According to a Justice Department study, states should “get rid of that idea” about marijuana impairment being tested by the amount of THC present in an individual’s system.
Frances Scott, a physicist at the National Institute of Justice’s (NIJ) Office of Forensic and Investigative Sciences, under the DOJ, spoke about the challenges of cannabis impairment tests in an episode of Justice Today, which was published late last month.
Scott questioned whether it was effective to set “per se”, THC driving limits that some states had enacted. This would allow a person to be charged with driving under the influence based on their concentration of cannabis components. She said that there may not be an easy way to determine impairment caused by THC, like alcohol.
Scott explained that there is a complication: “If you have infrequent users and chronic users, their concentrations are very different, and they will have different effects.”
She said: “So, the same effect level – if you like – will be correlated to a very different THC concentration in the blood of an infrequent user versus a chronic user.”
A recent federally-funded study also looked at this issue. It identified two different methods for more accurately testing recent THC usage which accounts for the fact metabolites can remain in the system of a person for weeks or even months after consumption.
Scott explained that “the problem is that we’ve funded research that shows pretty conclusively that the THC level in blood does not correlate well with driving impairment.” “One of our outstanding questions is figuring out if there is a good proxy or metric that we can use.”
If it’s not the delta-9 THC, then is there another cannabinoid that we should use, or are we better off moving away from this? She replied. If we can prove that your blood alcohol level is above 0.08, then that’s enough to show impairment, right?” This is also understood.”
The researcher suggested that “we need to get away from the idea that marijuana can be categorized by a number and that this means that someone is impaired.” It may involve different measures from what we are used to. It may not be a blood or breath measurement.
The Justice Department continues to fund research on the development of an alternative breathalyzer for cannabis. This includes saliva tests and peripheral eye assessments to determine whether certain eye functions could be related to impairment by THC.
Scott, who has recently spoken about the seemingly arbitrarily chosen 0.3 percent limit for THC in federally legal hemp by Congress, said: “We may need to do better tests.”
In particular, the question of THC impairment has been a focus for legislators and researchers in relation to driving laws.
A congressional report last summer for a Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies bill stated that the House Appropriations Committee, ” , continues to support development of an objective measure to measure marijuana impairment and related field sobriety tests to ensure highway safety.”
The Department of Transportation was required to complete the report by November a data-google-interstitial=”false” href=”https://www.marijuanamoment.net/biden-signs-infrastructure-bill-promoting-marijuana-research-by-encouraging-access-to-dispensary-products/” rel=”noopener” target=”_blank”>under a large-scale infrastructure bill/a>a>a>a>under a>under a>/a>/a>/a>/a>/a> under a>/a>under a>a>/a>that was signed by The Department of Transportation was supposed to finish the report by November , under a large infrastructure bill signed by President Joe Biden. However, missed this deadline and it is unclear how long it will take.
According to a study published in 2019, those who drive with the legal THC limit, which is usually between two and five nanograms per milliliter blood , are not statistically more at risk of being involved in an accident than people who don’t use marijuana.
The Congressional Research Service determined in 2019 that “marijuana use can impact a person’s motor performance and response time… Studies of the impact on a driver’s risk of a collision have produced contradictory results, with some finding little to no increased risk from marijuana usage.”
A study conducted in 2022 concluded that CBD-rich marijuana did not have a “significant impact” on the ability to drive despite the fact all participants had THC levels above the limit per se.
Marijuana tax revenue should fund education and housing, not police and prisons, voters say in a new poll
Martin Alonso is the photographer of this photo.
The post Justice Department researcher says ‘We may need better tests’ for Marijuana Impaired Driving, questioning ‘Per se’ THC limits first appeared on Marijuana moment.
