Well give folks a couple more minutes, but it might just be a quiet, small grill. Do y'all know of anybody else who was hoping to attend today?
Let me let me poke a few folks and see if there was more.
I think maybe your communique might have gotten a little lost in people's emails, because it was like a reply to an existing email. I know I kind of lost track of it a little bit.
Yeah. Good to know.
And I did as well.
Email threading is helpful but can also
yes, very.
well, that's all right. If it's just us, we can have a different kind of conversation. Or we can also just plan to have another date further out in the future. Whatever you all like. Do you have a preference?
Um, I'm kind of curious what your Well, I guess I see the agenda here. But what were your goals for the follow up for the follow up?
Yeah, I mean, I can kick us off. Um, I was, I won't bother going back over. This was just in case there were new people. Um, I wanted to talk a little bit about some of the takeaways that I walked out of the last meeting with, I wanted to hear from folks what your takeaways were. Um, so I can go over this in a second. And then I also was going to open the floor back up to see if there were any. Go ahead. Yeah. Thanks for agreeing to see if there were any other lingering questions or thoughts that you all had from the last time we met or, you know, you have conversations with partners. I'd love to hear about that. And then the last slide here is a set of kind of the considerations that we've been floating around around high THC and I wanted to get folks' take on all of those considerations. Some of them came up during our conversation on the 26th. And some of them have come up in public health conversations on the national stage. So I wanted to walk through those, but I'll start here on these takeaways. One of the things that I think this is an over synthesized ation of the notes, but it came up a lot when I was going back through the transcript and the the notes that I took, and I think I would quantify it as this how we frame issues matters and the use of royalty, I think LCB I think our partners across the industry and cannabis community, and certainly in the partners in public health, I heard a lot of confusion or frustration sometimes around like how I think a good example is psychosis and and schizophrenia are sometimes talked about interchangeably, but there's, you know, distinct differences between both of those conditions, there's differences in who is vulnerable to those conditions. I think even talking about psychosis, in a very specific, contextualized way, is really important. So those are all points that I plan to take back to our public health partners. And relying on strong science, I think there's a difference. I know this, and I think you all know this, and I know my public health partners know this. But it gets lost sometimes when we're doing things like like research briefs, or fact sheets that where we just have, you know, five citations on a thing. And not all of those citations are weighted equally. And so I hear folks loud and clear from that feedback in our last meeting to really think about what we're listing as citations and how we're contextualizing those citations, because I think things can get confusing, or it can be misleading. And I don't think anybody wants that. Loud and clear education is not only needed, but wanted. I think that came up the most. During our conversation, which was interesting, that also came up the most one I had conversations with public health partners. So I think that's going to be a key strategy. And then when we open the floodgates for research ideas, I was really excited by that part of the conversation. I think the types of research ideas that folks on the call on the 26th offered were different than the types of research ideas that we brainstorm in public health. And I think that that's really important and I would just a few of my friends and colleagues. I shared some of the ideas and they're like wheels started turning a million miles per hour that like we never even thought about that whole Like branch and so I think that's a really interesting area for maybe future collaboration. I thought that a few people gave really good feedback for the rollout of the 2320 signage that doh is responsible for. Some folks listed things like talking points for bud tenders and things like that, that I know our partners at doh hadn't considered yet. So I appreciated that. And I shared that with our friends at DOH. And then also insights on harmful terminology. And I'll be honest, it wasn't until this call on the 26th that I had heard the term predatory that that industry partners had been called predatory by folks in public health that was completely not on my radar. And it's come up a couple other times and other sidebars I've had with other folks from the cannabis community since our call on the 26th. And yeah, I message received and is something that is not lost on me that that would be offensive, and not set up a good partnership or relationship. So I plan to to go back to my public health partners and have a conversation about how we're framing conversations and talking about folks and and talking about practices. I also the other part, I put industry in quotes here because I think, and I this has long been on my radar that like we we group industry is like a thing. And I think we do the same thing on the public health side, right, like all public health is, is a monolith. And it's really not. And I and I know the same for industry. And so yeah, those two and there were a few others that I flagged that I planned to talk with our public health partners about I think it might turn down the temperature a little if folks could just have better tone and terminology that we're using. And then I think interest in more opportunities like this, I heard loud and clear both in the chat as we close out the meeting and several folks throughout the conversation on the 26th that more chances to have these sort of informal, open ended, maybe there's a topic that's bringing us all together, but we get to just sort of like talk and discuss instead of it being in more of like the structured setting of our rulemaking might be a really great option. And one thing I've talked about with some folks and our leadership is, you know, on the public health side, we have our quarterly roundtables, which are space where we're intentionally it's closed doors so that public health feels safe to talk more freely. And I wonder if we could do a quarterly side with the cannabis community and have have a more open ended. Usually we have a semi structure. So there's sometimes speakers that come in present. And sometimes we have folks ask us to go into certain topics or to open the floor to certain topics. So we could do a similar model on the the cannabis industry side. It is up to all of you. So that was my overview of what for those of you, Caitlin, mica Gregory, did you have any other like lingering thoughts? I'll go ahead, Jim.
