24), 2456-2473. Web.
The use of medical marijuana is still debatable across the USA, although it was legalized in many states. As far as Minnesota is concerned, the Medical Cannabis Therapeutic Use Act (developed by Governor Dayton) was signed into law in 2014 (Minnesota Department of Health, 2017b). Since then, thousands of residents of the state have used this type of treatment and reported its positive effects. For instance, 90% of the participants of a survey implemented by the Minnesota Department of Health mentioned the positive effects of the treatment (Collins, 2016).
Minnesota Medical Cannabis Program was one of the results of the new law. The program implied the provision of certain treatment (prescriptions of medical cannabis) to certain groups of patients (Minnesota Department of Health, 2017b). However, there are still many opponents who consider the use of medical cannabis to be harmful to patients as well as the overall public health. This paper includes a brief analysis of the program and the reform strategy associated with it.
Policy Strategy
As has been mentioned above, the program was launched in 2014 when the corresponding legislature was introduced. The program is accessible to patients suffering from certain chronic conditions that are certified by their physician and registered with this program (Minnesota Department of Health, 2017b). The chronic conditions include cancer, HIV/AIDS, glaucoma, seizures, intractable pain, a terminal illness with an estimated life expectancy of one year or less, and some other.
The strategy under analysis implies the inclusion of other health issues (for example, post-traumatic stress disorder) on the list. It is noteworthy that the patients diagnosed with PTSD are planned to be included in August 2017.
It has been found that cannabis has an obvious positive effect on such patients’ health conditions as their sleep improves significantly, which leads to the effective management of other symptoms of the disorder (Bonn-Miller, Babson, & Vandrey, 2014). Considerable attention is also paid to the use of marijuana in pain management. Shah, Craner, and Cunningham (2017) report about the positive effects of the use of cannabis among patients suffering from chronic pain.
Another characteristic feature of the strategy is its focus on funding. It becomes apparent that the existing funding is insufficient due to an overwhelming number of tests and inspections (Potter, 2017). Marijuana is still one of the Schedule I controlled substance, which leads to an unprecedented level of control over its production, distribution, and consumption. As far as patients are concerned, one of their major concerns is the high fee of the registration and the high costs of their prescriptions (Collins, 2016). Many find this type of medication inaccessible.
Advocates of the program try to ensure additional federal funding is aimed at improving the program and making it more accessible. The most optimistic supporters of the program and the use of medical cannabis advocate for the inclusion of this treatment to Medicaid and other insurance packages and programs. However, this is unlikely to happen soon due to marijuana’s status as one of the most dangerous illicit drugs.
It is necessary to note that the number of patients enrolled in the program is approximately 1,500 each month, which unveils quite a high demand for this kind of treatment in the state (Collins, 2016). Bonn-Miller et al. (2014) note that over 100 million Americans suffer from chronic pain, and the elderly can be regarded as the group at a high risk of development of the conditions included in the program.
The demographic trends in the USA (aging population) put to the fore the need to come up with cost-effective types of treatment. The use of cannabis is one of these approaches. The reform strategy aims at helping all those in need to access the treatment that can improve their quality of life. Walsh et al. (2017) claim that the use of medical marijuana has proved to be efficient when addressing numerous mental disorders.
Finally, the strategy also implies the development of more cost-effective production and distribution methods. Potter (2017) states that some policymakers try to come up with the legislature that will reduce taxes for marijuana producers. At that, the status of the Schedule I controlled substance makes it impossible to achieve this goal. Therefore, the change in the status of the substance is another area of discussion. This change may lead to a decrease in the number of inspections, which will result in the reduction of costs and prices for patients.
Endorsement
The American Nurses Association is one of the most powerful nursing organizations that can have a substantial impact on policymakers, healthcare professionals, and facilities, as well as public opinion. The mission of the ANA is to improve the health of all people through the development of the profession (American Nurses Association, 2016). The organization is created by and for healthcare professionals who spend more time with patients as compared to other health professions.
The ANA emphasizes that nurses often know their patients’ needs. The organization revealed its updated position concerning the use of medical cannabis in 2016. The ANA stresses that it has advocated the use of marijuana and some other cannabinoids for 20 years.
The organization provides several arguments for the use of this substance (ANA, 2016). First, extensive research reveals definite positive effects of the use of medical marijuana. Furthermore, it is stressed that the major goal of the US healthcare system is to improve people’s well-being through the use of the most cost-effective treatment. Finally, patients have the right to use the treatment they find optimal for them, which is one of the characteristic features of a democratic society.
The association also provides certain recommendations that include the relisting of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule II controlled substance. The ANA also claims that further research is essential for the evaluation of benefits and possible hazards of the use of this substance. It is also noted that the development of clear standards concerning the prescription, the most effective routes, possible side effects, and the like, is necessary.
It is necessary to note that this position statement, as well as the strategy in question, is consistent with the organization’s mission. The association aims at meeting the needs of the American population, and the use of medical cannabis can be one of the ways to achieve this goal. The reform strategy can also be instrumental in achieving these objectives. For instance, the inclusion of more health conditions on the list can improve the programs’ accessibility as more Americans will benefit from the use of medical cannabis.
Strengths of the Strategy
The strategy is characterized by a number of strengths. First, it will increase the accessibility of the treatment that has proved to be cost-effective in many settings. One of the major benefits is related to effective pain management. Shah et al. (2017) stress that chronic pain is a common symptom millions of Americans have to address. As for Minnesota, cancer is the major cause of death, while other chronic conditions are also common (for example, chronic lower respiratory disorders are the number 4 cause of death) (Minnesota Department of Health, 2017a).
It is important to remember that chronic conditions mainly persist in the aging population. The rate of elderly people in Minnesota is 15%, but it is estimated to almost double in approximately two decades. Hence, the use of medical marijuana and further widening of the list of illnesses and populations eligible to be included in the program will help more people access high-quality healthcare services and improve their well-being.
Apart from the strength mentioned above, the benefit of the strategy is related to the efficacy of health care. The existing types of treatment are associated with diverse side effects, including the development of addictions and increased risks of developing other disorders. Scientific evidence suggests that medical marijuana has fewer side effects and better health outcomes. The patients enrolled in the program mentioned above stress that their emotional state has improved, and the symptoms of their chronic conditions have become less disturbing (Collins, 2016). It can also be stated that the quality of healthcare services provided improves since the treatment provided is beneficial for patients. Therefore, it is possible to assume that the use of medical cannabis will improve people’s overall well-being.
Another important strength of the reform strategy is related to its financial aspect. The reform can have a positive impact on state and federal funds allocation. Potter (2017) states that medical use of cannabis is associated with significant financial losses for the producers of the substance as well as healthcare providers. The control over various processes (production, prescription, distribution, etc.) requires substantial funds. At that, the investigation of the program’s impact can help use funds wisely.
The program can also have certain implications for the existing legislature. For instance, the allocation of additional funds is likely to result in a wider discussion of the problem. The number of tests and inspections can be reduced, while more effective ways to control the production and use of medical cannabis can be developed. Importantly, scientific evidence, clinical trials, and the position of healthcare providers can have an impact on the status of marijuana. Eventually, it can become a Schedule II controlled substance, which, in turn, will lead to fewer inspections, lower costs, increased accessibility of this type of treatment.
Weaknesses of the Reform Strategy
Although the benefits of the strategy are obvious, it still has certain weaknesses. First, it requires the allocation of additional funds that are often scarce. The federal and state budgets have been decreased, which has put a certain pressure on the development of various programs. Such debatable topics as the use of medical cannabis often receive less funding as opponents try to downsize the relevance and positive impacts of programs (Potter, 2017). To address this weakness, it can be effective to address charities, individuals, and some health-related corporations to donate or contribute to the development of the program.
Besides, many researchers and practitioners note that further research into the matter is crucial as many aspects of the use of medical cannabis are still obscure. For example, the increased use of medical marijuana can be associated with the rise of its use among the American youth (Stolzenberg, D’Alessio, & Dariano, 2016). Shah et al. (2017) note that some studies show that patients using medical cannabis are at a higher risk of developing substance addiction though it is also added that further research is needed to explore the possible correlation.
Bonn-Miller et al. (2014) note that the effectiveness of the use of medical marijuana as compared to other pain management strategies is not sufficiently explored. Clearly, the only way to address this gap is to continue investigating various effects of the medical use of cannabis, its cost-effectiveness, and so on.
One of the most significant weaknesses of the strategy is associated with the development of a dialogue with the public as well as other stakeholders (governmental institutions, cannabis producers, etc.) (Potter, 2017). Even the program itself is not properly publicized. The lack of such communication contributes to the development of negative attitudes towards the use of medical marijuana, although the majority of those who use it view this type of treatment positively.
This weakness can be addressed through the launch of a wide-scale campaign aimed at informing people about the program as well as its possible improvements. Such media as television and the Internet can be used. Social media can become the primary platform for sharing information and facilitating the discussion. Of course, it is critical to involve healthcare facilities, patients, their close ones, officials, and so on in the discussion.
Conclusion
On balance, it is possible to state that the program, as well as the associated reform strategy, can help many Americans suffering from chronic diseases, improve the quality of their life. Pain management can become more effective as medical marijuana has proved to be an effective type of treatment. The strategy is characterized by several strengths that include the focus on the accessibility of treatment, possible financial outcomes for the stakeholders, as well as positive changes in the legislature. At the same time, it is necessary to mention certain weaknesses. These include the need for substantial investments, insufficient scientific and clinical evidence, and the lack of proper communication between the stakeholders.
The use of medical cannabis has been a debatable issue for decades, and many heal-related organizations have developed certain statements concerning the matter. For instance, the American Nursing Association is one of the proponents of the program and the reform strategy in question. The organization claims that the use of medical cannabis can significantly improve patients’ well-being and the quality of health care. At the same time, there are still numerous opponents to this type of treatment, as many still regard marijuana as one of the most dangerous illicit drugs. The debate is unlikely to stop anytime soon.
However, it is clear that further research is needed. It is also important to ensure the development of an effective dialogue among health-related organizations, governmental institutions, patients, charities, and individual donors, as well as the entire American society. People should choose whether marijuana use can be a type of treatment, or it should be banned. This kind of decision will result in more effective methods of funds allocation and the overall improvement of the healthcare system.
References
American Nurses Association. (2016). Therapeutic use of marijuana and related cannabinoids. Web.
