Effects of High-Potency Cannabis on Psychomotor Performance in Frequent Cannabis Users.

Background: Recently increased access to cannabis products in the United States has been associated with increased rates of driving after cannabis use. Although numerous studies indicate that cannabis impairs psychomotor and neurocognitive functions that can affect driving ability, the determination of cannabis-impaired driving risk is complicated by the extent to which frequent cannabis users develop tolerance to THC's subjective, cognitive, and psychomotor effects, and by the fact that there is no validated behavioral or biological marker of recent cannabis use or cannabis-related impairment. This study examined the psychomotor impairment-related effects experienced by frequent cannabis users in Colorado after naturalistic consumption of smoked cannabis, both immediately and 1 h postuse. Results were then validated in a smaller replication sample from Washington state. Methods: In the primary Colorado study, participants (n=70) used the DRUID® mobile app, a brief measure of psychomotor and cognitive domains that are sensitive to the effects of cannabis. First, participants used DRUID to establish a sober baseline impairment score. During a second appointment, they used DRUID at three time points: preuse, immediately after acutely using cannabis, and 1 h postuse. In the Washington replication sample, participants (n=39) used DRUID before acute cannabis consumption and then every half hour for 2.5 h. Results: In both studies, peak DRUID impairment effects were seen immediately after cannabis use, with recovery of performance at 1 h postuse. Specifically, significant quadratic effects of time emerged for both studies (Colorado study: (ß=-0.935, SE=0.204, p<0.001); Washington study: ß=3.0299, SE=1.3085, p<0.01). Domain-specific effects were tested in the larger Colorado study and were observed for reaction time within a complex divided attention task and a postural-stability balance task. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that psychomotor impairment emerges immediately after acute cannabis use even in regular users, but decreases significantly 1 h postuse. These results underscore the potential utility of the DRUID app for assessing acute cannabis-related psychomotor impairment. Further research is needed to explore whether the DRUID app and/or the specific psychomotor functions it assesses might serve as a tool for measuring cannabis-related driving impairment. Clinical trials registration number for the Colorado Study: NCT03522103.

Assessment of cognitive and psychomotor impairment, subjective effects, and blood THC concentrations following acute administration of oral and vaporized cannabis.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis legalization is expanding, but there are no established methods for detecting cannabis impairment. AIM: Characterize the acute impairing effects of oral and vaporized cannabis using various performance tests. METHODS: Participants (N = 20, 10 men/10 women) who were infrequent cannabis users ingested cannabis brownies (0, 10, and 25 mg Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, THC) and inhaled vaporized cannabis (0, 5, and 20 mg THC) in six double-blind outpatient sessions. Cognitive/psychomotor impairment was assessed with a battery of computerized tasks sensitive to cannabis effects, a novel test (the DRiving Under the Influence of Drugs, DRUID®), and field sobriety tests. Blood THC concentrations and subjective drug effects were evaluated. RESULTS: Low oral/vaporized doses did not impair cognitive/psychomotor performance relative to placebo but produced positive subjective effects. High oral/vaporized doses impaired cognitive/psychomotor performance and increased positive and negative subjective effects. The DRUID® was the most sensitive test to cannabis impairment, as it detected significant differences between placebo and active doses within both routes of administration. Women displayed more impairment on the DRUID® than men at the high vaporized dose only. Field sobriety tests showed little sensitivity to cannabis-induced impairment. Blood THC concentrations were far lower after cannabis ingestion versus inhalation. After inhalation, blood THC concentrations typically returned to baseline well before pharmacodynamic effects subsided. CONCLUSIONS: Standard approaches for identifying impairment due to cannabis exposure (i.e. blood THC and field sobriety tests) have severe limitations. There is a need to identify novel biomarkers of cannabis exposure and/or behavioral tests like the DRUID® that can reliably and accurately detect cannabis impairment at the roadside and in the workplace.

The Carnism Inventory: Measuring the ideology of eating animals.

Beliefs surrounding the practice of eating animals are widely held, and have been argued to constitute an ideology named carnism (Joy, 2009). We developed and validated the novel Carnism Inventory to measure two positively related components of carnistic beliefs: carnistic defense and carnistic domination. We anticipated that carnistic defense would legitimate the practice of eating animals, while carnistic domination would support the killing of animals for their meat. The Carnism Inventory showed the hypothesized two-dimensional structure as well as good internal consistencies and stability (N = 302, Study 1). We also demonstrated the convergent and discriminant validity of the Carnism Inventory (N = 781, Study 2a). As expected, carnistic defense predicted meat consumption, while carnistic domination was a significant predictor of having slaughtered an animal (N = 478, Study 2b). Both scales were significantly related to sociopolitical beliefs, including right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, but only carnistic domination was related to symbolic racism and sexism (N = 373, Study 3). Taken together, our findings highlight the utility of the two-dimensional conceptualization and measurement of carnistic beliefs and offer new insights into one of the most common human behaviors: Eating animals is not only a gustatory behavior, as widely believed, but also an ideological one.

Sexual coercion in men and women: similar behaviors, different predictors.

A growing body of literature supports the contention that both women and men employ various seductive, manipulative, intoxication, and even forceful tactics of sexual coercion to obtain sexual contact from unwilling partners. Although the self-reported coercive behavior of men and women may appear similar in many respects, predictors of such behavior seem to vary in important ways across gender. In addition to examining the prevalence of coercive behaviors reported across gender, the present study examined the extent to which four variables found in models of male sexual coercion predicted self-reported use of sexual coercion in a sample (n = 186) of college men and women: prior sexual abuse, sexual dominance, sociosexuality, and sexual compulsivity. Although prior sexual abuse seemed to be part of a cycle of sexual coercion among both men and women, key predictors of sexual coercion among men were sexual dominance and sociosexuality, whereas the key predictor of sexual coercion among women was sexual compulsivity. These findings support the notion that whereas men may behave coercively to obtain or maintain an impersonal sense of power and control, women may behave coercively to achieve some level of interpersonal connection when feeling out of control.