Thanks. Hey, I just wanted to welcome everybody and say that I appreciate you being here. I'm just gonna tell you something. So my dog died unexpectedly. And so I That's why I wasn't on camera right away. But I want I felt compelled after just listening a little bit to jump in. And thank you for the conversation last time. And the value of us getting together and talking without like an agenda in terms of like, you know, a position, I guess I should say, was really evident to me last time just from the conversations and all that kind of stuff. And I really appreciate it. And I'm hopeful that we can continue to have these kinds of conversations and that we can be, you know, open and that we can discuss things and recognize that we're not always going to come together on particular issues, and that sometimes we're going to have different opinions, but to really understand where we come from, and that we have less I don't know if I'd call them really surprises. But we've been working really hard. I mentioned this last time, I think with the legislature to have conversations before session starts so that we're not seeing bills dropped that we weren't aware of and Bill's that we haven't been a part of the conversation in advance and that kind of stuff. And so these kinds of conversations can help. And the last thing I'll say So Kristen and I had a really nice conversation following our meeting, just kind of debriefing. And she and I both talked about that piece that she put on here about language and terminology and just really the prevention side and the cannabis side. I think that there's opportunity for us both to recognize how we can work better together and just having these kinds of conversations with you guys, both of us walked away with a better understanding and perspective and, and like with more opportunity for us to work together in a less adversarial way, I guess you could say or in a way that helps us understand where we have commonalities and where we can work together. And the last thing I want to say, is around harm reduction. I've been a proponent of prevention, understanding the role of harm reduction for a while, and it's taken a while, frankly, for the prevention world to understand that there is a role of harm reduction in prevention. For a long time, it used to be prevention was stopping people from using, you know, initiation. And what that did was left out a whole group of people, whether it's individuals using cannabis, or parents who have young people who are experimenting with cannabis around tools and resources and how good it was either you don't use or you go to treatment. And it's like, wait a minute, there's a whole bunch of stuff in between, that we should be having conversations about. So I've seen the role of prevention, just evolving over time to be more open to the idea that there are things that we can do that might mitigate harm for young people in particular. But not necessarily just be this total, you know, no, no use at all kinds of things. So I just think there's a lot of opportunities and really appreciate it. So that's all I wanted to say, and welcome you and I'm probably gonna go off camera, but I'm still here listening. And I sometimes I'm compelled to pop back on when something comes up. So you may see me again, but thank you.
I love having these partnership calls with Jim, I think has the best poignant things to say. And again, condolences. Jim, I hope you saw some of those notes in the chat. Um, and I echo what Jim says, It was so nice to spend that time with all of you. And I'm glad that folks feel like this is something we can continue doing. I won't take today's low turnout as a sign for that. I think you're right, Mike, that it was a bad, bad communication strategy, ironically, coming from me, I'm usually better at that. The other thing I want to say is, you know, I, I did huddle up with some of my prevention partners who I work closest with, and they were hungry for more of this, you know, insights into what interests all of you. And I think also hungry for some of those aha insights, like I shared around terminology causing harm and things like that. Some folks were mortified that that's been the perception. And I think it was sort of illuminating for me to think about, you know, like I said, I know that we're not a monolith. But then like, How can I help show help share what I see from my prevention and public health partners with all of you. And so I've been thinking about ways to do that. I think that the hybrid conversation that we hope to have, later this summer might be a good first step into that. But I know, I've talked with some of you over the last several months about ways that we can create spaces where we bring many different kinds of partners to the same space. And folks feel like they can get to know one another better and get to know each other's interests and collaborate on solutions together. So I think we're on the right path for that. I don't think we can do it tomorrow. I think there's some like bridging and healing and like getting to know each other, that needs to happen first. But at least I have that path in mind. And I have some ideas on how we can get there. So that's exciting for me. And I think we can only have gotten there with all of you being you know, vulnerable and open and thoughtful. Go ahead, Jim.
Sorry. Yeah. So I'm back. I wanted to just also point out that, and I think we again, may have mentioned this last time, that we've actually have started getting invitations from industry conferences, local Washington State industry conferences, for prevention to come and be a part of the conference. And I think that's a huge step and a huge opportunity for us. And it would be great. As we have these conversations to be hearing from folks, what should that conversation be like? I mean, it'd be one thing for us to go in and just talk like we are here. But it would also be another thing to say. We've been talking to folks all along, and our agenda reflects those conversations. So just wanted to point that out. And again, see that as real progress in terms of how we're trying to approach our role and responsibility around youth and young adults in particular, and the products that we regulate and opportunities to work with the industry.