Bonn-Miller, M., Babson, K., & Vandrey, R. (2014). Using cannabis to help you sleep: Heightened frequency of medical cannabis use among those with PTSD. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 136, 162-165.
Shah, A., Craner, J., & Cunningham, J. (2017). Medical cannabis use among patients with chronic pain in an interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation program: Characterization and treatment outcomes. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 77, 95-100.
Stolzenberg, L., D’Alessio, S., & Dariano, D. (2016). The effect of medical cannabis laws on juvenile cannabis use. International Journal of Drug Policy, 27, 82-88.
Walsh, Z., Gonzalez, R., Crosby, K., S. Thiessen, M., Carroll, C., & Bonn-Miller, M. (2017). Medical cannabis and mental health: A guided systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 51, 15-29.
With the increase in the popularity of vaping, options including recreational drugs have become available. However, there are reasons to believe that the consumption of cannabis-containing vaping products leads to the development of lung diseases (“Vaping Illnesses May Be Linked to Illegal Marijuana Products”). Despite being politicized at their core due to being affiliated with either left-, right-wing, or centrist ideas, each of the articles under analysis includes unique biases, which leave room for potential improvements and further studies.
Main body
The focus on personal experiences and the attempt at engaging the reader into the lives of people that have suffered from cannabis-containing vaping products may seem as sensible as the means of increasing emotional investment. However, as the left-wing article written by Ferguson et al. shows, the described method reduces the levels of objectivity in the research, robbing it of its credibility (2). The issue of biases in the articles used for the analysis deserves a substantially greater focus since the presence of said biases may affect the efficacy of applying study results to solving lung-illness-related concerns.
Although the articles used for this research provide sensible arguing points, each of them incorporates a certain amount of biases, which reduces its value as a support for the general debate concerning the harm of cannabis vaping products. For example, the problem of a design bias becomes evident once considering the statements that each of the authors makes to support their thesis. Specifically, the paper by Ferguson et al. does not provide any background information on the cases sampled to prove the harmful effect of vaping; instead, the author simply states the number of vapers who died from lung cancer and those that developed severe health complications.
Ferguson et al. state that “some 12 people have died from mysterious lung illnesses linked to vape pens, and 805 others have been hospitalized in 46 states, according to federal health officials” (Ferguson et al.). Thus, the lack of any context on the people selected from the sample indicates that there may have been comorbid issues that could have affected the development of respiratory issues and the eventual emergence of lung cancer. As a result, the article by Ferguson incorporates a crucial design bias that may have affected the trustworthiness of the source.
The right-wing article written by Bartiromo, in turn, references the official statement of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which could make its statement reputable. However, the failure to create a strong logical connection between the presence of THC in vaping devices and the associated health issues causes the immediate disconnection from the article’s main argument. Specifically, the article never states explicitly that the presence of THC components in vaping devices causes harm to their consumers, hence the logical bias (Bartiromo 1).
During my research, the article by Brianna Abbott suggested, “hundreds of vapers are getting sick and six have died, but doctors are struggling to isolate the nature of the mysterious lung ailments.” As the patients showed patterns of chest pain, shortness of breath, and coughing, and others experiencing gastrointestinal issues, fatigue, fever, and weight loss that quickly progresses to organizing pneumonia (Abbott 1). To date, only a few reports of vaping-associated lung injury have included pulmonary illnesses findings, and even fewer included illustrations thereof.
The Department of Health Services cases corroborate many of these descriptions and provide some preliminary insight into the pathogenesis of this problem. Much attention has been given recently to the possibility that this may represent infection or pneumonia (1). The article by Aubrey is also worth mentioning as one of the examples of how biases may affect the perception and further interpretation of facts. Although the article in question does not specifically address the effects that vaping has on the probability of developing lung cancer, it still focuses on the health issues arising from vaping. The article features an interview between the show host and Allison Aubrey (Aubrey).
Although the article features an insightful talking point about the vaping culture and the threat of vaping as a fad, the inherent bias baked into the premise of Aubrey’s article affects the trustworthiness of the data to a considerable extent. By specifying that there is a link between the two concerns, the author manages to introduce balance into the discussion (Aubrey 2). Thus, although also being inclined toward addressing the harmful effects of cannabis-containing vaping products, the paper by Aubrey represents the most balanced argument.
For example, the fact that one of the participants repeatedly refuses to consider the opposing arguments and seems to focus solely on the information that supports their opinion of the harmlessness of vaping can be seen as a clear example of a biased approach. Defined as the controversy arising from the fact that in most interviews, the answers are skewed toward the interviewer’s perspective, the specified problem shines through in Aubrey’s article (Aubrey).
For instance, the host repeatedly refers to the increasing popularity of vaping as the main source of the problem, representing the rise in it as an inherently positive fact: “They’re labeled, dank – D-A-N-K – vapes. The packaging indicates that they contain 90% THC” (Aubrey). Thus, the responses to the interview questions seem to contain implicit biases defined by the participant’s unwillingness to focus on the problematic aspects of vaping.
It is blatantly obvious from the interview that Aubrey is desperately trying to keep the discussion objective by steering the conversation into analyzing the extent to which the problem has been researched: “But Martin says what’s really inside is not known yet. They’ve sent samples out to the state’s forensic lab for testing. From the outside, the products look legit” (Aubrey). However, the host continuously ignores these attempts, which amplifies the number of biases and their impact on the trustworthiness of the analysis: “Dank vapes sounds like a really cool name. It sounds like it would be a real product. And it looks like legitimate packaging” (Aubrey).
What can be observed in the discussion of the effects of vaping by Aubrey and Martin can be referred to as the opposite of the interviewer bias. While the latter implies that the interviewer has the power and capacity of steering the conversation in a desirable way and, thus, reduce the participant’s ability to discuss different aspects of the issues under analysis, in the case in point, the interviewee is the one that avoids discussing the product objectively. Instead, appealing to the young audience with the help of a culture-specific vocabulary and using the term “dank,” Mike Martin adds biases to his argument, causing the interview to look very one-sided. As a result, the interview as a source of information loses a significant amount of its credibility and usability as a potential source of information for further research.
I have found that The Food and Drug Administration found samples that included some of the marijuana products that recently sickened users across the country contained the same chemical: vitamin E acetate. It’s harmless when used as a supplement or skin ointment but apparently is not safe for inhaling while vaping and some have contained tetrahydrocannabinol or THC. The FDA is urging the public to be vigilant about any vaping products that young adults and teenagers may be using that the Trump administration plans on banning non-tobacco flavored vaping products as health officials continue to investigate the illnesses. (Abbott 2).
The issue of reporting biases is another reason for concern that needs closer attention as the possible source of biases in the information presented by the Department of Health Services. Specifically, the paper by Abbott features several instances of reporting biases caused by the selection of studies mentioned in the article. Since very few papers strive to prove the null hypothesis true, the propensity toward viewing vaping tools as inherently negative factors causing people’s health to suffer is very high. Indeed, all of the studies mentioned by Abbott as evidence seem to be geared toward proving the fact that vaping is extremely harmful to people and is likely to cause lung cancer (Abbott). For example, the author addresses the evidence provided by a physician: “If they’re extremely sick, they’re admitted.
And if it’s obvious it’s not an infection by blood work or cultures, we are putting them on steroids” (Abbott). The described type of evidence is supported by several other statements, yet none of the arguments considered by the author in the article indicates that there are any sources outlining the absence of negative effects observed in vaping patients. Therefore, it could be concluded that there is a bias of reporting in the article by Abbot. The same can be said about other sources since there is a noticeable lack of research devoted to proving the absence of harmful effects caused by cannabis-containing vaping products.
None of the Department of Health Services cases showed histologic evidence of pneumonia or infection since antibiotics haven’t been working and the illness has gotten progressive even the patients have been hospitalized. The article calls into question the diagnostic utility of identifying not an infection by blood work patients are put on steroids. The significance of this observation remains unclear, particularly in patients with a known vaping history, and until more data accumulates, Center of Disease and Control and Prevention’s data suggests that this finding should be interpreted with caution, as it may simply represent a marker of exposure and not necessarily a marker of toxicity but some needed to be put on a ventilator to help the patient breath (Abbott 3).
While it is difficult to discount the potential role of lipid, to the CDC, the histologic changes instead suggest that vaping-associated lung injury represents a form of airway-centered chemical pneumonitis from one or more inhaled toxic substances rather than exogenous lipoid pneumonia per se, but the agents responsible remain unknown (Abbott 3).
Most deaths and illnesses don’t seem to be coming from the legal sales of vaping and e-cigarettes. On the black market, there is no quality control, which means that pesticides and cutting agents could be present in any given Dank Vape cartridge or any other black-market cartridge, for that matter. And even for legal vape products, there’s still a huge lack of information on what types of flavoring agents are safe to add to vape cartridges. If they continue to close legal vaping stores, then we’ll see more black markets growing. (Kittredge 1)
Despite accumulating data on the clinical and imaging features of vaping-associated lung injury, its pathology is poorly understood. Health officials reviewed cartridges used by 57 (66%) of patients. All of whom vaped (77% with marijuana or cannabis oils or THC) and 16% used nicotine only products, health officials are not sure if linked by using THC products (Sandler 2).
When the first death from a lung ailment got out, the Public Health Director announced, “the severity of illness people are experiencing is alarming and we must get the word out that using e-cigarettes and vaping can be dangerous.” The Food and Drug Administration has criticized the tobacco companies for their marketing strategies of an alternative to quitting smoking (Edney 2). Doctors are searching for answers and turning to some previous cases for help as the illness went undetected until vaping got popular.
Specialists have treated several patients over the past couple of weeks who developed pulmonary illnesses after vaping, and the CDC thinks there may be more (2). Emily Chapman, chief medical officer of Children’s Minnesota said, “the possibility of what can go into these cartridges is almost limitless, and that in and of itself creates a lot of variation in what we are seeing in a body’s reaction to vaping” (E2).
What is still unclear, whether any of the cases resulted from product tampering, brand, ingredients, or usage. E-cigarettes have been available to consumers for more than 10 years, but people have become seriously ill within only the past few months. The health officials investigating the severe illnesses across the U.S. are finding “black market products,” not ones a consumer would find for sale at a vape shop (Anzel 1).
