Bill Overview
Title: Developing and Nationalizing Key Cannabis Research Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to expand activities concerning cannabis research. The NIH must collaborate with specified agencies to develop a national cannabis research agenda. Among other topics, the agenda must address (1) the therapeutic benefits of cannabis, (2) how cannabis effects specified populations, and (3) other public safety considerations. Additionally, the NIH must designate centers of excellence in cannabis research at institutions of higher education to conduct interdisciplinary research about biomedical, behavioral, and social issues related to cannabis. The CDC must work with other agencies to collect population-wide data about cannabis use, including (1) demographic factors, (2) health outcomes, (3) product variety, and (4) other relevant health information.
Sponsors: Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-52]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals using cannabis and professionals in cannabis research globally
Estimated Size: 15000000
- Cannabis researchers and academic institutions focusing on cannabis will be directly impacted as they will have increased funding and designation opportunities through centers of excellence.
- Patients who use cannabis for therapeutic purposes might benefit from discoveries made through the expanded research. They will be impacted by any changes in understanding of therapeutic benefits.
- Populations specified for research, such as possibly those with specific health conditions or belonging to certain demographic groups, will indirectly be affected through targeted studies and data collections.
- Public health policymakers and healthcare providers working in areas related to drug policy, addiction, and therapeutic treatments will be impacted, as the findings from the research could influence policy and treatment options.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily targets cannabis researchers, academic institutions, and indirectly, patients using cannabis for therapeutic purposes.
- The budget restrictions mean not all individuals will experience a direct change, but major research institutions may develop significant projects impacting the broader cannabis policy landscape.
- Populations with specific health conditions or demographic characteristics used in the research will benefit from more targeted studies, leading to more personalized health recommendations.
- Public health professionals and policymakers will be influenced by improved data and findings from the policy, affecting future drug policy and therapeutic practices.
Simulated Interviews
Medical Cannabis Researcher (California)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is great news for my work as it means increased funding and collaboration opportunities.
- Finally, we can conduct comprehensive studies with the backing of significant federal support.
- It could lead to breakthroughs in cannabis-based therapies, helping a lot of people.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Dispensary Owner and Cannabis Activist (Colorado)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Expanding research could validate claims we've made about the health benefits of cannabis.
- Regulations might get stricter based on new findings, so it's a double-edged sword for the business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Graduate Student (New York)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With more research opportunities, my career prospects become brighter.
- I'm concerned about how findings may be used politically, but overall knowledge gain is positive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Healthcare Policy Advisor (Texas)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could reshape the landscape of drug regulation significantly.
- I'm hopeful it will provide a strong evidence base for safer drug policies in Texas.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Chronic Pain Patient (Florida)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on cannabis for my pain, and more research could validate its use or provide alternatives.
- If regulations change, it might affect my access positively or negatively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Pharmacist (Michigan)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might lead to new cannabis-based pharmaceuticals, a positive for patient options.
- I worry about the impact on existing medication protocols if cannabis shifts the treatment landscape.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Software Developer (Washington)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Research might lead to better understanding and potentially more regulation of products I use recreationally.
- It could also lead to more innovative and safer product offerings in the market.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cannabis Industry Analyst (Massachusetts)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More research means better market forecasts and potentially more robust market growth.
- I'm eager but cautious about how research findings might affect regulations and market dynamics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Public Health Officer (Oregon)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The data generated could help us shape more effective community health programs.
- I see this as a way to improve substance abuse treatment and prevention initiatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Clinical Psychologist (Illinois)
Age: 43 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will support critical research into cannabis as a therapeutic tool in mental health.
- It could offer new avenues for evidence-based treatment of conditions like anxiety and PTSD.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)
Year 2: $95000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $115000000)
Year 3: $90000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $110000000)
Year 5: $85000000 (Low: $68000000, High: $105000000)
Year 10: $80000000 (Low: $65000000, High: $100000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The initial cost will primarily support infrastructure, staffing, and research set-up, potentially yielding greater benefits in later years.
- Interagency coordination is crucial for efficient spending and achieving the bill's objectives.
- Future legislative changes could affect the policy's lifespan and the realization of potential savings and economic benefits.