Thanks, Tim. Marker. Justin, did you have anything you wanted to add, before of formula takeaways from the last meeting?
Yeah, I don't know. If I would add anything specific to what's already been shared other than, you know, I think when we're looking at the the relationship between industry and public health, I know, we've made a lot of strides in the last few years on creating understanding from one perspective to the other. And I think that's a really good start. Because we're seeing the needle be moved on both sides, when that understanding is, is, you know, present. And so, you know, when we're talking about some of the crossover, I think what's helpful, so we don't have, you know, absolutes and conversations is, you know, recognizing kind of what's what's actually happening. And then how, if there's a risk that's involved in that, how do you mitigate it, you know, those types of things. And that's where I think the dialogue can really come in, and the partnership between folks to be able to share how you perceive risk mitigation would work in a particular topic. And same thing with the other side. And I think that's where that that CrossOver will really flourish when folks can see those types of things. Because I think there's solutions that are out there. I know that Kristin and I've talked quite a bit about this. And, you know, talking to both public health and industry, I don't think that the the interest points are all that far apart. So it's just a matter of bridging that that gap, I think, and creating that stronger understanding. And I think that that's going to really advance the conversation. So really appreciate folks engaging this way.
I missed the first one, I read your notes that were very detailed. I appreciate that. But this is like my first one. I guess I would just say that, like, I think part of the benefit of like reducing the temperature or getting people on the same page is that we can have more really concrete discussions about the likely impact of various policy choices. And I go back to 2023. Mica, I think you were instrumental in this about when the tax stuff was coming out, right? And it's like, what is the impact of increasing attacks on an ad valorem tax on something that's like six bucks, you know, you're just you're you're pushing people towards a different kind of consumption, you're not necessarily getting it, the underlying thing that you're trying to get at, you know, there, people are going to make real world decisions based on that policy. And we need to get past that being seen as Oh, the industry circling their wagons, you know, like, they're just shutting everything down. Where it's like, no, let's really take two or three steps forward as to thinking, what are the likely outcomes? What are the incentives? What incentives have changed? Based on this policy? It's not because like, no one can do anything in this space. It's let's really think it through and I keep thinking back to all the things we've discussed around the kind of broken medical market. What are those kinds of things that drive people to the illicit market, because the regulated medical market either didn't exist or was not meeting people's needs, and that that came up time. And again, in testimony, Ron 1453, all of these things, this is not a shut down the conversation this is we need to understand this at a deeper level. And so that's just something that I hope we can get to with with everybody, as that kind of relationship goes. deepens. And it's not just everybody being seen with a whole lot of skepticism.
Yeah. Yeah, I agree. I don't think any problem solving actual problem solving and that like back and forth, that it requires can happen until people start to kind of see each other as you know, all on the same team and all working for the same thing. And that reminds me it didn't add it to the takeaways but something that keeps coming up. It didn't come up a lot in that conversation, but it has in other conversations I've had with folks across the cannabis community space is just the elephant in the room of online sales. And and I just think like, I heads up Justin plan to be the drumbeat stop on that one because I just feel like it's, we can do all we want to tighten up the regulated market. But if this entire industry exists underground in our faces, that's how I feel about it, that it's underground, but it's like right there. Then then all of these other things are just potentially going to drive people to the convenience of ordering online. Go ahead, Lucas.
Oh, I didn't realize I was given the authority to Um, yeah, anyway, um, yeah, I have to say it's been a every legislative session, especially in the past few years, when online sales started to become a thing. There's this consistent, convoluted idea of a gummy that you buy online versus what you buy in a regulated store. And that's always been a challenge. And I mean, there's been a long standing history of the cannabis industry and the prevention community, not touching base or not having a forum where they can touch base. So we all butt heads, right, you know, legislative session and, you know, subsections of the cannabis industry all butthead. So it's like this big, ineffective communication that we've been running with for the past decade. But it's so challenging when, you know, I'm up testifying before the legislature right after someone's talking about their kid that bought a, you know, bag of gummies, you know, this big online. And I really hope that we can bridge that gap and talk about like, well, we have this whole other sector that we have a very hard time having control over. So I'm not sure what solutions we have to address that. But I think that's one area that we really could go hand in hand with with the prevention community, how do we actually tackle this issue? And especially when, you know, some of our online sales are coming from entities that are within the state of Washington? So how do we tackle that? How do we make that change? And also, how do we have that candid conversation? Because I think that would really help cut down on youth consumption and overconsumption on educated consumption. So I just I'd be miffed if I didn't mention that. So I'm glad we started talking about that.