The author, Rebecca Anzel of, “State officials seek answers to vaping-related illnesses Vaping” wrote, “a group of health advocates — the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, and Respiratory Health Association — said in a statement that barring the sale of flavored tobacco products will “ensure our kids are protected from tobacco’s deadly toll.” Health officials say that the rush to ban vaping products could harm public health by making e-cigarettes less accessible than cigarettes, which experts agree are more dangerous.
According to the Public Health officials they’re taking urgent steps to identify what is causing previously healthy vape users to develop pneumonia-like symptoms. But the results are still inconclusive. The CDC reported that the investigation is ongoing and involves several federal agencies and state health departments. According to a report published in 86 cases in Wisconsin and Illinois, investigators found that of the THC-products used by patients, nearly all were prepacked, pre-filled cartridges acquired from informal sources like friends and illicit dealers (Anzel 2).
Moreover, each of the articles discussed above contains a certain number of procedural biases. The concept of procedural biases suggests that the pressure put on respondents, especially in regard to the time that it takes to perform an interview, affects the results of the analysis and the overall veracity of its results. Indeed, as shown in the interview with Aubrey, the amount of time allotted per response was quite small, with the participant having rather slim chances of providing a coherent and fully developed answer to the question.
Due to the challenges of giving a succinct and accurate answer to a complicated question within a short amount of time, the responses provided by the interviewee may have failed to describe the effects that vaping has on people’s healthfully. What seems to be the responses that are purely designed to describe the benefits of vaping may have been the direct effect of the time constraints that the interviewee experienced when answering the questions.
Nonetheless, applying the specified bias to the analysis performed in the article by Abbott would mean making a rather substantial assumption. Since there are no time limitations mentioned by either of the participants, one may claim that the sole purpose of the answers provided by Martin was to showcase the outstanding characteristics of vaping and conceal the facts that might hurt the sales to a considerable degree. Therefore, when performing the analysis of the data provided by Abbott, it is necessary to take the information offered by the interviewer at face value.
Conclusion
While it would be wrong to deny that all of the articles used for the analysis of the problem in question contain inherent biases, discarding the evidence that they present would also be a mistake. Moreover, the very fact that the articles mentioned above contain biased information shows that the argument requires further study and, therefore, needs additional research to explore the problematic sides of vaping. Thus, the existence of biases in the studies mentioned above encourages the following research and adds focus to it.
In addition, getting completely rid of biases, especially in the articles that involve a large amount of information retrieved from personal interviews and other slightly unreliable sources, is barely possible. While the described characteristic of articles written based on interviews and reviews of literature does not dismiss the points that they make, it still shows that complementary analysis is needed to support the statements that authors make.
I am a nursing student who will present today on the topic of cannabis and mental health, providing you with an overview of the adverse effects of marijuana and the possibilities of addiction treatment. Mental health remains a significant aspect of wellness that requires heightened attention from medical professionals. Therefore, with the rising demand for cannabis in modern-day medicine, the number of people whom the substance has affected negatively through side effects and addiction has increased, necessitating recognizing the adverse effects of marijuana.
Who are They?
Helping to tend to those whose mental health cannabis has impacted, as a student currently studying to be a nurse, is one of my goals in life. Thus, I find it essential to create an informed and knowledgeable opinion on such a complex issue. As a future professional, I want to understand the severity of this problem and spread awareness of the sickness caused in peoples’ minds by cannabinoids.
What is the Topic and How is It Defined in Literature?
My topic is linked with presenting the adverse effect of cannabis on mental health, how to intervene in potentially damaging situations, its treatment, and expected outcomes. Literature precariously states, and my clinical experience supports, the fact that the relationship between mental health and cannabinoids has the potential to detriment the patient’s wellbeing. Can anyone from the audience name a few of the negative effects of cannabis on patient’s health? From a lessened attention span to psychosis and anxiety attacks, marijuana remains a dangerous substance for people’s mental health. As cannabis becomes more popular as a medicine, rather than a recreational drug, it is essential to keep in mind these detrimental effects instead of focusing merely on positive results (as seen in Figure 1). As an example, we may examine medical cannabis, which demonstrates the fact that patients use it more frequently but exhibit worse health results than those achieved during traditional treatment.
Why is it of Interest to Them or Important/Significant?
For me, the topic holds significance as I am deeply engaged in the cannabis debate, hoping to uphold the case that proves the extent of its negative effects over positive ones. Thus, with thorough support from relevant literature, it is possible to present an overview of a complicated addiction issue in modern Australian mental healthcare. The significance of this problem lies in the rising popularity of medical cannabis and tetrahydrocannabinol, often linked with overlooking its adverse effects on a variety of the brain’s functions (as seen in Figure 2). Contemporary Australian care of the consumer allows prescribing cannabis for some reasons, such as multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, chronic pain, palliative care, and during chemotherapy. However, the effects of cannabinoids do not surpass the effectiveness of traditional medicine, instead potentially negatively affecting the clients’ future symptoms, making medical cannabis today no different from 19th-century opium prescriptions.
Discusses the Contemporary Care of the Consumer
I have chosen the sources for this presentation by their direct relevance to the subject, as they provide a valuable overview of the Australian perspective and experience of cannabinoid treatment. The literature was managed successfully to include a wide variety of research on both the medical benefits and real-life drawbacks of cannabis use in Australia and abroad, thus creating a supported argument. These specific sources help present a structured overview of the nature of the use of cannabis on patients’ mental health, urging them to take care and understand the dangers of using it for medicinal purposes.
Contemporary consumer care begins with screening for cannabis addiction. Modern treatment is the same as for any drug addiction, with rehabilitation programs, hospital treatments, and detoxification programs aimed at helping the client to overcome their obsession with the help of professionals (see Figure 3). Admitting the patient to a facility, assessing and effectively detoxing them, followed by extensive inpatient care, initiates the process of wellness. The expected outcomes of care, which are based on behavioral therapy and trauma resolution, aims to create citizens who are free of both addiction and its lasting effects on their mental health. Patients are taught everyday tactics that help them avoid relapsing back into addictive behaviors and are sustained by a variety of resources, for example, communication lines with their facility and support groups. Negating drug-deprivation symptoms, withdrawal-induced anxiety, and possible aggressive tendencies, which the patients may exhibit during this period is imperative, as well as establishing secure communication lines with clients to help them maintain their healthcare endeavor.
The worsening of symptoms and an adverse effect on the patient’s life, for example, major depression, psychotic symptoms, and educational deterioration become supportive evidence for addiction treatment (see Figure 4). Intervention tactics are linked with decreasing the number of drugs taken by the patient and transferring them to non-cannabinoid-based medicines if they become dependent on therapeutic cannabis. Queries, such as the Severity of Dependence Scale, the Cannabis Problems Questionnaire, and the Cannabis Withdrawal Scale, help identify the issue’s extent. Unfortunately, the stigma of addiction treatment may prevent successful outcomes and pose additional social barriers to patients’ wellness. Nonetheless, understanding the process of treating cannabis addicts is essential in the modern world, which is increasingly shifting to ignoring its negative effects on people’s mental health. The dangers of drug dependence continue to pose a threat to the Australian public, with decreasing social awareness of the repercussions of substance consumption.
Engages the Tutorial Group
What do you do when cannabis affects patients’ wellness negatively on a long-term scale?
What experiences have you had with treating cannabis addiction?
How do you deal with addicted patients who demand cannabis treatment?
What unachievable by traditional medicine effects do you anticipate when prescribing mental health patients with cannabinoid treatments?
What argument convinces you of the prevalence of negative implications of cannabinoid treatment on clients’ mental health?
Effective Use of Handouts and is on Time
Figure 1. The negative effects of marijuana on the brain (Weber, 2016).Figure 2. THC acts on numerous areas in the brain (in yellow) (“THC acts on numerous areas in the brain (in yellow),” 2018).Figure 3. Addiction treatment model (“Addiction treatment model,” n.d.).Figure 4. Negative, adverse effects of marijuana (Weber, 2015).
Cook, J., Lloyd‐Jones, D. M., Ogden, E., & Bonomo, Y. (2015). Medical use of cannabis: An addiction medicine perspective. Internal Medicine Journal, 45(6), 677-680. Web.
Gage, S. H., Hickman, M., & Zammit, S. (2016). Association between cannabis and psychosis: Epidemiologic evidence. Biological Psychiatry, 79(7), 549-556. Web.
Gullo, M. J., Matveeva, M., Feeney, G. F., Young, R. M., & Connor, J. P. (2017). Social cognitive predictors of treatment outcome in cannabis dependence. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 170, 74-81. Web.
Hall, W., Hoch, E., & Lorenzetti, V. (2019). Cannabis use and mental health: Risks and benefits. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 269(1), 1-3. Web.
Lamy, F. R., Daniulaityte, R., Nahhas, R. W., Barratt, M. J., Smith, A. G., Sheth, A.,… Carlson, R. G. (2017). Increases in synthetic cannabinoid-related harms: Results from a longitudinal web-based content analysis. International Journal of Drug Policy, 44, 121-129. Web.
Lin, L. A., Ilgen, M. A., Jannausch, M., & Bohnert, K. M. (2016). Comparing adults who use cannabis medically with those who use recreationally: Results from a national sample. Addictive Behaviors, 61, 99-103. Web.
Lopez, M., & Blanco, C. (2019). Epidemiology of cannabis use disorder. In I. D. Montoya & S. R. Weiss (Eds.), Cannabis use disorders (pp. 7-12). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Lucas, P., Walsh, Z., Crosby, K., Callaway, R., Belle‐Isle, L., Kay, R.,… Holtzman, S. (2016). Substituting cannabis for prescription drugs, alcohol and other substances among medical cannabis patients: The impact of contextual factors. Drug and Alcohol Review, 35(3), 326-333. Web.
Notcutt, W., & Clarke, E. L. (2014). Cannabinoids in clinical practice: A UK perspective. R. G. Pertwee (Ed.), Handbook of cannabis (pp. 415-432). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Penington, D. G. (2015). Medical cannabis: Time for clear thinking. The Medical Journal of Australia, 202(2), 74-76. Web.
Reavley, N. J., & Jorm, A. F. (2014). Mental health reform: Increased resources but limited gains. The Medical Journal of Australia, 201(7), 375-376. Web.
THC acts on numerous areas in the brain (in yellow) [Image]. (2018). Web.
