Work

Concurrent availability of cannabinoid and tobacco products in licensed tobacco retailers in three U.S. cities

Year: 2025

Type: article

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Federal hemp legalization and expanding state cannabis laws have increased cannabinoid availability across U.S. retailers. Given health risks of tobacco-cannabis co-use, this study documented cannabinoid availability in tobacco retailers across cities with differing cannabis policies New York City and San Francisco (recreational cannabis legal) and Philadelphia (medical only) and analyzed associations with tobacco product offerings. METHODS: A stratified random sample of 20 % of licensed tobacco retailers (n = 1402) was selected from each city. From June to December 2023, trained researchers conducted in-person visits to brick-and-mortar locations to document availability of tobacco and cannabinoid products. Descriptive analyses characterized product availability by store type, and logistic regression examined associations between tobacco product offerings and cannabinoid availability. RESULTS: THC and CBD were each available in 9.8 % of stores with no significant differences observed across cities. After adjustment, with stores not selling each product as the reference groups, stores selling e-cigarettes had higher odds of selling THC (aOR=3.2, 95 % CI: 1.9-5.6) and CBD (aOR=3.0, 95 % CI: 1.7-5.2). Stores selling cigars also had higher odds of selling THC (aOR=2.6, 95 % CI: 1.5-4.7) and CBD (aOR=1.8, 95 % CI: 1.0-3.2). Conversely, cigarette-selling stores had lower odds of cannabinoid availability (THC: aOR=0.5, 95 % CI: 0.3-0.9; CBD: aOR=0.4, 95 % CI: 0.2-0.9). DISCUSSION: This study identified a significant presence of cannabinoids in tobacco retailers across three U.S. cities with differing cannabis laws, with higher odds of being sold in stores selling e-cigarettes and cigars. Findings indicate an interconnected retail landscape for tobacco and cannabinoid products, highlighting a need for enhanced regulatory oversight and improved compliance with existing policies.

Source: International Journal of Drug Policy

DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.105041