General Santos buying marijuana

__________________________

📍 Verified store!

📍 Guarantees! Quality! Reviews!

__________________________

▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼

▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲

General Santos buying marijuana

Official websites use. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Address for Correspondence : Patricia A. Cavazos-Rehg, Ph. Louis, Missouri Phone: Fax: rehgp psychiatry. In this study, we investigate the marketing tactics being used on marijuana dispensary websites in the U. One hundred dispensary websites were randomly selected from 10 states that allowed the legal use of medical or recreational marijuana and had at least 10 operational dispensaries. Three dispensaries were excluded due to non-functioning websites, leaving a sample of 97 dispensaries. Sixty-seven percent made health claims pertaining to medical conditions that could be treated by their marijuana products, with moderate or conclusive evidence to support their claims. Our findings indicate that marijuana dispensary websites are easily accessible to youth. In addition, only a small amount of the websites advised consumers about possible side effects or contraindications. This study suggests the need for surveillance of marijuana commercialization and online advertising especially in the context of state policy reforms. Marijuana remains illegal at the federal level, but the movement to legalize marijuana at the state level has gained momentum across the U. As legalization shifts towards leniency, businesses involved with the growing sales of marijuana will undoubtedly expand. A field of research indicates that exposure to alcohol and tobacco advertising can shift attitudes towards normalization of use and increase likelihood of use, and this advertising disproportionately targets youth and adolescents Anderson et al. Thus, in consideration of the expanding marijuana market and the known potential risks associated with marijuana use including dependence, respiratory and cardiovascular risks, cognitive impairment, and increased motor vehicle accidents Volkow et al. Numerous states e. Still, marijuana advertisements exist online and on social media, where there are minimal security measures to prevent their viewing among underage youth Bierut et al. Underage exposure to marijuana advertisements can be especially concerning when it coincides with dispensary practices that facilitate easy access to marijuana. Currently, there is relative consensus that marijuana reduces nausea and vomiting, helps with chronic pain, and improves spastic symptoms for multiple sclerosis patients National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, Additionally, related studies on alcohol and tobacco online vendors suggest that dispensaries may employ special promotions including price discounts and loyalty programs to attract new consumers and retain loyal ones. This exploratory and timely study is the first known of its kind to investigate how both medical and recreational marijuana dispensaries are currently being advertised online by dispensary websites across the U. Our study has public health relevance when considering the conclusive alcohol and tobacco studies that associate advertising exposures to greater intent to use these products, their more frequent use, and their use in greater quantities Grube, ; US Department of Health and Human Services, State government agencies were contacted via phone when a list could not be obtained from their website. In such cases, when a list of dispensaries could not be obtained from the state agency, a list of dispensaries for the state was drawn from Leafly. This purposive sample included 3 states that had legalized both medical and recreational use. For states that allowed both medical and recreational dispensaries 3 of the 10 states: CO, OR, WA , we randomly chose 5 dispensaries on the medical dispensary list and 5 dispensaries on the recreational dispensary list to total 10 within that respective state. Note, some states could have both medical and recreational licenses. If a dispensary did not have a website, it was randomly replaced with another dispensary until one with a website was identified. Arizona only releases a list of registered dispensaries to registered patients. Both Michigan and Montana did not legally allow dispensaries, but operational dispensaries were found on Leafly. Three members of the research team initially reviewed approximately 20 dispensary websites from across the U. The three team members discussed and refined the codes, coming to an agreement that these codes would adequately address the purposes of the content analysis and that no relevant codes were missing or irrelevant codes included. An additional 20 dispensary websites from across the U. Coding discrepancies from this first set of dispensary websites were then used to further refine the codebook before the full set of dispensaries was coded. The domains for coding are described below. The presence of an age verification process for entering the website was coded, including whether this involved a merely checking a box to indicate that the viewer is of legal age 18 or 21 years, depending on whether medical or recreational marijuana was sold , b entering a birth date, or c stricter verifications than entering a birth date. The coder noted whether a customer could order online for delivery i. Most websites provided menus of marijuana products available from the dispensary. These menus were reviewed to identify specific claims that were made by the dispensary describing what medical conditions could be treated with the marijuana product. Each health claim was documented from a long list of potential medical conditions e. The full list of these medical conditions can be found in Table 2. If menus were provided for more than one location for a dispensary, the first menu advertised i. Separately, coders documented whether health claims were made on pages of the website outside of the product menu. Italics represent conditions that have limited evidence associated with marijuana therapies. Non-italics represent conditions that have little or no evidence associated with marijuana therapies National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Each specific type of health claim was recorded as being linked to a specific type of marijuana product, including flower-based products i. When coding health claims outside of the product menu, if the health claim was not made for a specific product type, it was recorded as a general marijuana health claim. The research team documented whether any negative side effects following marijuana use were mentioned anywhere on the website e. In addition, the presence of warnings about contraindications was also coded, including warnings about using marijuana and driving or using marijuana if the customer is pregnant or breastfeeding, has mental disorders, or other contraindications. Selling or promoting novelty items was documented. Providing links to social media sites was also noted. Policy data was retrieved from Leafly. Each dispensary website, the unit of analysis, was coded by two of six trained research team members. For each dispensary coded, one of the coders was a senior member of the research team and the other was a junior member of the research team. Senior team members have advanced degrees in psychology and public health and prior content analysis experience Bierut et al. REDCap is a secure web-based application supporting data capture and management Harris et al. Separately, health claims for each dispensary were documented in Excel spreadsheets. In order to address coding discrepancies, the two coders assigned to each dispensary engaged in a dialogue to come to an agreement on the final assigned codes. We have also provided a clear description of the states and dispensaries of interest. While our results may not be transferable to states with a small number of dispensaries or those without an online presence, our results are representative of dispensaries with an online presence in states with an established dispensary system. The prevalence of the coded advertising practices used by dispensaries was compared by type of dispensary, which was defined based on whether the dispensary was licensed to sell medical marijuana only or both medical and recreational marijuana. In states where both medical and recreational were legal, it was uncommon for a dispensary to sell only recreational marijuana among the dispensaries included in our sample; thus, only one dispensary of this nature was included in our sample. The prevalence of advertising practices was also compared across the presence of specific relevant state advertising policies e. Among the dispensary websites chosen for analysis, three were excluded because one site was a Facebook page i. We did not replace these three excluded websites. Among these 97 websites, 72 had only a medical license, 24 had a license for both medical and recreational sales, and 1 dispensary in CO had only a recreational license excluded from comparisons by dispensary type. One dispensary required the viewer to enter their birthdate before entering the website, and then allowed us to enter the site after entering a legal age. Two dispensary websites required a username and password that needed to be obtained by registering with the dispensary both of these dispensaries were in NM ; because we could not enter and view the content of these two sites, they were excluded from further analysis. In addition, one dispensary website required the viewer to check a box to verify legal age but did not allow us to enter the site even after entering a legal age; this dispensary was also excluded from further analysis. The types and frequencies of health claims made on the dispensary websites are shown in Table 2. The health claims made on product menus are summarized in the top half of Table 2. Notably, among the 63 that made health claims on the menu, 21 of the menus were powered by Leafly. In these cases, the menu offerings and prices differed between dispensaries, but items that were offered on multiple dispensaries had identical descriptions, meaning that the health claims made for these individual products were the same. Figure 2 displays the side effects and warnings of contraindications provided to consumers on marijuana dispensary websites. Less commonly mentioned side effects included cognitive or psychomotor impairment, respiratory problems, the potential for addiction, and rapid heartbeat. Other rarely mentioned contraindications were use of marijuana when pregnant or breastfeeding or among those with a mental disorder. Two states, OR and WA, had policies that indicated that advertisements must contain specific warnings. This finding corroborates research on alcohol, tobacco, and e-cigarette websites, which similarly found a low percentage of online vendors utilizing age restrictions Jenssen et al. The use of age verifications has been encouraged as a means to prevent children from accessing inappropriate content online; however, the research is mixed in terms of validating the efficacy of the age verifications Jones et al. As a whole, there is still much to learn about how advertising marijuana online entices consumers to subsequently use marijuana in a manner that increases the risk for negative side effects. Despite a lack of state policies on marijuana health claims, we did observe that dispensaries that engaged in this practice had moderate or conclusive evidence to support most of their health claims made about marijuana National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, This recommendation was recently endorsed by the Food and Drug Administration FDA , which warned four companies selling marijuana-derived dietary supplements to stop touting their marijuana products as cures for cancer, a common but unproven claim in the industry Kaplan, The alcohol and tobacco industries also illustrate that distinguishing between qualifying conditions with and without evidence is a shared responsibility. Although most of the burden to distinguish between conditions with evidence and conditions without evidence may fall on the prescribing physician, the advertising practices of the alcohol and tobacco industries are regulated in order to minimize potential harms associated with their use. We also found that dispensary websites rarely listed adverse side effects such as cognitive problems, early onset of psychotic symptoms, addiction, and altered brain development that could follow marijuana consumption, which would be especially important for young marijuana users who are perusing dispensary sites Batalla et al. Notably, however, dispensaries were significantly more likely to list the potential consequences of marijuana use when the states in which they were located had explicit policies that encouraged this practice. Thus, expanding this policy across all states where marijuana is legally sold may be worthwhile for increasing awareness about the potential adverse side effects that follow marijuana use. The efficacy of increasing the affordability of marijuana to boost its sales is unknown; however, related campaigns have benefited the alcohol and tobacco industries by gaining market share, attracting new users, and retaining loyal consumers Altman et al. Notably, policymakers advocate for alcohol and tobacco price inflations to reduce population-level use and related harms for e. Likewise, we observed that the encouragement of marijuana for recreational use i. It is possible that similar patterns may emerge in marijuana advertising, and it is important to prevent such tactics in order to help reduce existing health disparities. Developing a better understanding of this type of advertising and marketing, its intent, and its effect on young people is necessary in the path to preventing vulnerable populations from being targeted by marketers, especially the marketing of potentially harmful products. This is particularly applicable in the relatively new area of marijuana advertising, as marijuana becomes increasingly legal in the U. Users reporting more positive attitudes toward the anti-marijuana ads were less likely to report intention to use marijuana and continued use of it at 1-year follow-up. These findings may inform designers of persuasion-based prevention campaigns, guiding pre-implementation efforts in the design of ads that target groups find appealing and thus influential. This study has some limitations. We chose to sample 10 websites from each of the 10 states to reach a total sample size of nearly websites in aggregate that were coded. Our approach was not intended to provide definitive conclusions of all dispensary practices found online, and it may be that accounting for trends over time i. We additionally understand that our sampling strategy limits the generalizability of the results obtained in this study. Nevertheless, our exploratory study offers a starting point on this timely research topic and delineates some important trends of how both medical and recreational marijuana dispensaries across the U. Given that the marijuana industry is evolving quickly, we recommend that future studies work to expand upon our pilot findings. We eliminated two websites that required a medical marijuana card before looking at the products; the possibility exists that these websites may have been more responsible, and removing these might have skewed our data. Likewise, new dispensary websites are constantly coming out, and these websites are changing frequently, but we could only assess the data up until a certain point in time. Furthermore, examining dispensary advertising practices on their respective websites is only one outlet by which these advertisements may occur online; evaluating popular marijuana websites that market marijuana retailers online i. Despite limitations, we contribute to an expanding body of knowledge that is important to build upon in the future with regard to improving policy and counter-marketing efforts to reduce or prevent marijuana use-related harms. The present study takes important first steps toward investigating the online advertising practices of dispensaries within both recreational and medical states across the country in order to inform regulations to protect youth and other high-risk populations and against health claims that lack sufficient evidence. Future research should continue the surveillance of marijuana commercialization and online advertising, especially in the context of state policy reforms. The authors thank Marisel Ponton for her assistance in coding the marijuana dispensary websites. Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest: One of the authors, Dr. Bierut, is listed as an inventor on Issued U. All other authors declare they have no conflicts of interest. Ethical Approval: This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. Informed consent : Not applicable. This study did not involve human participants. This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article. As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Prev Sci. Published in final edited form as: Prev Sci. Find articles by Patricia A Cavazos-Rehg. Melissa J Krauss , M. Find articles by Melissa J Krauss. Elizabeth Cahn , B. Find articles by Elizabeth Cahn. Kiriam Escobar Lee , M. Find articles by Kiriam Escobar Lee. Erin Ferguson , B. Find articles by Erin Ferguson. Biva Rajbhandari , M. Find articles by Biva Rajbhandari. Shaina J Sowles , M. Find articles by Shaina J Sowles. Glennon M Floyd , M. Find articles by Glennon M Floyd. Carla Berg , Ph. Find articles by Carla Berg. Laura J Bierut , M. Find articles by Laura J Bierut. PMC Copyright notice. The publisher's version of this article is available at Prev Sci. State Medical use legal? Open in a new tab. Compliance with Ethical Standards. Similar articles. Add to Collections. Create a new collection. Add to an existing collection. Choose a collection Unable to load your collection due to an error Please try again. Add Cancel. Appetite c. Muscle spasms b. Health claims observed within the website, but outside of their menu. AIDS a. Muscle Spasms b. PTSD a.

Marijuana Promotion Online: An Investigation of Dispensary Practices

General Santos buying marijuana

The rampant peddling of marijuana and other prohibited drugs in school premises must be a cause for alarm. Thus, the apprehension of those actively trafficking in these instruments of destruction should be relentlessly pursued. The case now before this court is one of such apprehensions. It deserves prior attention. At about four o'clock in the afternoon of August 9, , Ephraim Englis, an applicant for the Integrated National Police, upon instruction of Sgt. He talked to some students and pretended to be a buyer of marijuana. One of the students pointed to William Domingo as one of those pushing marijuana. He approached Domingo and asked if he had stocks with him for sale. Domingo replied that the price was P Englis agreed to buy two boxes. As he had no stock with him then, Domingo told Englis to meet him at the corner of Recto-Laurel Streets, General Santos City, at six o'clock in the evening of that day with the money. At about six o'clock in the evening at the agreed place, a tricycle marked as 'Pelotin Family' arrived with Domingo as passenger. It stopped in front of Englis. Domingo gave two matchboxes of dried marijuana leaves to Englis who thereafter gave him P Domingo left immediately. Englis gave a signal to Sgt. Martinez and his companions, who were posted about twenty meters away at Claro M. Recto St. Martinez started their jeep and picked up Englis. Thereafter, they chased the tricycle which proceeded towards the plaza. They overtook the tricycle. Martinez asked the driver, John Pelotin, where his companion was. Pelotin pointed to Domingo who was five to ten meters away. Englis approached Domingo whom he identified as the person who handed him the two matchboxes of marijuana. During the custodial interrogation, after having been appraised of their constitutional rights, Pelotin and Domingo executed extrajudicial confessions. Martinez showed Domingo the two matchboxes full of dried marijuana leaves which the latter gave to Englis and Domingo Identified the same. Thus Martinez issued to Domingo a receipt for the two boxes which reads:. Mamerto Martinez PC have this date seized two 2 matchboxes filled with dried marijuana from the possession of William Domingo at about o'clock in the evening, General Santos City. The two matchboxes of marijuana were then indorsed to the PC Laboratory in Davao City for laboratory examination by Lt. Zenaida S. Sabio, forensic chemist. Thereafter, she submitted Chemistry Report No. D 3 wherein it appears that after conducting a dangerous drug test she found the leaves confiscated from Domingo to be positive for marijuana. It was learned in the course of the investigation that at about six o'clock in the evening of August 5, , Domingo and John Pelotin met Jimmy Pelotin, Gregorio and Gonzaga in front of a store in Barrio Obrero. Domingo brought out from his pocket a matchbox containing dried marijuana leaves. Domingo then prepared a marijuana cigarette, lighted it and passed it around. After one stick was consumed, Domingo lighted another stick. Gregorio and Gonzaga stated that after smoking the cigarette, they felt hot and weak. When they asked Domingo what they were smoking, Domingo told them that they were smoking marijuana leaves. Ronald Gregorio and Nilo Gonzaga further admitted that the same incident happened in the same place in the evening of August 8, That about in the evening of August 9, or sometime prior thereto at corner C. Recto-Laurel Streets, General Santos City, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, having in his possession and control two matchboxes of shredded dried marijuana leaves, and without being authorized by law, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously sell said matchboxes of the prohibited drug to prospective buyers and in the act of selling the same, he was apprehended. Page 17, Rollo. About in the evening of August 5, , at Bo. Obrero, General Santos City, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, without being authorized by the law, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously use Indian hemp by smoking sticks of marijuana cigarettes during their pot session. About in the evening of August 8, at Bo. Obrero, General Santos City, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, without being authorized by the law, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously use Indian hemp by smoking sticks of marijuana cigarettes during their pot session. Page 19, Rollo. Jimmy Pelotin remained at large, while Ronald Gregorio and Nilo Gonzaga were discharged to be witnesses for the prosecution. The criminal cases proceeded against William Domingo and John Pelotin. Both cases were jointly tried and after the trial on the merits, a decision was rendered by the trial court on May 12, , the dispositive part of which reads as follows:. Credited in their favor is the full period during which they were undergoing preventive imprisonment in the City Jail during the pendency of this case. Thus, this appeal brought by the accused. In their brief, the appellants assigned the following errors allegedly committed by the court a quo, to wit:. Under the first assigned error appellant Domingo contends that the records show that two matchboxes containing marijuana leaves were taken by Sgt. M from Ephraim Englis inside the P. What the records in fact allow is that it was the appellant who delivered the two matchboxes to English in consideration of which he was duly paid by English. The contraband was turned over by English to Martinez. Under the second and third assigned errors, appellant Domingo argues that there is no showing that the match boxes that were submitted for examination at the P. After a receipt was issued to the appellant by Sgt. Martinez for the two matchboxes of marijuana, the same were placed in a cellophane bag properly marked with the name of William Domingo. On August 9, , it was indorsed by Lt. Warieto A. Thereafter, Lt. Sabio conducted three examinations — physical, chemical and TLC. The examinations showed that the leaves were positive for marijuana. From the circumstances, it appears that safeguards were adopted to ensure that the two matchboxes with contents taken from appellant Domingo were the same ones turned over to the PC laboratory for examination. Appellant Domingo capitalizes on the fact that while in the information it is alleged that he was caught in possession of 'shredded dried marijuana leaves' in the Chemistry Report No. D of Lt. Sabio she described what was submitted for examination 'crushed dried leaves' of marijuana. The said descriptions mean one and the same thing, and as the Solicitor General correctly pointed out, the denomination is just a play of words. Both appellants contend that the confession of witnesses Nilo Gonzaga and Ronald Gregorio are only admissible against them Gonzaga and Gregorio and not against their co-accused. The argument is without merit. Gonzaga and Gregorio testified in court so that certainly their statements are direct evidence against the appellants where the latter were given the opportunity to cross-examine the said witnesses. Appellants then point out that there is no proof of the corpus delicti. Is there any better proof than the admission of appellants that they smoked marijuana leaves? This disposes of the other assigned errors. Serrano, Phil. The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee. Quirico L. Pelotin for defendants-appellants. Page 19, Rollo Jimmy Pelotin remained at large, while Ronald Gregorio and Nilo Gonzaga were discharged to be witnesses for the prosecution. Footnotes 1 Exhibits E, E-1 and A.

General Santos buying marijuana