Walsh, Z., Gonzalez, R., Crosby, K., Thiessen, M. S., Carroll, C., & Bonn-Miller, M. O. (2017). Medical cannabis and mental health: A guided systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 51, 15-29. Web.
Weber, L. (2015). Negative, adverse effects of marijuana. Web.
Weber, L. (2016). The negative effects of marijuana on the brain. Web.
Cannabis is also known as weed, hashish and a large wide variety of different slang phrases. The most common form is marijuana – a “greenish-grey mixture of the dried flowers of Cannabis sativa” (NIDA 2018, para. ). In terms of intake, some individuals smoke marijuana in pipes, hand-rolled cigarettes or in blunts. The predominant mind-altering chemical in cannabis that is accountable for most of the intoxicating effects in people is known as delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).
Cannabis is the most commonly used psychoactive drug around the world after alcohol and the first among illicit substances. During the last several years, the number of cannabis users has increased among adolescents and concerns have been raised that its consumption can lead to serious mental disorders specifically psychotic disorders. Nemours research studies have been conducted to investigate the link between cannabis use and schizophrenia. These studies aim to explore the adverse consequences of cannabis use together with whether it increases the risk of developing schizophrenia.
The available evidence in the literature shows a connection between cannabis and psychosis. Seven years ago, the Swedish Conscripts Cohort was the only major study control that addressed this topic. New studies have emerged and supported the Swedish study that cannabis is a substantial association factor for schizophrenia. However, other studies are more careful when drawing such conclusions and interpretations because there is no clear evidence that cannabis causes schizophrenia.
Regarding this assignment, I am going to address the importance of this topic in the field of addiction and healthcare, assessing the research that suggests that cannabis plays a role in schizophrenia and the strengths and weakness of the study. Lastly, I will conclude the research with possible academic suggestions for the literature review.
Rationale for the Subject and its Importance in the Field of Addiction and Healthcare
The relationship between cannabis use and psychiatric disorders is a complicated public health issue. According to the World Drug Report (2019), “UNODC estimates that roughly 3.8 per cent (range: 3.3–4.4 per cent) of the global population aged 15–64 years used cannabis at least once in 2017, the equivalent of some 188 million people (range: 164–219 million)” (p.). These statistics highlight the importance of conducting a multidisciplinary study to come up with effective prevention programs and enhance protective factors, which will ultimately improve population health. In addition, it is important to consider the effects of second-hand exposure to cannabis smoke.
This assertion holds because the harmful effects of passive smoking are known but there is not enough evidence about whether passive cannabis smoking presents similar health risks. Currently, very few researches have been conducted on the probable psychoactive effect of exposure to second hand cannabis smoke.
Structured Critical Review
Despite the several lines of evidence proposing a connection between cannabis and psychosis, the Swedish Conscripts Cohort was the only major study control that addressed this topic. The research, “Cannabis, Schizophrenia and other Psychoses: Longitudinal Studies on Swedish Conscripts”, by Manrique-Garcia (2014) explored how cannabis can increase the risk for psychiatric disorders such as psychosis and depression, and especially schizophrenia. The study’s objectives were to determine the long-term risk of developing schizophrenia and the risk of depression among cannabis users and non-users. It also sought to assess and compare the prognosis of schizophrenia among patients with a history of cannabis use and those without. The other objective was to assess mortality rates among cannabis users as compared to non-users to establish whether cannabis increases the risk of death among patients with psychotic disorders.
The article’s title is clear, and it is related to the specified paperwork. The abstract is intelligible as the author identifies the aims of the study and describes the objectives, methods and results obtained. The introduction is not stated clearly, and thus it is difficult to locate as it is merged with the background information. However, the author indicates why the research was undertaken and the background section is rich as it provides sufficient information to understand the goals of the study.
According to the literature review given in the article, the relationship between cannabis use and schizophrenia is complicated because different people will be affected in different ways. However, the overall effects of cannabis on the brain are mild euphoria, perceptual alterations, and relaxation. The neurobiology of marijuana underscores what happens to the brain once the substance is introduced to the body system.
The effects of THC are mediated through cannabinoid receptors type 1 (CB1), which are mainly found in the brain where they suppress inhibitory or excitatory synaptic transmission. Therefore, continued exposure to marijuana, especially during adolescence and young adulthood, could lead to impaired neural connectivity (Manrique-Garcia 2014). It could also cause a permanent alteration of dopamine, glutamate, and GABAergic systems, and these effects underscore the link between cannabis and psychosis. The author used 109 reference materials throughout the paper to support all the claims made.
According to the article, over 200 million people around the globe use marijuana with the peak prevalence age being between 20 and 24 years. In 2010, over 2 million people lived with cannabis-related disabilities due to dependence. In terms of gender, males are more likely to use cannabis as compared to their female counterparts, and the lifetime risk of dependence is about 9 per cent. The United States, Australia, France, and Spain are some of the leading countries with the highest burden of cannabis dependence.
The study used a quantitative approach to assess the association between cannabis and schizophrenia. Quantitative research is more structured than qualitative research, and it is used to measure a problem by generating numerical statistics, which could be converted to usable data. The study sample involved 50,087 Swedish military conscripts and the cohort was followed from 1969/1970 to 2007. Cannabis users were taken as cases while non-users were used as controls. Risk factors were well defined, as primary outcomes, and they included risk of schizophrenia, depression, death among people with psychosis, and death among the total cohort.
The author gathered information about potential covariates based on prior studies to avoid confounding factors. The covariates included contact with juvenile authorities, run away from home, truancy, smoking, solvent abuse, risky use of alcohol, psychiatric diagnosis at conscription, divorced parents, use of intravenous drugs and other substances at conscription, IQ score, upbringing, family socioeconomic status, and the civil status during the follow-up. The confounding factors were controlled to avoid biased results. Reliability of the study was improved by using reputable databases for data collection. The conscripts were followed up for 30 years to examine their behaviors as related to the study variables.
The study’s analysis was not an intention-to-treat. On the contrary, the different statistical analyses were carried out to assess the various risk factors for depression, mortality rate, schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders among cannabis users and non-users. For instance, Cox proportional hazards modeling assessed the risk of developing depression and death among marijuana users at conscription. Negative binomial regression estimated prognosis rate ratios with 95% confidence levels. Logistic and multinomial logistic regression calculated odd ratios for developing schizophrenia with 95% confidence intervals.
Fisher’s exact test was used to test differences in the type of schizophrenia at first admission and pre-morbid psychiatric diagnosis. Ultimately, the results were adjusted for confounding factors. Permission to extract data from the conscription database was sought and granted by the Stockholm Regional Ethical Review Board. The obtained data were treated based on recommendations by the Swedish Data Inspection Board.
The results obtained from this study indicated a strong correlation between cannabis use and the risk of developing schizophrenia. Therefore, cannabis users were more likely to develop this psychiatric condition as compared to non-users. After controlling confounding factors, specifically disturbed childhood, cannabis users did not have an increased risk of developing depression. However, patients with schizophrenia and a history of cannabis use higher chances of readmission and longer hospital stay duration as compared to those without such history. Additionally, study participants with a history of heavy cannabis usage had higher mortality rates as compared with non-users. However, having a history of cannabis use was not a contributing factor to death rates among psychotic patients.
These results underscore the importance of studying this topic because the currently available literature is divided on whether cannabis use is linked with the possibility of developing schizophrenia. The discussion part of the paper is consistent with the results, and the author is critical to himself and other research works on the subject. The study’s strengths and limitations have also been mentioned.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Undertaken Literature Review
The author used 109 reference materials to compile to back claims made throughout the article. The references had several strengths and weaknesses alike. Some of the strengths included the use of up-to-date information. Given that the article was written in 2014, materials published after 2009 would be considered as current literature, and the majority of the references used in this article fall within this timeline. In addition, the references are relevant to the study.
The Swedish conscript survey one of the reputable cohort studies on the issue of cannabis use and schizophrenia given that it used a large sample size (50,087 participants) followed for 30 years. As such, the results from this study have a scientific basis for generalization in other set-ups. Additionally, the study assessed schizophrenia as a specific outcome, which gives it enough power to assess the study’s objectives. The homogenous nature of the study population allowed for the lifetime prognosis of schizophrenia based on background factors.
However, the review has several limitations. First, the available baseline data on cannabis use was only after conscription and thus other risk factors after baseline might influence the ultimate results. Second, only males were used in this study, and thus effects on females were not captured. Third, information on hereditary factors was lacking during the assessment. Fourth, cases of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders were only limited to in-patient care. Therefore, milder forms that do not require hospitalization were not factored in this study. Consequently, further research is needed to fill the gaps exposed in this study.
Possible Practical or Academic Implications for the Review
The implications for this review and the results from this study are multi-pronged. These findings could shape the political and ideological debate on the issue of regulating cannabis. In public health policy, the link between cannabis use and schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders should be understood in context before liberalizing laws on marijuana. According to the literature reviewed in this paper, eliminating the usage of any form of cannabis would reduce schizophrenia incidences by over 10 per cent. In addition, the usage of cannabis is expected to introduce 10 % of new cases of schizophrenia.
Therefore, with the increasing demands to decriminalize marijuana use, it could be hypothesized that consumption in the public will increase steadily. This aspect underscores the need for academicians to invest time and resources to research more on the effects of such changes in relation to psychotic disorders. Additionally, cannabis has also been shown to have positive therapeutic uses, and such conflicting information could affect policy-making. Further research is needed to identify the point at which marijuana health burdens overweight the associated benefits for evidence-based decision-making.
Summary/Conclusion
The topic of cannabis use is controversial with proponents citing its benefits and calling for the liberalization of laws governing marijuana. Opponents of this issue are concerned with the negative effects of cannabis use, especially its link to psychotic disorders, such as schizophrenia. This controversy underlines the need to have a comprehensive study on the benefits and health concerns associated with marijuana. “Cannabis, Schizophrenia and other Psychoses: Longitudinal Studies on Swedish Conscripts”, by Manrique-Garcia (2014) was reviewed for this assignment. The author sought to establish the relationship between cannabis use and schizophrenia and other psychotic conditions among other objectives. A Swedish cohort of 50,087 military draftees was used for the study. The subjects were followed for 36 years from 1969 to 2007.
After controlling for confounding factors, the results showed that cannabis use increases the chances of developing schizophrenia and other related disorders. These findings are important as they could be considered when making policies on the liberalization of marijuana use. In academics, the research gaps highlighted in this review present an opportunity to investigate this topic more to derive reliable results for informed decision-making.
