Dataset Information

Long-term effects of minimum legal drinking age laws on marijuana and other illicit drug use in adulthood.

ABSTRACT: Exposure to permissive minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) laws (ability to purchase alcohol <21 years) during adolescence can have long-term effects, including heavy alcohol use or alcohol use disorders as adults. We examined whether exposure to permissive MLDA laws during adolescence has long-term effects on illicit drug use and disorders in adulthood.Participants from the 2004-2012 National Survey of Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) were linked with historical state MLDA laws. Participants born in 1949-1972 (age 31-63 years at observation, n = 110,300) were analyzed because they came of legal age for alcohol purchase when changes occurred in state MLDA laws. Logistic regression was used to model drug use measures as a function of exposure to permissive MLDA during adolescence, adjusting for state and birth-year fixed effects, demographics, and salient state characteristics.Rates of past month use, past year use, and abuse/dependence of marijuana were 4.7%, 7.8%, and 1.2%, respectively. Rates of past month use, past year use, and abuse/dependence of illicit drugs other than marijuana were 2.9%, 6.2%, and 0.7%, respectively. Among the full sample, exposure to permissive MLDA laws was not significantly associated with drug use or abuse/dependence in adulthood. Men exposed to permissive MLDA laws were at 20% increased odds of past year illicit drug use (aOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.09-1.32).Restricting alcohol access during adolescence did not increase long-term drug use. Allowing the purchase of alcohol among those less than 21 years of age could increase the risk of drug use later in life.

SUBMITTER: Krauss MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4361331 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Long-term effects of minimum legal drinking age laws on marijuana and other illicit drug use in adulthood.

Krauss Melissa J MJ Cavazos-Rehg Patricia A PA Agrawal Arpana A Bierut Laura J LJ Grucza Richard A RA

Drug and alcohol dependence 20150210

<h4>Background</h4>Exposure to permissive minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) laws (ability to purchase alcohol <21 years) during adolescence can have long-term effects, including heavy alcohol use or alcohol use disorders as adults. We examined whether exposure to permissive MLDA laws during adolescence has long-term effects on illicit drug use and disorders in adulthood.<h4>Methods</h4>Participants from the 2004-2012 National Survey of Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) were linked with historical stat ...[more]

PMID: 25707705

Similar Datasets

Project description:Many studies have found that earlier drinking initiation predicts higher risk of later alcohol and substance use problems, but the causal relationship between age of initiation and later risk of substance use disorder remains unknown.We use a "natural experiment" study design to compare the 12-month prevalence of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fourth Edition, alcohol and substance use disorders among adult subjects exposed to different minimum legal drinking age laws minimum legal drinking age in the 1970s and 1980s. The sample pools 33,869 respondents born in the United States 1948 to 1970, drawn from 2 nationally representative cross-sectional surveys: the 1991 National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiological Survey (NLAES) and the 2001 National Epidemiological Study of Alcohol and Related Conditions. Analyses control for state and birth year fixed effects, age at assessment, alcohol taxes, and other demographic and social background factors.Adults who had been legally allowed to purchase alcohol before age 21 were more likely to meet criteria for an alcohol use disorder [odds ratio (OR) 1.31, 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) 1.15 to 1.46, p < 0.0001] or another drug use disorder (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.44, p = 0.003) within the past-year, even among subjects in their 40s and 50s. There were no significant differences in effect estimates by respondent gender, black or Hispanic ethnicity, age, birth cohort, or self-reported age of initiation of regular drinking; furthermore, the effect estimates were little changed by inclusion of age of initiation as a potential mediating variable in the multiple regression models.Exposure to a lower minimum legal purchase age was associated with a significantly higher risk of a past-year alcohol or other substance use disorder, even among respondents in their 40s or 50s. However, this association does not seem to be explained by age of initiation of drinking, per se. Instead, it seems plausible that frequency or intensity of drinking in late adolescence may have long-term effects on adult substance use patterns.

