As families gathered for a rare weekday game last month at Fenway Park, the iconic venue buzzed with excitement as the Boston Red Sox faced off against the Texas Rangers.
As they strolled past vendors peddling sausages and peanuts, their attention was drawn to a troubling sight: advertisements for a cannabis delivery company prominently displayed on trash cans.
This vivid example of cannabis marketing has raised alarms among public health advocates like Amy Turncliff, a noted scientist and activist.
Turncliff expresses deep concern about the implications of such advertising on children and adolescents who are also walking by.
“This is why we don’t allow tobacco advertising on billboards; it reduces the perception of harm, lowers the perception of disapproval, and can increase usage,” she stated.
Having spent years advocating against youth cannabis use, especially regarding high-potency products, Turncliff points to the real-world consequences of these advertisements.
Clinicians treating young patients for addiction confirm that cannabis-related issues are prevalent, with many young people experiencing psychosis, depression, anxiety, and other serious mental health disorders.
In her eyes, the cannabis ads surrounding Fenway Park signal a significant oversight by regulators and lawmakers, who she feels have neglected to implement necessary public health protections since legalization in 2016.
“It’s further evidence that our state isn’t taking public health and youth prevention seriously,” she asserted.
Turncliff isn’t merely focused on advertising regulations; she advocates for stricter potency limits, enhanced warning labels, and public awareness initiatives aimed at educating the public about the dangers cannabis poses to youth.
Despite her continuous lobbying efforts for these changes, Turncliff’s frustration is palpable, especially after speaking to the Legislature’s Joint Committee on Cannabis Policy last month.
“How many parents am I going to have to apologize to on behalf of the state before we actually take some action?” she lamented.
Her concerns face opposition from industry supporters who have dismissed these warnings.
At a 2021 legislative hearing, an attorney representing the cannabis industry characterized such concerns as largely exaggerated, telling lawmakers, “We have a lot of what I would describe as pearl-clutching medical folks who are announcing these dangers because of increased potency. I’m sorry, but THC is biologically incapable of killing a human being, so what are you actually protecting here?”
When asked by 5 Investigates’ Mike Beaudet whether she fits the bill of a concerned parent, Turncliff rebutted, “No, the public has a right and a need to know what the risks are.”
However, Turncliff and her allies in the public health community find themselves significantly outnumbered in this debate.
They confront an industry that generated $1.65 billion in cannabis sales in Massachusetts last year, wielding significant resources to shape public policy.
An investigative review revealed this industry poured $7.2 million into lobbying efforts over the past five years in an attempt to influence legislative outcomes.
Further analysis of campaign contributions uncovered a staggering $409,000 in donations made to politicians in the last five years, although this figure does not account for contributions from industry consultants and lobbyists who may not hold official licenses.
State Rep. Marcus Vaughn, R-Wrentham, is among those pressing for public health-focused cannabis legislation, having introduced bills aimed at limiting THC potency and enhancing warning labels.
He recognizes the industry’s substantial sway: “That’s obviously a possibility. Some of them carry a lot of weight and a lot of money,” Vaughn noted, regarding the potential obstacles these bills may face.
While Vaughn supports the use of cannabis, he emphasizes the need for regulatory measures that ensure products are safe for public consumption.
The responsibility for enforcing industry regulations lies with the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission, which has come under fire from advocates for their perceived lack of urgency in addressing public health issues.
Turncliff and others express frustration with the Commission, asserting that even with a public health-minded commissioner mandated by law, the focus on health priorities seems insufficient.
5 Investigates conducted interviews with Kimberly Roy, the public health commissioner on the Cannabis Control Commission, and Executive Director Travis Ahern.
Roy’s appointment in 2021 was based on her experience managing a school substance use prevention program as the director of external affairs for the Worcester County Sheriff’s Department.
When asked whether the Commission should step up its educational efforts regarding potential cannabis-related risks, Ahern indicated that they have requested funding for public awareness campaigns over the past four years, underscoring their struggle for resources.
“We would love to do more; we try to do as much as we can with the resources we have,” Ahern said regarding their budget constraints.
Yet in the face of increasing revenue from cannabis sales, Ahern confirmed that public awareness efforts have not been prioritized in funding requests for the past five years.
The Commission has voiced their desire to improve their website, citing years without updates, but highlight a lack of resources as a critical barrier.
The interconnectedness between the Commission and the cannabis industry raises further concerns, as it is common for staff members to transition from regulatory roles to positions within cannabis companies.
An executive director, two commission attorneys, and several other staff have made such transitions, stirring scrutiny over potential conflicts of interest.
When asked about this dynamic, Ahern dismissed concerns of undue closeness, stating that if the industry views the Commission as overly stringent and advocates call for complete prohibition, “we’re probably doing something right.”
He added that the state prohibits former commission staff from intervening in cannabis board matters for one year after leaving their positions.
Roy referred to the close relationship as an indicator of expertise rather than a concern, emphasizing the need for knowledgeable professionals in the industry.
Turncliff’s advocacy efforts have been long-standing, dating back to 2019 when she and over 30 scientists raised a “Statement of Concern” to legislators about the public health risks of legal cannabis, especially for younger demographics.
Now, six years since legalization, she observes an alarming increase in cannabis-induced psychosis among young people, expressing disappointment about the lack of proactive measures taken by policymakers.
When asked if her warnings had fallen on deaf ears, Turncliff offered a somber confirmation: “I feel like the answer to that is no.”
As debates about cannabis and public health continue to unfold, advocates like Amy Turncliff remain steadfast in their pursuit of protective measures for the youth, despite formidable opposition from a booming industry.
image source from：wcvb