References
Manrique-Garcia, E 2014, ‘Cannabis, schizophrenia and other psychoses longitudinal studies on Swedish conscripts’, MSc. Thesis, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm.
Cannabis use has recently become the topic of discussion both in medical and political environments. The comprehensive coverage and research on the topic have been facilitated by the recent legalization measures that ply to medical marijuana. The properties of the cannabinoids in the plant have been found to beneficially affect individuals with several conditions, generating both interest in how cannabis affects the body and the delivery methods. In this paper, cannabis will be discussed from the perspective of the endocannabinoid system, endocannabinoid deficiency, and delivery routes, as well as their cons and pros.
How Cannabis Affects the Body
Cannabis has both psychological and physiological effects facilitated by the compounds present in the plant. Cannabinoids, specifically such as THC, are the primary psychoactive elements that pass into the bloodstream and are carried to the braid, which is how the psychological effect occurs (Zou & Kumar, 2018). The human body makes molecules similar to cannabinoids (endocannabinoids) which are involved in the endocannabinoid system (ECS). The system, on the other hand, has various vital functions such as regulating sleep, memory, and mood.
ECS
ECS mediates the activity of phytocannabinoids, namely, the cannabinoids derived from the cannabis plant. The effects result from the cannabinoid receptors’ bindings with the cannabinoids, which, together with the transporters and certain enzymes, ultimately encompass ECS (Almogi-Hazan & Or, 2020). The receptors are CB1 and CB2, CB1 being linked to the central nervous system while CB2 to the peripheral one. As a result, endocannabinoids attach to certain receptors depending on the location. In terms of cannabis compounds binding to specific receptors, each element can be bound to one of both of them. For example, THC, which is the element that creates the psychoactive effect, can bind to both CB1 AND CB2, which is not similar to how CBD, which helps with pain, binds to the same receptors.
Endocannabinoid Deficiency
An endocannabinoid deficiency is generated when the endocannabinoid tone becomes disrupted either congenitally or through an acquired condition. The issue may be interconnected with the production of cannabinoids, their metabolism, and the quality of the receptors. According to researchers, the condition is linked to such psychosomatic outcomes as migraines, irritable bowel syndrome, displays of anxiety, and depression (Brugnatelli et al., 2020). It is important to highlight that further research is needed to address the existence of endocannabinoid deficiency as there is no scientific consensus on the existence of the medical condition (Cogan, 2020). While the issue has not been studied enough, promising evidence shows that the psychosomatic effects mentioned prior may be connected and have resulted from a disruption in the tone of the endocannabinoid system.
Delivery Methods
Cannabis can be delivered into the system in multiple ways. Individuals can select a method of intake that is not only appropriate based on their preference and condition but also correlates with fewer risks. It is vital to point out that the use of cannabis while having a historical background, has not been extensively researched in regards to long-term effects from a broader perspective. An example is the difference between smoking marijuana and tobacco. According to researchers, smoking tobacco can undoubtedly be linked to lung cancer. At the same time, the same cannot be said about cannabis since no researcher has conducted a long-term study on the effects (Russell et al., 2018). Nonetheless, four of the most common delivery methods, namely, smoking, vaporizing, ingesting, and applying topically, can be discussed from the perspective of the mechanism, benefits, and cons.
Smoking
Cannabis smoking is the most common delivery method as it is the preferred way of most individuals who are either prescribed marijuana or consume it recreationally. The compounds of the plant are absorbed into the bloodstream from the lungs and delivered to the brain. The advantage of this particular method is the fast absorption which takes minutes for the consumer to feel the psychotropic effects (Russell et al., 2018). The benefit, however, is minimized by the major negative implication, namely, the effects of smoking on the respiratory system. Similar to cigarettes, cannabis contains carbon monoxide, and the smoking method leads to the accumulation of tar on the walls of the lungs.
Vaporizing
Vaporizing cannabis is similar to smoking it in terms of the absorption of the compounds into the system through the lungs, bloodstream, and ultimately, the brain. However, smoke is the result of combustion, which is not the case for the heating process correlating with the action of vaporizing cannabis oil (Russell et al., 2018). Moreover, it produces less carbon monoxide compared to the smoking process, which is another benefit. Nonetheless, the transmission method is relatively non-researched due to the new occurrence of this particular delivery framework. Moreover, researchers mention that the vaporizing process has a delayed impairment (Russell et al., 2018). Thus, both pros and cons are linked to cannabis consumption through vaporizing.
Ingesting Edibles
Ingesting cannabis is another method of transmission that can be applied by users of the plant or its compounds. However, it is absorbed differently as it passes through the stomach to the liver, bloodstream, and, ultimately, the brain. Edibles do not have the harmful respiratory effects commonly associated with smoking, and the effect usually lasts longer than through the vaporization of the oil (Russell et al., 2018). However, since the products are challenging to formulate adequately, overconsumption is common, which can lead to excessive psychoactive effects. The negative aspect can result in episodes of psychosis, anxiety, and other adverse psychological outcomes.
Applying Topically
Applying cannabis compounds topically is a delivery method that implies the cream, oil, or substance is transferred onto the skin, absorbed, and transmitted through the brain through the bloodstream. The benefit of the method is the fact that systematic exposure is minimal, and the psychoactive effects do not occur (Patel & Lio, 2021). Pain-relieving and dermatological benefits are the primary advantageous aspects of the transmission framework. However, the delivery method lacks adequate research, which is a significant limitation that potentially compromises the solution.
Conclusion
Cannabis use has been discussed in relation to the reaction of the endocannabinoid system, the evidence for the existence of endocannabinoid deficiency, and the delivery methods. ECS mediates the activity of phytocannabinoids, while a systematic disruption in the tone of the system creates health issues that researchers argue correlate with the said system. Phytocannabinoids can be delivered through several routes, namely by smoking, vaporizing, ingesting, and applying the compounds topically. Based on the analysis, vaporizing is the method that correlates with the least harmful effects, while the most maximized benefits as a reduction in damage to the respiratory system compared to smoking can be highlighted alongside the fast absorption compared to ingesting edibles or applying cannabis compounds topically.
Patel, P. M., & Lio, P. A. (2021). Safety and sourcing of topical cannabinoids: Many questions, few answers. Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology, 14(8), 49–51.
Cannabis has long been used medicinally, and in recent years, interest in the potential benefits of cannabis-based medications for treating various medical conditions has increased. Nevertheless, there may be risks and drawbacks to using cannabis, just like with any drug. As such, it is crucial to examine both the advantages and disadvantages of medicinal cannabis, emphasizing the benefits of possible pain relief and a decrease in anxiety and depression, as well as the disadvantages of possible side effects and addiction. In general, medicinal cannabis has excellent properties in treating pain, anxiety, and depression, while its risks are typically minimal and can be adequately controlled with proper monitoring and dosage.
Benefits
Pain Relief
The capacity of medicinal cannabis to relieve pain is one of its most well-known advantages. Millions of individuals worldwide suffer from the debilitating disease of chronic pain, and conventional painkillers frequently fail to provide adequate relief. Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), two cannabinoids contained in cannabis, have been discovered to be very effective at lowering pain, especially neuropathic pain can be particularly challenging to treat with conventional drugs (Maayah et al., 2020). Cannabis interacts with the body’s endocannabinoid system, which controls how painful stimuli are perceived. As it can help to lessen pain and inflammation, cannabis has demonstrated potential in treating various chronic pain issues.
Reducing Anxiety and Depression
The symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and depression, two of the most prevalent mental health illnesses that impact millions of people worldwide, have been discovered to be potentially helped by medicinal cannabis. THC and CBD, two active substances found in cannabis, are thought to interact with the brain’s endocannabinoid system to affect how mood, stress, and anxiety are regulated (Steardo et al., 2021). The brain is one part of the body with a complex network of neurotransmitters and receptors known as the endocannabinoid system. Many physiological functions, including pain, emotion, food, and sleep, are regulated by this system. In particular, THC and CBD may help to lessen the signs and symptoms of PTSD (Steardo et al., 2021). Thus, interest in medicinal cannabis has grown due to the hunt for alternative treatments.
Drawbacks
Side Effects
Cannabis used for medical purposes has been demonstrated to have potential advantages for several medical issues. However, it is crucial to understand that it can also have risks and adverse effects. Like the usage of any medication, medicinal cannabis use can result in adverse side effects and undesirable symptoms, which can vary based on the user and the particular product utilized. Drowsiness or weariness is one of the most frequently mentioned adverse effects of medicinal cannabis (Kuhathasan et al., 2019). This is especially true for items that have high THC content because THC is known to have sedative effects (Kuhathasan et al., 2019). Some patients may discover that this adverse effect makes it difficult for them to go about their daily lives regularly, in which case they may need to modify their dosage or administration time.
Addiction
The possibility of addiction is one of the potential disadvantages of therapeutic cannabis. Compulsive drug-seeking behavior, persistent use despite unfavorable effects, and withdrawal symptoms upon cessation of drug usage are the hallmarks of addiction. Cannabis addiction remains a challenge even though it is sometimes considered less severe than addiction to other substances like opiates or alcohol. The main compound in cannabis, THC, is thought to be connected to the risk of addiction. The psychoactive properties of cannabis, including the “high,” are due to the molecule THC (Moreno-Rius, 2019). As THC enters the brain, it interacts with the endocannabinoid system, which regulates mood, stress, and reward (Maayah et al., 2020). The brain’s creation of dopamine, linked to feelings of pleasure and reward, is thought to be one of the primary factors underlying cannabis’ potential for addiction. When used frequently, cannabis, like other psychoactive substances, has the potential to lead to a state of dependence in some users.
Discussion
To ascertain whether the possible benefits of medicinal cannabis outweigh the risks, the advantages and disadvantages of the drug must be thoroughly weighed. Even though cannabis usage carries some possible hazards, such as side effects and addiction, these risks are minimal and may be effectively controlled with careful monitoring and dosage. Nevertheless, there are few, if any, realistic options for many people when it comes to treating pain, anxiety, and depression. A particular instance analysis of the potential dangers and advantages of this therapy option, as well as the individual health issues involved, must be done before deciding whether to utilize medicinal cannabis. Evidence, however, indicates that the benefits of cannabis usage ultimately outweigh the risks.
