Pacula Rosalie Liccardo, Hunt Priscillia, Boustead Anne
RAND Corporation.
J Drug Policy Anal. 2014 Dec;7(1):1-19. doi: 10.1515/jdpa-2014-0001.
When voters in two US states approved the recreational use of marijuana in 2012, public debates for how best to promote and protect public health and safety started drawing implications from states' medical marijuana laws. However, many of the discussions were simplified to the notion that states either have a medical marijuana law or do not; little reference was made to the fact that legal provisions differ across states. This study seeks to clarify the characteristics of medical marijuana laws in place since 1990 that are most relevant to consumers/patients and categorizes those aspects most likely to affect the prevalence of use, and consequently the intensity of public health and welfare effects. Evidence shows treating medical marijuana laws as homogeneous across states is misleading and does not reflect the reality of medical marijuana lawmaking. This variation likely has implications for use and health outcomes, and thus states' public health.
2012年，当美国两个州的选民批准娱乐性使用大麻时，关于如何最好地促进和保护公众健康与安全的公开辩论开始从各州的医用大麻法律中寻找依据。然而，许多讨论被简化为各州要么有医用大麻法律，要么没有这一观念；几乎没有人提及各州法律规定存在差异这一事实。本研究旨在阐明自1990年以来实施的与消费者/患者最相关的医用大麻法律的特征，并对那些最有可能影响使用流行率、进而影响公共卫生和福利影响强度的方面进行分类。有证据表明，将各州的医用大麻法律视为相同是具有误导性的，并且不能反映医用大麻立法的实际情况。这种差异可能对使用情况和健康结果产生影响，进而影响各州的公共卫生。