I think that's great. And you your gummy thing, I think is a great example. The other one I hear a lot is vape devices that are unmarked on labeled you don't know what's in it. And and partners will come to me and say, Why is LCB allowing these things and I'm like, we're not like that's all of our stuff has to be like this is the rule. And everyone has to follow this rule. And like if it's not following this rule, there's this entire other universe that it's coming from. And I think when I had those conversations with folks, I fantasize about this, like training that maybe industry folks can put on for public health folks that like level set and help people understand this, and this are not from the same place. And like how we do these things in prevention for parents, like how do you identify, you know, the signs that your kids are using, or identify products and things in your household that might actually be stashing marijuana, or whatever. But like, I almost feel like we need to do one for the prevention, public health partners to understand like, what is and isn't part of the regulated market. And then I think rallying folks on both sides to address the internet issue would be great. But I also know from conversations with Justin and others, it's not that easy of a problem to solve, um, there is no like owner of the internet, we can go and send a cease and desist letter to like, this is a much bigger problem. And I think because it's such a big problem, it's gonna take all hands on deck to address it. Go ahead, Micah.
I'm curious if anybody at the AGs office has thought about sending a cease and desist letter to Visa for payment processing, because that's the way that this could get shut down. And if they actually got some understanding from a State Ag that these products were not legal in the state of Washington, which they objectively are not. I'm curious if you know, there might be a method to not let payments from Washington State Credit Cards be processed on these websites.
That's an interesting one. Like, I don't know if we talked about that. One of the things that just kicking around was more like looking at the common carriers. Like you have some basic understanding and this this is coming from like the alcohol side who had the same thing. There are tons of internet shipping, totally untaxed, undercutting, you know, the regulated industry. And just saying like, you know, FedEx, you have to know when you're shipping 10s of 1000s of, you know, bottle shaped boxes from something called, like, tequila direct. It might have alcohol and like, none of it's labeled. It's the same thing that we're talking about here. So but that's interesting. So we were kind of we had very, very brief discussions with revenue and the AGs. But I kind of like the visa thing. Sorry, Jim.
No worries. Oh, you know, one of the things that I have a meeting scheduled with the AGs office to talk about a cease and desist letter right now as a matter of fact, and so I'll add that to my Let's, and the cease and desist letter I'm talking about right now is there and it's something we heard from industry. It's around the medicinal claim that you know, the places that are advertising that they can get you a medical card here in Washington state, when in fact you can't I mean, not the way our laws set up. And so we're talking about, can we do something about that, you know, the advertising of that in the state. So I'll add that I think that's an interesting opportunity, potentially. So thanks for bringing that up.
And just real quick, Lucas, I would just point out, that's another great area that we heard from both public health and prevention and industry partners, where you all y'all are straight on the same page on that one. Go ahead, Lucas,
I just want to ask, I'm not sure how it's enforced necessarily. Maybe it's because it's more of a federal thing. But I know with anytime that we've changed gun laws in Washington, there's a very quick and sustained change of we will not ship you know, these attachments, we will not ship these parts, we will not do any commerce with Washington state. And that seems to change very quickly with internet sales. And I'm not sure that maybe it's because we have the ATF and you know, there's a federal entities that have a strong feeling or they're going to do a strict job of enforcement. But I'm wondering what sort of tactics are used in that. And if that could be something we could look to, it's totally different than, you know, cannabis, alcohol and tobacco. But that's just a sector that seems shut down seemingly overnight with no ifs, ands or buts.
Yeah, I don't know, Mark, or, Justin, if you could talk about some of that federal tone on, on cracking down on internet sales? I've heard you speak to that before.
Yeah, I think it's I think it's fairly difficult. Because I don't think the federal government's really prioritizing looking at I mean, they don't look at it from an internet sales perspective, I think they look at it from a product perspective. So there's a lot of concerns, for example, around the firearms, I can't speak to all the nuances on how they get that done. So effectively. I do know the ATF does actively look at a number of things and their correspond and those types of things. So the issues, though, around shipping, for example, and I'm going way back. So this isn't necessarily what current state is. But we were doing tobacco work shortly after legalization happened. And we were working with the United States Post Office to try to curb illicit and untaxed cigarettes coming into the state. And the officers that were working with folks, and they went up to, you know, some of the distribution centers for USPS. And they said, All you could smell is marijuana. So, you know, at that point, there was this mass, you know, shipment going on through UPS, or USPS. And they weren't really able to combat that. So I think that there's some parameters on the federal side on what they can look at what they can, you know, which packages I'm sure that they can open or not, or scanner, I'm not sure how that works. So firearms laws might be different in that regard, then restricted products, like we have. That could be one of the things. But yeah, it's it's a really difficult component. Because if if you are doing it, you know, where it's not overt, it's gonna be really difficult to, to identify
that, so I think we do have plenty of overt actors in this space. There's no, no one's trying to hide it. You know, you don't have to do any investigations.
Yeah, and I think one of the conversations, and I don't know what the what the result could possibly be necessarily on this. But when we look at any type of illicit market sale, just like we did when when legalization occurred is, how do we create the avenue for products if they're safe, of course, to go through a legal chain. And so if you're going to, right now, we've taken with the last piece of legislation, the approach of this is absolutely prohibited. So anything with a detectable level that's not coming from the industry is prohibited. So you have this whole bulk of product out there that's being debated federally in a number of states. And so those states are shipping this stuff out. And there's no way for that anybody to explore what this should look like in a controlled environment. So I think that you're going to continue to have that because if it's cheaper on the taxation piece, people are going to be gravitating towards those online sales. And I think that that's, that's going to continue to be a challenge for us when you're talking about out of state based product coming into Washington.
We just had a conversation the other day with Department of Health and director wax, an enforcement education division here about internet sales and one strategy. Aside from all of like the legal How do we stop it side? More downstream? How can we educate consumers to know that these products are not part of a legal regulated market? And we just sort of workshop some of those ideas with Department of Health, since they're the ones that have a public education campaign budget, to think through, you know, are there ways that we can come at it from like a consumer safety perspective? Because one of the things that we know is, a lot of folks just don't even realize that, that they're buying things illegally, that, you know, the advertising for all of these, whether it's in state or out of state, these hemp derived THC products are very legitimate looking, they're very well done. As someone with a marketing background, it's painfully impressive to me when I look at some of these websites, and I see some of the ads that people send me. And so how do we then combat that with some counter messaging with with consumer? So if that's an area you all are interested in partnering or collaborating on? Let me know and we can connect you all.
Any other thoughts about? We've talked a lot about internet sales. Any other thoughts about that space? Well, do you have any insights? Do you know how to stop it?
I do, but structurally, the, the the country wouldn't be happy with me. I think, you know, we could just shut down this thing that they call the Internet. I remember when I was in college, and had to go back and forth to the library. Yes, I'm Yes, I'm gonna bout to really date myself. We didn't have computers. They were in a computer lab. And you had to reserve X amount of time so that you could get on a computer and do dial up. That in and of itself will probably help this problem. That's what I'm gonna say.
Any better? I didn't have a smartphone in college, if that makes you feel any better?
Yeah, it makes me feel a little bit better, but not much. I mean, I think this is that problem that just? Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. How do we solve a problem like the internet? Um, it's also a source of a lot of good. So that's the trick. Um, are there any other big topics like this, we sort of touched on some of these pieces last time. But are there any other while you have us any other topics that you'd love to workshop like this? Like we just did?
I think so our conversation following the last meeting was, you know, how everybody was sort of very think just keep going. You know, if you recall, the early part of the meeting, it was there was not a lot of feedback, like it took people a little bit to warm up and feel like, maybe this isn't a trick. And maybe in particular, when you got to the question about types of research that folks would like to see, we probably could have gone for another hour, as people were talking about, because honestly, like, you know, we did talk about this a little bit, too, you know, and you mentioned it in your introduction to this whole Well, I've got studies and I've got studies, and I've got studies. And you know, that whole landscape is really challenging, because when there isn't a lot of research yet, how how that research gets weighted, can not be helpful. And so I think, you know, that's a really good end to get people continuing to contribute. And then a really easy place to find common ground.
Yeah, I appreciate that. Yeah, that was one of the most fun parts of the conversation from my perspective, because there it was, like opening the floodgates. Like I said, there's all these different ideas that we just don't really talk about on the public health side. So that was helpful for me. It also I went back to Sarah or Sarah okey, or research program manager, and told her about about the ideas. I shared the list with her and we were sort of workshopping ways that we can create a forum to have have more of those conversations where we where we really think through some of these ideas. And also think through the next step like how do you then fund that? How do we then encourage people who have funding to or apply for funding to explore some of these research topics? So I think LCB is uniquely positioned to actually move that forward. Which would be interesting. Yeah. Anybody else?
I am? I am kind of curious. It's been mentioned now in both meetings about potential legislation. Are you all anticipating I know LCD is not coming with anything? But are you all anticipating more legislation around prevention and cannabis in this upcoming session?
I've, I feel like there's always something but I don't know that I have seen anything. Mark, can probably speak more to that. Or Jim, go ahead.
I was just gonna say that I don't know of anything in particular. But I do know that we're likely to see something from rep. Davis. So and you know, it's just been historically. And I do she and I were at a conference just recently, and she didn't tell me anything specific that she was planning, but just her style and how she operates, I can anticipate because what I've been saying to her is, well, then let's have conversations if you're going to do something, because we want to be a part of those long before the session starts. So I don't know anything particular. But I would guess we'd probably see something.
Yeah, we've had a lot of conversations. Maybe more on the alcohol side with with prevention, but I'm not aware of anything on the prevention, cannabis Nexus at this stage.
And I pulled this up. Oh, go ahead. Kailyn.
No, we can I was just going to ask if LCB if you all are planning on participating in the ADA AI conference in September? I'm assuming Yeah.
We plan to several s plan to attend. I don't know that. Anyone is planning to speak. I can talk with Sarah and her team, though. Jim, was your hand up?
No, no, I was just gonna say that. I'm planning on attending. I haven't I haven't. I'm not planning on participating as a panelist or anything, but I do plan on participating.
I might, um, I'm hopeful that we might have that hybrid meeting prior to that EDA conference, I see that that that event tends to be where some of the more political rhetoric starts to come out. And some of the more I'm trying to be very measured, but challenging language, right, that gets people's feelings big. And so I it will be lovely, if we can kind of all be there and maybe take some of this ethos here, there and to maybe tamp down some of this so that we can have more productive conversations.
As we get closer to a session. Yes, and I am planning on having like several heart to hearts with some some of my friends in the public health and prevention space, to just I think really the the unintended consequences of, of coming out swinging in some of the ways that I've heard from a number of people that there was, in particular, that 2022 symposium comes up all the time is like this. It's almost like synonymous with pink with talking poorly about the industry. Like it's like a shorthand for that almost. And so I don't know that our colleagues at Adi are fully aware of that, like fully aware of that impact. Maybe they are, but I I think it would be a good starting place for conversation. Certainly. My good Go ahead. And then it looks like you want to say something like this.
One thing that I've been talking about for a while on this subject is us on the on the industry side, cultivation side, what are we gonna call it are not well positioned to counter a lot of the sort of medicalized claims that get made in these public health environments. And I know that we mentioned it earlier, the sort of harm reduction approach to all this, anything that the LCB can do to cultivate that side of public health, from being more active in this conversation would go a lot further than probably anything we can do. And say, and so, cultivating like those folks to come in and really like be a critical part of this, like getting hired into roles at DOH to be highlighting the medical aspects of the benefits of cannabis within the conversation of public health, like that should be one conversation. And those folks are like, siloed off within that agency, you've got people that understand the benefits of cannabis, and you've got the the people that think it's all bad, and totally isolated places. And so encouraging them to like have dialogue, bringing them into these conversations, making sure we have representatives for people that understand like the benefits of cannabis out in the world for so many people is gonna help sort of bring down that temperature level, again, because we can sort of defer to the sort of white coat privilege of those folks that and benefit from that. And I think that's something that could get done to sort of move this conversation forward to, like, bring in some of the allies that, that we have that work in that world, and let us sort of ride on their coattails a bit.
Yeah, I would also point out just having been at Department of Health, one of the challenges that you're identifying is that the medical cannabis team, which you know, like you said, they're in one division from the prevention team, they exist to help like the lifespan spectrum of people who are using medical cannabis, then the Prevention Team exists solely for youth cannabis prevention and education. So they don't have a component within that team that is serving the adult consumer in a way to help them use the products in a safer and healthier way, you know, did you see anything so like, they're always say that inherently,
banning medical cannabis is going to help with youth consumption, that they are the same thing. And they should be integrated? Like, medicine is different than recreational drugs. And I think getting people to understand that the sort of power and intensity and potential of all of this is gonna go a long way and keeping young people from experimenting in the way that they have.
Yeah, I totally hear you. And in addition to that, the point I'm just trying to make when you hear the prevention only messaging, I think that like, structurally a Department of Health, if they also had folks who were like their job was to help with harm reduction, or to help with just like safety of use for on the recreational side for adult consumers, that would also change this entire dialogue. But that doesn't really exist because of the way that it's structured. Caitlin, your hand went up for a sec.
And just the quick thoughts, actually, Mike and I were just talking about this earlier. So I've got a kiddo with epilepsy, which actually does make my conversation with the other kids very easy, and they're very willing to just sort of wait. And some of that has to do with their insight of cannabis as as medicine within our family. And, yeah, wanted to put that finer point on it, but that really is an effective option.
Yeah, I appreciate that. Will guess did you want to say anything?
