Objective

The growing availability of cannabis products through home delivery services may affect cannabis-related health outcomes. However, research is impeded by a lack of data measuring the scale of home delivery. Prior research demonstrated that crowdsourced websites can be used to validly enumerate brick-and-mortar cannabis outlets. We piloted an extension of this method to explore the feasibility of measuring availability of cannabis home delivery.

Method

We tested implementation of an automated algorithm designed to webscrape data from Weedmaps, the largest crowdsourced website for cannabis retail, to count the number of legal cannabis retailers offering home delivery to the geographic centroid of each Census block group in California. We compared these estimates to the number of brick-and-mortar outlets within each block group. To assess data quality, we conducted follow-up telephone interviews with a subsample of cannabis delivery retailers.

Results

We successfully implemented the webscraping. Of the 23,212 block groups assessed, 22,542 (97%) were served by at least one cannabis delivery business. Only 461 block groups (2%) contained one or more brick-and-mortar outlets. In interviews, availability varied dynamically as a function of staffing levels, order sizes, time of day, competition, and demand.

Conclusions

Webscraping crowdsourced websites could be a viable method for quantifying rapidly evolving availability of cannabis home delivery. However, key practical and conceptual challenges must be overcome to conduct a full-scale validation and develop methodological standards. Acknowledging data limitations, cannabis home delivery appears to be nearly universal in California, whereas availability of brick-and-mortar outlets is limited, underscoring the need for research on home delivery.

Background

Public health experts have urged governments around the world to regulate newly legalized cannabis as they do alcohol to effectively and efficiently protect health. However, research evaluating the alignment of alcohol and cannabis policies is sparse. We assessed similarities and differences in local alcohol and cannabis control policies across California, and characterized localities adopting distinct policy approaches.

Methods

Using standard legal epidemiologic techniques, we collected and coded local alcohol and cannabis control policies relevant to public health for 12 California counties and all incorporated cities within them (N=241). We assessed whether localities were equally stringent on alcohol and cannabis policies by comparing overall restrictiveness (summed policy scores) and 9 specific provisions that applied to both substances. We captured distinct local alcohol-cannabis policy approaches using latent class analysis, and examined this classification in relation to local demographic, socioeconomic, political, and retail market characteristics.

Results

All 241 localities permitted alcohol sales, while 71% banned cannabis sales. Among those that did not ban cannabis sales, more stringent alcohol policy scores were associated with more stringent cannabis policy scores (linear regression coefficient: 0.16 [95% CI: 0.07, 0.25]). Local governments rarely adopted the same provisions for alcohol and cannabis (e.g., limits on hours of sale, advertising restrictions), and only two regulated the co-location of cannabis and alcohol outlets. Localities that were restrictive on alcohol yet permissive on cannabis (12%) were more urban, politically progressive, and had more low-income and racial/ethnic minority residents. Localities that were more permissive on alcohol and restrictive on cannabis (51%) were more socioeconomically advantaged.

Conclusion

We found few similarities between local alcohol and cannabis control policies. California's experience suggests that, as governments around the world legalize cannabis, lessons learned from regulating alcohol are not routinely applied to cannabis, particularly in communities distinguished by high social and economic advantages.

Background

Employees with fluoridated drinking water access at work can reap oral health benefits. The purpose of this study was to assess the availability, appeal, and promotion of fluoridated tap water in publicly accessible spaces compared with retail beverages at the University of California, San Francisco.

Methods

The authors collected information on beverages available in publicly accessible spaces at University of California, San Francisco hospitals and campuses in San Francisco, California, from December 2019 through February 2020 using a web-based survey tool. Data collected included fluoridated water and retail beverage locations; type of water or retail beverage source; number of water sources per station; cleanliness, flow, and any obstruction of water sources; proximity of water stations to retail beverage locations; signage near the beverage locations about water and beverage consumption; and type of retail beverages available.

Results

Fluoridated water stations were identified in 230 locations and had 377 water sources (for example, traditional drinking fountain and motion-sensor bottle-filling station). One water station was available for every 80 students and employees; however, 25% were obstructed, dirty, or had unsatisfactory flow. Approximately 1 in 5 watercoolers lacked disposable cups. Of 41 retail beverage locations identified, 29% had a water station within sight. Only 11% of beverage locations had signage encouraging healthier beverage choices.

Conclusions

A systematic assessment of work site access to fluoridated water can provide actionable evidence to improve availability, appeal, and promotion.

Practical implications

This study provides a model to assess work site availability of fluoridated drinking water that can be used for future evaluations.

Background

Cannabis outlets may affect health and health disparities. Local governments can regulate outlets, but little is known about the effectiveness of local policies in limiting outlet densities and discouraging disproportionate placement of outlets in vulnerable neighborhoods.

Methods

For 241 localities in California, we measured seven policies pertaining to density or location of recreational cannabis outlets. We geocoded outlets using web-scraped data from the online finder Weedmaps between 2018 and 2020. We applied Bayesian spatiotemporal models to evaluate associations of local cannabis policies with Census block group-level outlet counts, accounting for confounders and spatial autocorrelation. We assessed whether associations differed by block group median income or racial-ethnic composition.

Results

Seventy-six percent of localities banned recreational cannabis outlets. Bans were associated with fewer outlets, particularly in block groups with higher median income, fewer Hispanic residents, and more White and Asian residents. Outlets were disproportionately located in block groups with lower median income [posterior RR (95% credible interval): 0.76 (0.70, 0.82) per $10,000], more Hispanic residents [1.05 (1.02, 1.09) per 5%], and fewer Black residents [0.91 (0.83, 0.98) per 5%]. For the six policies in jurisdictions permitting outlets, two policies were associated with fewer outlets and two with more; two policy associations were uninformative. For these policies, we observed no consistent heterogeneity in associations by median income or racial-ethnic composition.