Project description:ImportanceOver the last 25 years, illicit cannabis use and cannabis use disorders have increased among US adults, and 28 states have passed medical marijuana laws (MML). Little is known about MML and adult illicit cannabis use or cannabis use disorders considered over time.ObjectiveTo present national data on state MML and degree of change in the prevalence of cannabis use and disorders.Design, participants, and settingDifferences in the degree of change between those living in MML states and other states were examined using 3 cross-sectional US adult surveys: the National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey (NLAES; 1991-1992), the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC; 2001-2002), and the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III; 2012-2013). Early-MML states passed MML between NLAES and NESARC ("earlier period"). Late-MML states passed MML between NESARC and NESARC-III ("later period").Main outcomes and measuresPast-year illicit cannabis use and DSM-IV cannabis use disorder.ResultsOverall, from 1991-1992 to 2012-2013, illicit cannabis use increased significantly more in states that passed MML than in other states (1.4-percentage point more; SE, 0.5; P = .004), as did cannabis use disorders (0.7-percentage point more; SE, 0.3; P = .03). In the earlier period, illicit cannabis use and disorders decreased similarly in non-MML states and in California (where prevalence was much higher to start with). In contrast, in remaining early-MML states, the prevalence of use and disorders increased. Remaining early-MML and non-MML states differed significantly for use (by 2.5 percentage points; SE, 0.9; P = .004) and disorder (1.1 percentage points; SE, 0.5; P = .02). In the later period, illicit use increased by the following percentage points: never-MML states, 3.5 (SE, 0.5); California, 5.3 (SE, 1.0); Colorado, 7.0 (SE, 1.6); other early-MML states, 2.6 (SE, 0.9); and late-MML states, 5.1 (SE, 0.8). Compared with never-MML states, increases in use were significantly greater in late-MML states (1.6-percentage point more; SE, 0.6; P = .01), California (1.8-percentage point more; SE, 0.9; P = .04), and Colorado (3.5-percentage point more; SE, 1.5; P = .03). Increases in cannabis use disorder, which was less prevalent, were smaller but followed similar patterns descriptively, with change greater than never-MML states in California (1.0-percentage point more; SE, 0.5; P = .06) and Colorado (1.6-percentage point more; SE, 0.8; P = .04).Conclusions and relevanceMedical marijuana laws appear to have contributed to increased prevalence of illicit cannabis use and cannabis use disorders. State-specific policy changes may also have played a role. While medical marijuana may help some, cannabis-related health consequences associated with changes in state marijuana laws should receive consideration by health care professionals and the public.

Project description:Importance:As marijuana continues to be legalized in many states, little is known about best regulatory practice, exposing the population to significant potential harm. Objective:To assess the extent to which potential best practices, including those from tobacco control, were incorporated into state and local marijuana policies in California. Design and Setting:California legalized medical marijuana in 1996 and adult recreational use in 2016, effective in January 2018. A cross-sectional study with data collection and analysis from February 1 to November 30, 2019, measured the adoption of potential demand reduction and youth protection best practices, including restrictions on sales, products, marketing, warnings, and taxation. Laws in effect by January 31, 2019, were verified and all 539 California local jurisdictions were studied. Main Outcomes and Measures:Adoption of potential best practices in marijuana laws for demand reduction and youth protection. Results:The laws of 534 of California's 539 jurisdictions (99%) were successfully identified; 263 of these 534 jurisdictions (49%) allowed any retail sale of marijuana, covering 57% of the state's population. More than one-third of jurisdictions allow sales of marijuana for adult recreational use (203 of 534 [38%]); of those, 122 allow storefront dispensaries and 81 allow sales by delivery only. A total of 257 of 534 jurisdictions (48%) allow medical sales. Of 147 jurisdictions allowing medical or adult use dispensaries, 93 (63%) limited the number of licenses, with a mean of 1 store for every 19?058 residents (range, 154-355?143). The state imposed no limits on number of dispensaries or deliverers. Forty-two jurisdictions increased the state-specified distances required between dispensaries and schools. Only 8 jurisdictions allowing retail sales imposed restrictions on products exceeding state regulations; 1 prohibited sale of flavored products, 3 prohibited sale of marijuana-infused beverages, and 5 imposed additional restrictions on edible marijuana products. No jurisdictions limited potency of products sold, although 1 established a potency-linked tax. The state did not limit or tax potency, except for establishing a standard 10-mg dose of tetrahydrocannabinol for edible marijuana products, nor did they limit manufacturing or sale of flavored products. The state required only a health warning in 6-point font on packages. Twenty-seven jurisdictions required additional health warnings in stores or on packages, 27 allowed onsite consumption of marijuana products, and 13 allowed marijuana-related events. More than half of jurisdictions legalizing any cannabis commerce (154 of 289 [53%]) did not tax marijuana locally and little revenue was captured for prevention. Much of the state excise and cultivation taxes is slated for youth substance use prevention and treatment. Conclusions and Relevance:In implementing legalization of marijuana in California, local policies varied widely. Where marijuana was legalized, many lessons from tobacco control to reduce demand, limit harm, and prevent youth use were not adopted, potentially creating greater risk of harm.

Dataset Information

Long-term effects of minimum legal drinking age laws on marijuana and other illicit drug use in adulthood.

Publications

Long-term effects of minimum legal drinking age laws on marijuana and other illicit drug use in adulthood.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure