Cannabis industry uses familiar tactics from tobacco and alcohol to fight THC potency regulation

Analysis of industry testimony in Washington State found cannabis companies use three main strategies to oppose THC potency limits: threatening economic consequences, distracting from the issue, and discrediting the supporting science.

Carlini, Beatriz H et al.·Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs·2024·n/aQualitative Study
RTHC-05177Qualitativen/a2024RETHINKTHC RESEARCH DATABASErethinkthc.com/research

Quick Facts

Study Type
Qualitative Study
Evidence
n/a
Sample
Not reported

What This Study Found

Three rhetorical strategies dominated industry opposition to high-THC regulation: threatening (economic harm, public health consequences, undermining voter will), distracting (introducing tangential topics), and discrediting (attacking the science or its advocates). The most common was economic threats.

Key Numbers

41 testimonies from 33 industry actors analyzed. 3 public bill hearings and 1 work session examined. Time period: 2020-2023. Three main rhetorical strategies identified.

How They Did This

Deductive thematic analysis of 41 testimonies from 33 cannabis industry actors across 3 public bill hearings and one legislative work session in Washington State between 2020 and 2023. The codebook was informed by documented strategies from alcohol, tobacco, and sugar-sweetened beverage industries.

Why This Research Matters

Understanding industry opposition tactics helps public health advocates develop effective counterarguments. The parallels with tobacco and alcohol industry rhetoric suggest cannabis industry lobbying follows predictable patterns that can be anticipated and addressed.

The Bigger Picture

As more states and countries consider cannabis potency regulations, knowing how the industry pushes back is valuable. The finding that cannabis companies borrow directly from Big Tobacco and Big Alcohol playbooks provides a roadmap for health advocates preparing for these debates.

What This Study Doesn't Tell Us

Only examined Washington State hearings. Industry testimony is public-facing and strategic, so it may not reflect private lobbying efforts. The deductive framework was based on other industries, potentially missing cannabis-specific strategies.

Questions This Raises

  • ?Are these same rhetorical strategies appearing in other states considering potency limits?
  • ?How effective are these tactics at influencing legislators?
  • ?What counterarguments have been most successful at overcoming industry opposition?

Trust & Context

Key Stat:
3 main industry strategies: threaten, distract, discredit
Evidence Grade:
Qualitative analysis of public testimony. Evidence grading does not apply to this type of policy research, but the systematic analysis provides useful documentation of industry tactics.
Study Age:
Published in 2024 analyzing testimony from 2020-2023.
Original Title:
Threaten, Distract, and Discredit: Cannabis Industry Rhetoric to Defeat Regulation of High-THC Cannabis Products in Washington State.
Published In:
Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 85(3), 322-329 (2024)
Database ID:
RTHC-05177

Evidence Hierarchy

Meta-Analysis / Systematic Review
Randomized Controlled Trial
Cohort / Case-Control
Cross-Sectional / ObservationalSnapshot without intervening
This study
Case Report / Animal Study

Uses interviews or focus groups to understand experiences in depth.

What do these levels mean? →

Frequently Asked Questions

How does the cannabis industry fight potency limits?

The study found three main tactics: threatening economic harm and public safety consequences, distracting by introducing unrelated topics, and discrediting the scientific evidence or researchers supporting regulation.

Are these the same tactics used by tobacco companies?

Yes. The researchers specifically found that cannabis industry actors adapted rhetorical strategies previously documented in tobacco, alcohol, and sugar-sweetened beverage industry opposition to regulation.

Read More on RethinkTHC

Cite This Study

RTHC-05177·https://rethinkthc.com/research/RTHC-05177

APA

Carlini, Beatriz H; Kellum, Lyndsey B; Garrett, Sharon B; Nims, Lexi N. (2024). Threaten, Distract, and Discredit: Cannabis Industry Rhetoric to Defeat Regulation of High-THC Cannabis Products in Washington State.. Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 85(3), 322-329. https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.23-00277

MLA

Carlini, Beatriz H, et al. "Threaten, Distract, and Discredit: Cannabis Industry Rhetoric to Defeat Regulation of High-THC Cannabis Products in Washington State.." Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 2024. https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.23-00277

RethinkTHC

RethinkTHC Research Database. "Threaten, Distract, and Discredit: Cannabis Industry Rhetori..." RTHC-05177. Retrieved from https://rethinkthc.com/research/carlini-2024-threaten-distract-and-discredit

Access the Original Study

Study data sourced from PubMed, a service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

This study breakdown was produced by the RethinkTHC research team. We analyze and report published research findings without making health recommendations. All interpretations are based solely on the published abstract and study data.