Conclusions

Some local cannabis policies in California are associated with lower cannabis outlet densities, but are unlikely to deter disproportionate placement of outlets in racial-ethnic minority and low-income neighborhoods.

Objectives. To assess whether cannabis control policies that may protect public health were adopted evenly across California localities with differing sociodemographic compositions. Methods. From November 2020 to January 2021, we measured cannabis control policies for 241 localities across California and linked them to data on the characteristics of the communities affected by these policies. We evaluated whether disadvantaged communities were more likely to allow cannabis businesses and less likely to be covered by policies designed to protect public health. Results. Localities with all-out bans on cannabis businesses (65% of localities) were disproportionately high-education (55.8% vs 50.5% with any college) and low-poverty (24.3% vs 34.2%), with fewer Black (4.4% vs 6.9%) and Latinx (45.6% vs 50.3%) residents. Among localities that allowed retail cannabis businesses (28%), there were more cannabis control policies in localities with more high-income and Black residents, although the specific policies varied. Conclusions. Cannabis control policies are unequally distributed across California localities. If these policies protect health, inequities may be exacerbated. Public Health Implications. Uniform adoption of recommended cannabis control policies may help limit any inequitable health impacts of cannabis legalization. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(11):1640-1650. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307041).

Objective

To examine the effectiveness of a workplace sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) sales ban on reducing SSB consumption in employees, including those with cardiometabolic disease risk factors.

Design

A controlled trial of ethnically diverse, full-time employees who consumed SSB heavily (sales ban n 315; control n 342). Outcomes included standardised measures of change in SSB consumption in the workplace (primary) and at home between baseline and 6 months post-sales ban.

Setting

Sutter Health, a large non-profit healthcare delivery system in Northern California.

Participants

Full-time employees at Sutter Health screened for heavy SSB consumption.

Results

Participants were 66·1 % non-White. On average, participants consumed 34·7 ounces (about 1 litre) of SSB per d, and the majority had an elevated baseline BMI (mean = 29·5). In adjusted regression analyses, those exposed to a workplace SSB sales ban for 6 months consumed 2·7 (95 % CI -4·9, -0·5) fewer ounces of SSB per d while at work, and 4·3 (95 % CI -8·4, -0·2) fewer total ounces per d, compared to controls. Sales ban participants with an elevated BMI or waist circumference had greater post-intervention reductions in workplace SSB consumption.

Conclusions

Workplace sales bans can reduce SSB consumption in ethnically diverse employee populations, including those at higher risk for cardiometabolic disease.

Background

Cannabis exposures reported to the California Poison Control System increased following the initiation of recreational cannabis sales on 1 January 2018 (i.e., "commercialization"). We evaluated whether local cannabis control policies adopted by 2021 were associated with shifts in harmful cannabis exposures.

Methods

Using cannabis control policies collected for all 539 California cities and counties in 2020-2021, we applied a differences-in-differences design with negative binomial regression to test the association of policies with harmful cannabis exposures reported to California Poison Control System (2011-2020), before and after commercialization. We considered three policy categories: bans on storefront recreational retail cannabis businesses, overall restrictiveness, and specific recommended provisions (restricting product types or potency, packaging and labeling restrictions, and server training requirements).

Results

Localities that ultimately banned storefront recreational retail cannabis businesses had fewer harmful cannabis exposures for children aged <13 years (rate ratio = 0.82; 95% confidence interval = 0.65, 1.02), but not for people aged >13 years (rate ratio = 0.97; 95% confidence interval = 0.85, 1.11). Of 167 localities ultimately permitting recreational cannabis sales, overall restrictiveness was not associated with harmful cannabis exposures among children aged <13 years, but for people aged >13 years, a 1-standard deviation increase in ultimate restrictiveness was associated with fewer harmful cannabis exposures (rate ratio = 0.93; 95% confidence interval = 0.86, 1.01). For recommended provisions, estimates were generally too imprecise to detect associations with harmful cannabis exposures.

Conclusion

Bans on storefront retail and other restrictive approaches to regulating recreational cannabis may be associated with fewer harmful cannabis exposures for some age groups following statewide commercialization.

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic led to important indirect health and social harms in addition to deaths and morbidity due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. These indirect impacts, such as increased depression and substance abuse, can have persistent effects over the life course. Estimated health and cost outcomes of such conditions and mitigation strategies may guide public health responses.

Methods

We developed a cost-effectiveness framework to evaluate societal costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) lost due to six health-related indirect effects of COVID-19 in California. Short- and long-term outcomes were evaluated for the adult population. We identified one evidence-based mitigation strategy for each condition and estimated QALYs gained, intervention costs, and savings from averted health-related harms. Model data were derived from literature review, public data, and expert opinion.

Results

Pandemic-associated increases in prevalence across these six conditions were estimated to lead to over 192,000 QALYs lost and to approach $7 billion in societal costs per million population over the life course of adults. The greatest costs and QALYs lost per million adults were due to adult depression. All mitigation strategies assessed saved both QALYs and costs, with five strategies achieving savings within one year. The greatest net savings over 10 years would be achieved by addressing depression ($242 million) and excessive alcohol use ($107 million).

Discussion

The COVID-19 pandemic is leading to significant human suffering and societal costs due to its indirect effects. Policymakers have an opportunity to reduce societal costs and health harms by implementing mitigation strategies.