Conclusion
With careful monitoring and dosage, it can be concluded that medicinal cannabis has more advantages than disadvantages. Nevertheless, each case-by-case choice to utilize medicinal cannabis must be made after carefully weighing the advantages and disadvantages of this course of treatment. Cannabis has several therapeutic effects, including the ability to alleviate pain and reduce anxiety. However, it also carries particular concerns, such as addiction and adverse effects. Individuals can make wise decisions about their health and well-being by carefully considering the potential risks and advantages of medicinal cannabis and selecting treatment alternatives that are safe, efficient, and suitable for their particular requirements.
Cannabis, also known as marijuana, is one of the most commonly misused drugs in western cultures for recreational purposes. The drug was reported to have approximately 192 million users as of 2018 worldwide (Gabri et al., 2022). In Europe alone, almost 90 million people ranging between 15-64 years reported to have taken marijuana at least once in their lifetime, and about 1 in every 10 young adults used the drug monthly in 2019 (Gabri et al., 2022). Additionally, the United States recorded 3.43 million users in 2020 (Conway, 2022). The inappropriate use and sake of cannabis may contain significant public health as well as social consequences. When compared with non-user individuals, monthly consumption of the drug is assumed to lead to an increased risk of injuries, psychosis, and poor obstetric outcomes. Furthermore, cannabis is addictive and causes cognitive impairment and short-term memory (Yu et al., 2020). Moreover, cannabis misuse is directly linked with reduced motivation and poor academic performance. As much as the use of cannabis is associated with adverse effects, its health effects, such as pain reduction, remain beneficial.
Mechanism of Action
The mechanism of action of marijuana in the human body remains unclear. Marijuana is the only plant that comprises Cannabinoids which contain similar properties to the endocannabinoids found in the human body. The drug contains over 400 compounds of the terpenoid and flavonoid types and its chemical elements known as cannabinoids, with more than 60 being pharmacologically active (Rabipour et al., 2022). All the cannabinoids are capable of activating endogenous receptors of the CB1 and CB2 type in the endocannabinoid system. CB1 and CB2 then trigger specific signaling systems that initiate various actions by directly obstructing the release of several neurotransmitters, including dopamine, acetylcholine, and glutamate (Rabipour et al., 2022). The endocannabinoid system is a dense network of organs all over the body that express the receptors and take homeostatic functions (Anand et al., 2021). CB1 receptors are primarily located in the hippocampus, spinal cord, basal ganglia, peripheral nerves, association cortex, and cerebellum, whereas the CB2 receptors are situated in the immune system’s cells. The roles of the endocannabinoid system include memory, appetite, pain, immunity, movement, cardiopulmonary function, salivation or lacrimation, and metabolism.
The majority of the effects of cannabinoids, like psychotropics, result from CB1 activation, with CB2 taking significant roles in inflammatory and immune functions. Internally, endocannabinoids act as modulators of neuro-regulation, which are responsible for reverse neurotransmission (Anand et al., 2021). A post-synaptic neuron at this point excretes endocannabinoids that combine mainly with CB1 receptors on the presynaptic nerve cell. The joining with the CB1 receptors then leads to inhibited activation of the presynaptic calcium channel and the release of subsequent presynaptic neurotransmitters. Suppose the presynaptic neurotransmitters are primarily inhibitory, like Gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), the net outcome will be excitatory. Moreover, binding to distinct parts of the central nervous system (CNS) mediates diverse cannabinoids’ psychotropic traits, specifically THC. The affected areas and their effects include impairment of short-term memory in the hippocampus, altered movement and reaction time in basal ganglia, and euphoria in the nucleus accumbens (Anand et al., 2021). Additionally, there is impaired sensation and judgment in the neocortex, increased appetite in the hypothalamus, ataxia in the cerebellum, analgesia in the spinal cord, and paranoia and panic in the amygdala.
Cannabidiol (CBD) which contains antipsychotic and anxiolytic effects, and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is the primary psychoactive marijuana component, are the most studied cannabinoids. The main source of THC is the resin of stems or leaves, and it is highly fat soluble. Additionally, THC is quickly absorbed in the intestinal and respiratory systems with a bioavailability of 6% when consumed orally and between 15-20% when smoked (Rabipour et al., 2022). The therapeutic effects of cannabis are reliant on THC concentration as well as the cannabidiol to THC ratio following the ability of cannabidiol to moderate THC psychoactive effects. The 1:1 ratio has been reported to produce the best clinical advantages with less adverse effects (Rabipour et al., 2022). Moreover, the channel of administration is significant as it establishes the absorption process, pharmacology as well as the metabolism of various cannabinoids. The cannabinoids’ therapeutic properties include neuroprotective, antioxidant, antiviral, bone stimulant, antibiotic, anti-inflammatory, and vasorelaxant.
Medical Treatment
Pain Management
Marijuana can be used as an effective remedy for pain reduction. Cannabinoids extracted from cannabis have been investigated for their analgesic benefits in pain management, such as cancer-associated pain, particularly neuropathic pain (Daris et al., 2019). In support of this, Donk et al. (2018) found that more patients showed pain reduction by 30% with high doses of CBD and THC. CB1 receptors in the central nervous system exist in concentrated amounts in brain areas that mediate nociceptive processing with the same distribution as opioid receptors (Anand et al., 2021). Additionally, cannabinoids may act on mast cell receptors which promote the release of analgesic opioids to curb inflammation and hinder the emission of inflammatory substances, thereby reducing pain effects.
Moreover, cannabinoids inhibit the acute pain response fibers as well as the wind-up phenomenon, which are largely associated with hyperalgesia development hence helping with the treatment of neuropathic pain. Cannabinoids can be combined with opioids to produce analgesia using the G-protein coupled mechanism that inhibits the release of pain-generating neurotransmitters in the spinal cord as well as the brain (Anand et al., 2021). Furthermore, the analgesic effect of cannabinoids THC is moderated through kappa and delta opioid receptors depicting a close connection between opioid and cannabinoid signaling channels in the variation of pain perception.
Anxiety Disorders and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
Anxiety disorders and PTSD are regarded as the most common mental diseases globally, accompanied by high financial and psychosocial burdens, especially in veterans. They are primarily treated with psychotherapy, benzodiazepines, and antidepressants containing selective norepinephrine and serotonin reuptake inhibitor as well as a serotonin reuptake inhibitor. However, even with these treatments, approximately 40% of patients continue to experience anxiety and PTSD symptoms which have then motivated medical experts to seek effective therapeutics. CBD has shown to be an alternative therapeutic treatment for anxiety and PTSD. Elms et al. (2019) found that an oral administration of CBD to regular psychiatric care led to reduced PTSD symptoms in 91% of adults in their study. In addition, their results indicated that CBD provided relief for patients that have frequent encounters with nightmares as a PTSD symptom. Moreover, Shannon et al. (2019) claimed that anxiety scores dropped in 79.2% of their participants, while 66.7% reported increased sleep scores within the first month of the research. Therefore, it is evident that CBD can be an effective treatment for PTSD and anxiety.
Increasing the consumption of cannabinoids such as CBD helps the level of joy transmitter, that is, anandamide, increase, which helps eliminate undesirable encounters. Moreover, the resultant change in body chemicals aid in soothing an individual’s muscles and nerves which allows relaxation, thus reducing the effects of anxiety. Anandamide acts as a neurotransmitter since they transmit chemical messages between neurons in the nervous system. CBD affects various parts of the brain, which influence memory, sensory perception, thinking, as well as coordination (Elms et al., 2019). THC contains this same feature which enables it to bind with receptors in the brain, stimulating several physical and mental features. Furthermore, recreational smoking of marijuana has been associated with short-term memory loss among individuals. Despite this, examination of the endocannabinoid system indicates that it helps accelerate the process of enabling people to forget painful experiences, including traumatic events.
Seizure
Cannabidiol can be used to prevent some forms of seizures in some individuals, such as ones suffering from epilepsy. Some epilepsy patients suffer from drug-resistant epilepsy. A drug-resistant epilepsy patient is one whose seizures are uncontrollable despite using the required dosage of not less than two antiepileptic medications. Drug-resistant epilepsy reduces the quality of life of individuals, increases cognitive problems, and leads to severe psychosocial consequences (Gray & Whalley, 2020). Endocannabinoids take part in reducing excitatory neurotransmitter release in the central nervous system, which aids in inhibiting seizure development. They work on cannabinoid receptors, with CB1 being expressed in peripheral and neural nerve cells and CB2 in brain cells as well as the immune cells. CBD interacts with the purinergic system to increase extracellular adenosine, which reduces seizure threshold generation. In support of this, Zafar et al. (2021) found an 86% decrease in seizure frequency in all of their 10 participants and reported reduced use of antiepileptic drugs following medical cannabis treatment. Moreover, seizures initiate the rapid production and release of adenosine and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG), which can be provided by marijuana, hence reducing seizure frequency.
Loss of CB1 and CB2 receptors influences the regulation of neural activity, which can lead to severe and spontaneous forms of seizures. For this reason, formulating and creating drugs containing cannabinoid receptors can be used as a therapeutic way to help reduce the development of seizure disorders (Gray & Whalley, 2020). Since CBD has more antiepileptic features than THC, drugs containing more CBD are most effective in seizure reduction. Moreover, CBD contains fewer adverse effects due to its weak activity at CB1 and CB2 receptors working as an effective remedy for seizure with less adverse effects (Zafar et al., 2021). Furthermore, CBD operates under other mediums, such as transient receptor potential (TRP) channels leading to a reduction in the glutamate presynaptic release, thereby lowering seizure incidences.
Nausea
Nausea is a common symptom of various illnesses but is considered challenging to treat using conventional treatments. It is caused by various problems such as chemotherapy, gastrointestinal disorders, emotional distress, and food poisoning. Cannabis has been widely used to curb nausea, and its effectiveness has been recorded mostly in cancer chemotherapy. Marijuana contains high concentrations of THC compound, which affects the dorsal vagus nerve and is responsible for moderating vomiting and nausea (Mersiades et al., 2018). The drug has the ability to induce responses of the CB1 receptor to other stimuli like the insular cortex in the CNS. In addition, CBD promotes CB1 expression in the hypothalamus, which is responsible for appetite and helps relax the digestive tract, which helps reduce nausea incidences. CBD enhances the synthesis of particular hormones, such as ghrelin which induces appetite or the drive to eat.