Well, no, it's hard not to have a bit of a response to that 2022 ai conference. It was very, very few people from the cannabis industry attended. And then a lot of the talking points from that came forward in the prior two legislative sessions and the rhetoric behind it was very much so put nicely in us and then rhetoric, and there's really a clear separation and demonization of the cannabis industry, especially from especially from some some of the speakers. If I do I mean, I'll be talking to people within the industry to try more people there. I think it's really important that we get to participate. But that basically, my facial response was just to the 2022 symposium, it was very illuminating. Very, very interesting to like, see what the conversation looks like internal to that community. And at the very least, just for our own, you know, education to see you know what the others had Thanks looks like but I really can't stress enough how important it is that we find a way to bring a nexus between these two communities. Because there's clearly a missed opportunity that we're going to continue buying heads over. And I wish I had something more substantive to say, but that was wear my official?
Well, I think it just goes to this, like, let's keep going, let's keep humanizing this. Let's keep there's there's a lot of hurt. And again, my brain keeps thinking about what Michael was just talking about that that medical overlap part. And I know like some folks were, I think rhetorically, it's so useful to make a comparison between alcohol and cannabis, I think sometimes on the regulatory not at all, in terms of behavioral health side of things. But on the regulatory it makes sense sometimes for our industry to say we want parity with alcohol, in terms of those types of regulations. But I think when we're in this context, it actually doesn't serve us very well, because cannabis and alcohol are actually very, very different substances. And when we're talking about harm reduction, using those two is algorithmically, the same as not, actually, they're not at all. And so being able to be creative and more nuanced. And how we think about cannabis is definitely a industry, harm reduction partnership conversation, where we can actually really get good messages out to young people and adults about ways, ways to be respectful and get the outcome they're looking for when they interact with cannabis, which, you know, in some cases is not at all. But we won't be able to get to that nuance until I think we heal some of this. Insult, frankly, that has happened over over the last couple of years.
Yeah, I can appreciate that. And I thank
you for your leadership on that. Yeah. And I appreciate
you all, you know, showing vulnerability and sharing those perspectives, because it's, I think, one of the first steps in identifying a problem, right? I also want to just say, I and I hope this doesn't come across as defensive, because I don't mean it this way. But keep an open mind that that is not necessarily reflective of the entire public health and prevention space. I know far more people who are aligned with my harm reduction, values and training, then folks who are like, let's let's burn it down, let's not have it at all, you know, like far side and so. But I think with anything, it's the loudest voices that that sort of, you know, when they have a platform or conference like that as symposium, I think it's easy to take away that that's reflective of everyone. And really, it's reflective, I think of the researchers that they they tap to come and speak. So yeah, just keep that in mind. And and let us like you, I like that you keep saying this. Caitlin, let's keep going. Let's, let's keep showing, let's keep showing up and make judgments as we go. Oh, go ahead, Jim.
And I can say to Oh, go ahead.
I was just gonna make a comment about the commitment that we that I have as a board member is to continue to combat the kind of attitudes around anti industry at any place, we can, while at the same time recognizing that we do play a role, obviously, in prevention and youth and young adults access. And I mentioned last time, I'm also of interest to me is the recovery community and people who do struggle with addiction. I mean, I think that there's there's both sides of this conversation. And the other side is the industry side, where cannabis addiction is not real. I've heard that and it's like, okay, well, there's, there's both sides of the conversation. And that's I'm hoping to find that balance where we can have that kind of balance. I also was at the 2022 Adi symposium, and I was struck by some of the same things, Lucas that you were struck by it was my first one and be it and I be a Carlini, and I meet on a quarterly basis, and I've meet with her because I used to work at the U DUB. And I do respect the work of Adi and that may not be a popular stance, but I do respect a lot of the work they do. I don't agree with everything that they do. But I do believe that they do some there's some good products that come out of that institute. So what I'm happy to do is to without naming anybody, I'm gonna have my next conversation with Bia. I'm going to talk to her about that upcoming symposium and what can we do to be more proactive in the space of including industry and be mindful of language and mindful of what's said and that kind of stuff. cuz I think that that is an important, whether they listen or not, I don't know. But it's an important message for them to hear. And I'm happy to be the person who delivers that message to him.
Thanks, Jim. We're gonna say something to Caitlin.
Well, actually, along those same lines that you know that I think the industry representation you have here is good. And I think all of us are committed to also helping folks continue to show up with open minds and hear what you're saying. And we'll trust that the majority of folks actually do want to keep moving forward here. Thank you.
That was a good conversation. I will I know, we only have seven minutes left. We thought we'd end early look at us. Um, I, I've had this on the screen for a while you probably had a chance to read through it. This is the list and I've organized it the way that it makes sense to me. This is the list that has been generated over conversations. Some of these things I've heard folks on the national level talking about exploring in their state, some of these things I've heard come up from public health partners, from various folks across the industry. Go ahead, Lucas.
