Higher potency cannabis flower linked to more frequent use and greater addiction risk in California young adults | Research

The takeaway

Among 512 young adult cannabis flower users in California, those who used higher-THC flower reported 3.3 more use days per month and 1.2 higher cannabis use disorder scores per potency level increase, contradicting the idea that people use less of stronger products.

Young cannabis users, policymakers considering potency regulations, and addiction researchers.

Higher potency = 3.3 more use days/month and 1.2 higher addiction scores per potency level

What the researchers found

Each one-point increase in perceived THC potency was associated with 3.33 more use days per month, 0.13 more grams consumed per day, and 1.21 higher CUDIT-R (cannabis use disorder) scores. Nearly half (46.8%) of those who knew their flower potency reported using High or Very High THC flower. About 18.6% did not know their flower's potency.

Why it matters

A common argument in cannabis policy is that people will "titrate" their use of higher-potency products, using less to achieve the same effect. This study directly contradicts that assumption: higher potency was associated with more frequent use, more consumption, and more addiction symptoms, not less.

The numbers in context

512 young adults. 46.8% used High/Very High THC flower. 18.6% did not know potency. Per potency point: +3.33 use days/month (p<0.0001), +0.13 grams/day (p<0.01), +1.21 CUDIT-R score (p<0.0001).

How the study worked

Cross-sectional survey of 512 California young adults (mean age 25.9, 48% female) from a cohort study who reported past-month cannabis flower use. Self-reported perceived THC potency was examined against use frequency, quantity, and CUDIT-R scores using multivariable regression adjusting for demographics.

What this study cannot tell us

Cross-sectional design cannot determine directionality: do people who are already heavier users seek out high-potency flower, or does high potency drive heavier use? Perceived potency may not match actual THC content. Self-reported use is subject to bias. California-specific sample may not generalize.

How to read the evidence

Cross-sectional survey of 512 young adults with multivariable adjustment, limited by self-reported potency and inability to establish causality.

When this study was published

Published in 2025, using 2022-2023 survey data.

The bigger picture

As legal cannabis markets trend toward higher-potency products, these findings raise public health concerns. If higher-potency users consume more, not less, then the cumulative THC exposure in legal markets may be increasing faster than consumption rates alone would suggest. Potency caps or labeling requirements may be warranted.

Questions still open

Would potency caps in legal markets reduce cannabis use disorder rates? Does the failure to titrate apply equally to other product types (edibles, concentrates)? Are the 18.6% who do not know their product's potency at particular risk?

Common questions

Don't people just use less of stronger cannabis?

This study found the opposite. People who used higher-potency flower actually used cannabis more frequently, consumed more per session, and had higher addiction scores. The "titration hypothesis" was not supported.

How many young adults use high-potency flower?

Nearly half (47%) of those who knew their flower's potency reported using High or Very High THC products. About 19% did not know what potency they were using.

Read the original research

High potency cannabis flower use is associated with heavier consumption and risk for cannabis use disorder among young adults in California, United States.

Addiction (Abingdon, England), 120(11), 2329-2334

View on PubMed ↗Publisher’s paper ↗

Citation

Dunbar, Michael S; D'Amico, Elizabeth J; Seelam, Rachana; Davis, Jordan P; Pedersen, Eric R; Rodriguez, Anthony; Kilmer, Beau. (2025). High potency cannabis flower use is associated with heavier consumption and risk for cannabis use disorder among young adults in California, United States.. Addiction (Abingdon, England), 120(11), 2329-2334. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.70118