Moreover, CBD promotes the production of serotonin and dopamine, otherwise known as mood hormones which can be beneficial for individuals lacking appetite in stressful situations. Dopamine initiates a hunger feeling which then promotes appetite (Mersiades et al., 2018). On the other hand, serotonin aids in moderating digestive-related processes such as appetite and bowel movements. Additionally, CBD can directly bind with CB2 receptors found in the peripheral tissues, like in the gastrointestinal system, which then helps in the synthesis of stomach acid and saliva. Thus, CBD can be helpful in promoting hunger and effective digestion.
Conclusion
In conclusion, cannabis can be used for medical purposes despite having severe effects. The mechanism of action of cannabis continues to be unclear, even with diverse research. Marijuana contains cannabinoids with similar properties to endocannabinoids found in the human body. Cannabinoids activate CB1 and CB2 receptors which trigger specific signaling systems that initiate various actions by directly obstructing the release of several neurotransmitters. Most cannabinoid effects, such as psychotropics, result from CB1 activation, with CB2 taking significant roles in inflammatory and immune functions. Cannabidiol (CBD) and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) are the most studied components of cannabinoids.
Cannabis can be used in pain management, particularly in cancer patients. Cannabinoids may act on mast cell receptors which promote the release of analgesic opioids, thus helping in pain reduction. Moreover, cannabinoids inhibit the acute pain response fibers as well as the wind-up phenomenon, which largely contributes to neuropathic pain reduction. Additionally, marijuana is highly effective in the treatment of anxiety disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder. Increasing the consumption of cannabinoids helps the level of joy transmitters which helps eliminate traumatic experiences. Cannabinoids are able to influence an individual’s thinking, coordination, memory, and sensory perception allowing THC to attach itself to neurons and influence outcomes. Cannabidiol can be used to prevent some forms of seizures. Endocannabinoids take part in reducing the release of excitatory neurotransmitters in the (CNS), inhibiting seizure development. Furthermore, cannabis contains high concentrations of THC compound, which affects the dorsal vagus nerve and is responsible for moderating vomiting and nausea. CBD promotes the production of ghrelin, serotonin, and dopamine beneficial for individuals lacking appetite.
Gabri, A., Galanti, M., Orsini, N., & Magnusson, C. (2022). Changes in cannabis policy and prevalence of recreational cannabis use among adolescents and young adults in Europe-an interrupted time-series analysis. PLOS ONE, 17(1), 1–10. Web.
How can a person enjoy cannabis without inhaling unnecessary tars and poising his or her lungs and blood with carbon monoxide? Wouldn’t it be better to merge marijuana with the most outstanding bakery products instead of having only a boring gummy option? We offer our customers to combine the best side of the bakery and cannabis by removing pointless lung damage. We are better than our competitors because we do not mix marijuana with other drugs, such as caffeine, and we do not put THC inside overpriced gummies. The dessert shop is guaranteed to grow because the market is about to boom, the legal environment is welcoming, and competition is weak. The project will become an Instagram star that provides relatively cheap and high-quality bakery products. In our dessert shop, you will leave full, your taste buds will be delighted, and your mind will feel relaxed. In addition to these numerous advantages, the business will become profitable astonishingly fast without losing the advertisement budget.
Situation Analysis
Market Trend Analysis
The name of the industry is the cannabis edibles market, which promotes a healthier way of marijuana consumption. In regards to the market size, the article states: “A recent Deloitte report suggests that edibles and alternatives will be worth $2.7 billion a year in Canada – making up 60 percent of the legal cannabis market.” The trends are in favor of edible cannabis because the drug has a solid research base on its safety and increasing popularity. The research suggests: “A total of 12.9% of respondents reported smoking marijuana, 6% reported using edibles, 4.7% reported vaping, 1.9% reported using concentrates, and 0.8% reported using topicals. Overall, 6.7% reported using multiple forms in the past year.” Therefore, it is evident that the industry will grow due to the negative health ramifications of smoking marijuana, such as CO and tars. The sector will be comprised of edible marijuana products, which will come in the form of cookies, gums, sweets, and other foods with cannabis.
The sales are increasing because of the overall expansion of the market, and edible marijuana is a healthier alternative to smoking. The current market trends indicate that cannabis edible spending is on the rise with the estimation of the number reaching $4.1 billion in 2022 in both US and Canada. Therefore, one can expect steady growth in the industry due to the constant escalation of the total spending among consumers. Market entities are independent commercial organizations that are oriented to profit, and all elements of the structure of subjects work for a common goal. Resources are limited and distributed centrally, thus, there is no competition between the items for the resource. In the framework of the established restrictions, one can observe competition for the position, for a place in the hierarchy.
Environmental Analysis
To analyze the environmental factors, it is important to consider both regulatory and demographic influences. Any organization, regardless of small or large, is in contact with the external environment which is a source of means for a small enterprise, necessary to maintain its internal potential. Today, in the country, a complex political and economic situation has formed regarding marijuana. At that point, the external environment has become more stable and predictable, which will not affect the small business to a large extent. Therefore, it is important to discuss environmental factors affecting the development and organization of small businesses. It is stated that: “Under the new ‘Cannabis 2.0’ rules, there is a 10 milligram THC limit per package of solid and drinkable edibles.” In other words, Canada imposes specific regulatory measures which limit the amount and concentration of THC in a product. In addition, demographic factors, such as provinces, are critical in understanding the environmental forces. The article claims that: “Saskatchewan, British Columbia, Manitoba, and Newfoundland are all fairly quick movers, with the first cannabis edibles beginning to appear on shelves and online.” Therefore, a number of provinces are more eager to consume edibles than the others, which means that competition and consumer demand will differ depending on the given demographic factor.
Features of the external environment of the small businesses, such as the dessert shop, lie in its complexity, mobility, and a high degree of uncertainty. In this regard, with the transition of cannabis to market relations, the external environment of commercial organizations has changed significantly. Unlike other countries where the market system has been developing for many decades, the cannabis business had to join the new system in a short period and learn to withstand the effects of environmental factors. However, the gradual increase in spending will inevitably result in edibles becoming popular among all Canadian provinces. Both regulatory and demographic factors are major environmental influences that will directly impact the edible cannabis industry.
Competitive Analysis
The three main competitors are Tasty THC, Cannabis and Coffee, and Cannabis Growth Corp. The former two are the direct rivals because each of them sells an edible form of marijuana in Toronto. The justification is based on their relative market share and observations, where Tasty THC holds 4% of the industry, Cannabis and Coffee holds 3% of the industry, and Cannabis Growth Corp holds 5% of the total cannabis market. These are the direct competitors because they are the major edible sellers in Toronto. The Tasty THC’s key products are Sour gummy series, Cannabis and Coffee’s key products are coffee drinks with THC, and Cannabis Growth Corp’s key product is pure marijuana.
In the case of the marketing mix, it is important to understand the key difference in terms of price, promotion, positioning, and place. Price values for each competitor vary, where one piece of products of Sour gummies is equal to CA$25. It is significantly more expensive than cannabis coffee and plain marijuana. However, the gummies are sold in packs, which means that the value of a single gummy will be also different. The place is primarily concentrated in Toronto because further expansion will be only considered if the launch is successful. The positioning of all three competitors is focused on affordability and low prices, and therefore, there is an opportunity for quality-oriented products. Lastly, Promotion among all three competitors is predominantly reliant on online platforms, and Cannabis Growth Corp also utilizes offline advertisement. To compete with the competitors effectively, the promotion for the shop needs to occur on social media platforms.
Company
Tasty THC
Cannabis and Coffee
Cannabis Growth Corp
Product
Sour gummies
Cannabis coffee
Marijuana
Price
CA$25.007
CA$48
CA$29
Promotion
Online advertising
Online platforms
Offline and online advertising
Place
Toronto
Toronto
Toronto
Positioning
Affordable sweets
Cheap coffee with THC
Low prices for marijuana
Market share
4%
3%
5%
Reaction
Aggressive marketing
Expansion within the market
Transition to edible marijuana
Strengths
Popular gummies
Wide range of edible products
Popular beverage with THC
Many coffee shops
Bigger market penetration
Larger company
Weaknesses
Highly specific set of products
THC dosage restrictions
Coffee might not be attractive to some marijuana users
Caffeine may disrupt the THC’s effect
The product is not considered an edible cannabis
There is no direct form of competition
In conclusion, the main competitors are sour gummies and other edible products. THC coffee might also pose a serious threat due to the overall popularity of coffee beverages, and thus, combining these two popular drugs can be seen as attractive to some consumers. In addition, plain marijuana is an indirect form of competition because the entire cannabis market is not reliant solely on edible alternatives.
Summary
To sum up, the edible cannabis industry is primarily influenced by regulatory and demographic forces, where dosage restrictions can limit the possibility of products being available. However, the market trends show solid and gradual growth with strong projections for future expansion. Such an increase is mostly due to the general public interest regarding marijuana. In addition, edible cannabis can be perceived as a less harmful way of taking THC due to smoking being associated with tars and carbon monoxide.
Strengths
Healthy
Wide range of options
No monopoly
Weaknesses
Smoking is the most preferred approach
Edible marijuana is not quick in delivering the drug
Opportunities
Market growth trend
Threats
Coffee is the most popular beverage
Plain marijuana encompasses a larger portion of the industry
Plan
Target Segment
Main consumers of cannabis edibles in Canada are young citizens of the country in their 20s and 30s who want to find out new formats of cannabis consumption. Traditional smoking of cannabis is known to be the not healthiest way to enjoy it due to smoke that irritates and damages the respiratory tract. The main approach is to utilize a demographic form of segmentation. The edibles format of cannabis consumption avoids such a problem and allows buyers to enjoy not only the relaxation but also interesting and tasty desserts that will be produced.
In addition, this market segment includes future cannabis users who were previously classified as non-consumers. The development of this field in the future decade may recruit a large number of people because of the better methods of cannabis use. It is important to indicate that according to the report made by Deloitte on Cannabis 2.0, the market shares of the cannabis edibles worth $2.7 billion. The consumers reported using cannabis edibles multiple times a week, mainly with a group of their friends and less frequently with family members or alone. Having fun and relaxation are reported as the main reasons for the use of cannabis-infused edibles. Consumers prefer to try out new formats of edibles, which include candies, caramels, brownies, and cakes. Edibles market development would recruit new cannabis consumers because this format is more comfortable and possibly may be used as a substitute for alcohol. The reason for that is a similar usage occasion and age category of consumers.