Sorry, I just want to question has, I'm not sure if it's duchy with green bits, who's now I think, duchy acquired green bits. But I've worked with their data, while with their engineer, their, their computer science engineer, team, wherever you want to call it. But to work on an issue that was preventing sub blotting a few years ago, and when I was working with them, they were very open and excited about their data collection. And specifically, basically, they use your and this was two years ago, maybe they've changed things, maybe they haven't or, anyway, but the US consumers driver's license, every time that you go into a store that uses Dutchie, Green Bits, they use that as a key identifier. And the beauty there, I mean, it's creepy, but all your data is collected everywhere. But the the opportunity there is that you can track a consumers consumption patterns through through time, I'm wondering if there's ever been a nod or a tap to them to look to see if there could be actual information. I'm just seeing how, you know, increased research about products, as I've seen data and consumer behavior, it'd be a great way to take a look at consumer behavior and how consumers have evolved over time to see if people have increased their cannabis consumption decreased their cannabis consumption, their rate of purchases, their type of purchases, I don't know if that would be a benefit. Or if there's ever been a tap to any of the third party traceability solutions for specifically for point of sale, because often as it's beneficial for bud tenders to have a way to validate if a driver's license is real or not by scanning it. I imagine that there is more than one point of sale solution that tracks individual consumer data one way or another. Has that been looked at at all?
Yeah, Justin, do you want to speak to that?
Yeah, I don't think that we've specifically looked at those third parties as far as their their data collection, obviously, we would need to enter into some sort of agreement to, to see that. But I think that that would be worth exploring, as far as from our research perspective, because we have done some surveys around consumer behavior and what self reporting is from those consumers. But if we had even just a raw data set, you know, no names, that kind of thing, to be able to look through as a consumer trends, that would be very interesting to see that type of data. And I think it could speak obviously, you know, depending on how robust the data set is, it could speak to, you know, some of the overarching trends on consumption, and that could help inform some of that conversation on when you're when some claims are made that you know, this, this is how people are consuming. And if it's not from a representative sample, then that would be very informative, I think. But yeah, I don't think that we have anything that we've reached out to those companies because if they're collecting the data, that's probably not something that they're going to offer up for analysis. Funny. Yeah.
Yeah. Mike, you had your hand up, you put it down. Did you still want to say something?
Oh, I just want to say I was part of that like data sharing agreement task force that happened when we were talking about the traceability switchover. And I certainly don't think it would be legal for the state to enter into getting personalized data from a private company, nor do I think that's an appropriate suggestion. Just to put that out there.
No, and I would agree with you, Mike, I don't think that we would be interested in any personalized data. But if we could have aggregate consumer type of analysis, I think that would be interesting. But you're Yeah, we wouldn't have an interest in getting personalized data for consumers that we're also
Learning that one of those companies is using, Id checking to do that is incredibly upsetting to me. And I'm gonna make sure to be doing something about that, because I don't think that that's at all appropriate, but that a company is leveraging that in that way. And I think that's probably illegal.
Thanks, Mica. Go ahead, Mark.
This is something that that we've talked about looks like that we have purchased a headset, you know, in sight. So again, we are not interested in looking at an individual's purchasing change over time or something like that. But at that aggregate level, it can be potentially illuminating, potentially, you know, there's there's too many confounding variables there. But I think that was something that we got, along with the task in 2320, those kind of really broad based questions that we're going to be answering from CCRS, to have something to essentially validate that kind of spot, check that if it's wildly off, then you know why? I don't anticipate anything like that. But that is something that we're that we're looking at, you know, trying to glean some insights from. Yeah. And again, and do during the crosswalk with between that and the CCRS.
Yeah, I think the crosswalk between CCR s and also the International Cannabis Policy Survey, right. And wanting to crosswalk between that because there are some findings on that, that that don't make enough sense without understanding actual consumer behavior.
Right. There's that one. And then we also have contracted with Whitney economics to do some work. We've got some really very different assessments of the state of play right now. And so I think we're, that's that's something that like, as much information as we can get to understand that I think the better. Yeah, it
helps with validating any of the datasets if there's commonality across them. Yeah. All right. Well, that takes us to time, I just want to say thank you so much, all of you. I know at the beginning of the call, we weren't sure if we'd last five minutes. And this was a robust and interesting conversation. So I'm really appreciate all of you sticking in and letting us have more of a fireside chat together. I will look to some of my my colleagues internally to see a frequency that makes sense for us to continue conversations like this, and also a better communication strategy to make sure more people are aware of these calls happening. Thank you all for your time, and I'll let everybody go. I'll send notes. I admittedly didn't take many notes today because it was listening so much, but I know that Gregory is recording so hopefully we can link to the page that he shares. All right. Thank you, everyone.