Positioning & Mix
Positioning
The business will position itself as a dessert shop with a wide range of bakery options and affordable prices. The position of a commercial organization on the market is the position of a business organization in the market space, which determines the nature of its actions, which, in turn, forms the attitude of a commercial organization to other elements of the market environment. Positioning is not what is done in the product and service, but what is done in the mind of a potential buyer. There are two approaches to considering the concept of positioning. The primary positioning approach will be focused on the benefits and symbolism of healthiness and recreational cannabis consumption. One can take positioning only as a marketing weapon, giving it a place in the methods and means of promoting goods on the market.
In addition, positioning is a necessary condition for the normal functioning of a commercial organization in the modern market. It is impossible to exist for a commercial organization and its goods, services, works, or develop in time. Only a constant determination of the place of a commercial organization relative to consumers and competitors can be the key to success. Although they are all just different sides of the same coin, it would be more appropriate to give frequently encountered definitions of positioning.
Positioning will go through the aggressive branding of products in the local market. Branding is now an integral part of e-commerce, and e-commerce is closely related to branding. It allows companies to expand the scope of the original product with new services. Easy-to-remember domain names of company websites, a beautiful logo in the address bar create a more complete picture in the consumer’s head. This is especially true on an international scale. Thus, firms and stores that are not represented in any country become popular through blogs, banners on different websites of online stores with the delivery of goods abroad, sales through intermediaries in the country of residence, that is, the brand penetrates the consciousness of consumers throughout to the world. Branding can create such an important asset of the enterprise as a good reputation. If the company does not possess it or possesses it to a lesser extent, then this can be corrected with the help of branding. It can build a system of customer expectations related to a particular product or service, can justify them, and especially exceed it, creating better and more memorable products, thereby increasing interest in what this company creates.
Product
The product will be a bakery item, such as cookies, cakes, buns, and crepes. In particular, the product relates to soft pastries such as cakes containing a large number of slow carbohydrates. It is important to understand that pastries containing slow carbohydrates and, therefore, characterized by a slow release of energy, have a positive effect on the health of the consumer. The presence of slowly assimilated glucose in these products provides a slow release of the energy contained in them. One should be aware that the content of gradually absorbed glucose in baked goods decreases during cooking. The number of elements usually decreases during baking due to the gelatinization of starch. In part, gelatinization is due to the presence of water in the dough. Gelatinization is understood as the partial melting of the crystalline structure of starch, which increases its digestibility. During the heat treatment of the wet mixture, starch grains first swell, then increasingly lose their crystalline structure, eventually breaking up and releasing polysaccharides contained in the grains. Cakes and pastries are well-known examples of soft pastries and include, for example, biscuits, brownies, and muffins.
Price
Bag of cookies and many other products will have an estimated price of CA$10. The pricing strategy will be based on the framework for innovative products. In a cannabis market economy, the commercial success of any enterprise or entrepreneur largely depends on the right strategy and tactics for pricing goods and services. The difficulty of pricing is that price is a market category. A set of political, economic, psychological, and social factors has a significant impact on its level. Today, the price can be determined by the cost factor, and tomorrow its level may depend on the psychology of customer behavior. For each innovative product, service, work, an individual contract price is established. The following types of contract prices are distinguished, such as fixed prices, cost-reimbursable prices, prices with guaranteed maximum payments, set prices, prices with periodic payments, and complex prices.
Payment for an innovative cannabis product will be carried out regardless of the actual costs of fulfilling the contract at a predetermined price. Firm prices for innovative projects are widely used in practice, often set by bidding. They create for the contractor sufficient independence, the opportunity to get more profit while lowering the cost of the work. Their main drawback is the possible risk of losses for both parties if the market conditions change. Cost-reimbursable prices will also be used; they assume reimbursement to the contractor of all costs associated with the implementation of the corresponding innovative project. In this case, the contract spells out all types of direct expenses, the methodology for calculating indirect costs, additional payments, allowances, margins. Such prices are applied for projects with an insufficiently developed planned structure, with parallel work, in cases of tight control by the customer over the progress of work. For a store, such a price reduces the risk of losses, but at the same time limits the ability to make big profits.
Promotion
The promotion strategy will be primarily based on online advertising, especially on Instagram. Instagram is a social network in which a store can very quickly get subscribers and increase sales. This is the best platform to show the product, and Instagram is ideal for creating and developing a business, as the social network guarantees maximum results with minimal effort and financial costs. It is important to understand that maintaining a personal Instagram page and promoting a brand with an Instagram account are two different tasks. To do this, first of all, an Instagram account is created competently, and one needs to develop it, fill it with content and promote it in special ways that will help not only make the Instagram account attractive but also well-selling. Any company strives for its logical development, and by no means, the last tool that pushes the company on the path to success is this advancement.
In today’s world, the Internet is one of the main channels of information. Social Media Marketing (SMM) is communication with an audience of social networks and forums on behalf of a brand or organization. Today, most progressive companies create their corporate pages and communities in many popular social networks, with the help of which they actively interact with customers, fill the pages with useful and exciting content, conduct quizzes and contests among users. Product promotion on the market begins, in fact, from the moment of its creation and implies the beginning of advertising activity before it entered the market. The distribution of goods is actively carried out at a time when it is well known to a potential consumer. Based on the above definitions, there are basic strategies for promoting a product on the market.
Financial Analysis
Opening a dessert shop that sells edible cannabis will require a three-year commitment because the initial two years will result in losses. The overall strategy will revolve around maintaining rent and salary expenses as constant values in addition to high advertising expenditures of CA$10000 each year. The estimation of customer purchase growth each year will differ based on the assumption that advertising costs will yield some results. A total of two employees will be used with a base salary of CA$1500 per month, which results in an annual salary expense of CA$36000. The rent is estimated to be equal to CA$3000 per month, which will also result in CA$36000 per year. Kitchenware purchase for the first year will be equivalent to CA$10000, but the subsequent years will require less money, such CA$1000. Utilities, maintenance, and insurance will remain as constants and based on general knowledge. The cost of goods sold will consist of basic bakery ingredients, such as flour, sugar, and other components, and cannabis. The resulting value will be equal to CA$5.2 for each CA$10 product. The annual revenue is based on the estimation that an average of 200 purchases will be made each week for 2021, 300 purchases for 2022, and 400 purchases for 2023. The respective annual revenue values are equal to CA$96000, CA$144000, and CA$192000.
Exhibits
Pro-Forma Income Statement 2021
Revenues
1
Sales
96000
2
Cost of Sales
50000
Gross Profit
46000
Expenses
3
Advertising
10000
4
Utilities
1000
5
Maintenance
1000
6
Rent
36000
7
Salaries
36000
8
Kitchenware
10000
9
Insurance
1000
Total Expenses
86000
10
Net Profit
(40000)
Pro-Forma Income Statement 2022
Revenues
1
Sales
144000
2
Cost of Sales
75000
Gross Profit
69000
Expenses
3
Advertising
10000
4
Utilities
1000
5
Maintenance
1000
6
Rent
36000
7
Salaries
36000
8
Kitchenware
1000
9
Insurance
1000
Total Expenses
77000
10
Net Profit
(8000)
Pro-Forma Income Statement 2023
Revenues
1
Sales
192000
2
Cost of Sales
100000
Gross Profit
92000
Expenses
3
Advertising
10000
4
Utilities
1000
5
Maintenance
1000
6
Rent
36000
7
Salaries
36000
8
Kitchenware
1000
9
Insurance
1000
Total Expenses
77000
10
Net Profit
15000
Works Cited
Grewal, Dhruv, and Michael Levy. Marketing. McGraw-Hill Education, 2020.
“Cannabis Growth Opportunity Corporation Announces NAV of $2.46.” CannabisGOC, 2020, Web.
“Coffee Menu.” Cannabis&Coffee, 2018, Web.
“Featured Products.” TastyTHC, 2020, Web.
Beadle, Alexander. “Canada’s Edibles Market Gets Off to a Slow Start.” Medieval Fragments, 2019, Web.
Charleboid, Sylvian, et al. “Edibles and Canadian Consumers’ Willingness to Consider Recreational Cannabis in Food or Beverage Products: A Second Assessment.” Trends in Food Science & Technology, vol. 98, 2020, pp. 25-29.
Conway, Jan. “Cannabis Edibles Spending in the United States and Canada from 2017 to 2022.” Medieval Fragments, Web.
Nanjapla, Rajiv. “Cannabis Edibles: Why It’s a Big Deal.” Market Realist, 2019, Web.
Rodriguez, Jeremiah. “Cannabis Edibles Are Now Legal: Everything You Need to Know.” Medieval Fragments, 2019, Web.
Steigerwald, Stacey, et al. “Smoking, Vaping, and Use of Edibles and Other Forms of Marijuana Among U.S. Adults.” Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 169, no. 12, 2018, pp. 890-892.
Scientific research over the years has shown that cannabis can be farmed commercially for various non-recreational and profitable ventures. I propose this business venture here in Oregon, as it is one of the states that have legalized cannabis. Entering into the business legally requires certification from the relevant authorities, which an individual or organization must undergo to qualify. The Oregon Liquor & Cannabis Commission, OLCC, is one of the agencies that regulate this industry.
The business would fall under OLCC’s medical marijuana operational program, which is responsible for tracking all producers registered in the state. Since we intend to cultivate, manufacture, and produce medical marijuana, this agency would be essential in facilitating the registration for all legalities pertaining to the business. The Oregon Department of Agriculture is another agency that would help in legalizing the business.
Other requirements would include workers’ permits, relevant licenses, compliance with the land use planning and zoning, land use compatibility statements from the authorizing government agency, building permits, and relevant inspections. OSHA certification is also vital in ensuring the business adheres to workplace safety health standards of Oregon. The Cannabis Regulation/Oregon Medical Marijuana Act – ORS 475C is an example of a cannabis law relating to getting into the business legally. I highly recommend funding of this business because it is not only highly profitable, but also offers significant potential to the pharmaceutical world.
Scientific evidence shows the potential of medical marijuana as a drug, hence the need to invest in the business. The OLCC is important because they provide the largest legal coverage for the cannabis business venture. The license covers producers, retailers, processors, and wholesalers. Therefore, the license would allow the venture to maintain operations at all levels of business.