OBJECTIVE:Retail sales of intoxicants, including derived intoxicating cannabis products (DICPs) such as delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and hallucinogenic mushrooms, have rapidly increased throughout the US, despite their sale being federally illegal. This study assessed DICP and hallucinogenic mushroom availability in US smoke shops with differing DICP and psilocybin laws. METHODS:In May-October 2025, using Google's Incognito mode, we searched "smoke shop in [city, state]" across eleven cities in states (California, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, New York, Nevada, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Washington) with differing legal contexts for THC and mushrooms (7 explicitly prohibited DICP sales, 2 decriminalized psilocybin, Amanita was not explicitly illegal in any). We called each store (n=1,023) to assess product availability. Bivariate tests assessed differences by state laws. RESULTS:73.0% (n=747/1,023) answered the phone and responded about DICP availability: 51.4% (n=384/747) reported selling DICPs (39.6% DICPs illegal vs. 80% not explicitly illegal, p<.05; range: 2.0% in New York City to 93.8% in Jacksonville, FL). Overall, 70.2% (n=718/1,023) answered questions about mushroom availability: 59.7% (n=414/718) sold mushrooms (56.6% decriminalized psilocybin vs. 57.9% illegal psilocybin, p=.786; range: 0% in New York City to 84.0% in Las Vegas, NV). Among those selling mushrooms, 54.1% specified they sold Amanita mushrooms, 28.5% did not know mushroom type, and 17.4% said 'something else'. CONCLUSIONS:DICPs were sold widely, including in states where they were expressly illegal (~40%). One-third of retailers were unable to identify mushroom type sold. Collectively, findings suggest the need for greater retail surveillance, education, and enforcement.

Psilocybin is a federally illegal psychedelic substance that carries positive (e.g., treatment for mood disorders) and negative (e.g., emotional distress) consequences. In 2020, Oregon legalized psilocybin for adult use (21+) at the state level, restricted to designated service centers. In Fall 2024 and Spring 2026, we summarized and compared Oregon's legal/regulatory psilocybin context and highlighted public health considerations. We found there are no limits on the number of licenses that can be issued, and there are mandated trainings to obtain facilitator licensure (e.g., 120/128 hours of instruction in 2024/2026, requiring a test score of 75% [unlimited number of testing attempts]). Regulations specify manufacturing rules, including allowable ingredients and testing for contaminants and concentration. One serving includes 25mg of psilocybin analyte; two servings per person are allowed. Labeling guidelines are provided (e.g., safety warnings and no youth-oriented wording). We identified the presence of psilocybin-related websites that were not age-gated. We found pricing information related to administration ($15-$3,500/person) and facilitator training ($3,000-$14,175). Given the inability to limit the number of psilocybin licensees, the number of service centers is likely to increase. Since Oregon psilocybin services do not license training programs, and given the unlimited number of testing attempts allowed, there may be issues ensuring individuals have adequately acquired the necessary knowledge. Longitudinal research is needed to assess the health impact of these programs and the long-term impacts of psilocybin use.

Kratom may pose some health risks (e.g., liver toxicity, seizures, dependence), and interstate commerce is federally illegal; however, kratom is sold widely in the US. The extent of interstate commerce is unclear, but may be indicated by brands present across states/territories. Thus, this study examined kratom brands sold in US vape shops. Using Google Maps, we identified vape shops in all 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Stores were called in November/December 2023. To achieve our target sample of 520 (n=10 per state/territory), 661 stores were called (contact rate=78.7%). Kratom was sold in 372/520 shops (71.5%), of which 153 (41.1%) provided brand information. Among 129 brands reported, OPMS was sold in 90.20% of shops across 42 states/territories, Remarkable Herb in 34.64% across 30 states/territories, and MIT 45 in 33.33% across 31 states/territories. Interstate brand presence indicates likely violations of federal laws and the need to strengthen regulation and enforcement.

OBJECTIVE:Δ9-THC edibles are widely marketed as federally compliant industrial hemp under the 2018 Farm Bill (≤0.3% Δ9-THC by dry weight). We evaluated whether the labeled Δ9-THC content in edibles marketed as "hemp" could be supplied using cannabis material meeting that threshold without exceeding the mass of the edible. METHOD:From October 2025 to February 2026, we identified online retailers marketing Δ9-THC edibles as hemp to U.S. consumers. For each product, we examined Δ9-THC content (mg), unit weight (g), and sugar content (g) from product labels and/or laboratory reports. We calculated the minimum cannabis mass required to supply the Δ9-THC content, assuming the maximum legal concentration (0.3%). Products were classified as mathematically infeasible when required cannabis mass exceeded available non-sugar mass (primary test) or total product mass (ultra-conservative test). Prevalence estimates used bootstrap confidence intervals (2,000 replications; clustered by brand). RESULTS:80% of products would have to contain mathematically impossible portions of cannabis (95% CI: 72-88%; n=297); the median product required cannabis material equal to 160% of available non-sugar mass. 2% required more cannabis than the total product mass (95% CI 0%-4%; n=380). Across all edible types, most appear unable to obtain their Δ9-THC content from lawful hemp material. CONCLUSIONS:Most Δ9-THC edibles marketed as "hemp" appear infeasible to manufacture using cannabis material containing ≤0.3% Δ9-THC by dry weight without exceeding the available product mass, even under highly conservative assumptions. Thus, most appear to depend on marijuana as an ingredient, which has substantial regulatory and public health implications.

Cannabis retail surveillance is crucial to inform regulations and enforcement efforts. This point-of-sale audit study examined marketing practices and compliance with age verification rules, required signage, and marketing restrictions among 161 cannabis retailers in 5 US cities in states authorizing nonmedical cannabis retail (Los Angeles [LA], California; Las Vegas [LV], Nevada; Denver, Colorado; Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington) in summer 2025. Descriptive and bivariate analyses characterized retailers overall and across cities. Overall, 84.5 % of retailers requested age verification upon entry (range: Seattle = 43.3 % to LV = 100 %); 8.1 % never verified (range: LV/Denver = 0 % to Seattle = 26.7 %). All 5 states required pregnancy-related warning postings/brochures, observed in 64.6 % (less often in LA = 30.8 % and LV = 46.9 %). Nevada and Oregon required signage prohibiting on-site consumption, observed in 51.6 % overall (LV = 81.3 %, Portland = 86.7 %). California and Washington required signage indicating negative impacts on children/youth, posted in 42.2 % (LA = 20.5 %; Seattle = 80.0 %). All 5 states restricted youth-oriented packaging, found in 24.2 % (more often in Denver = 53.3 % and LV = 40.6 %). Other targeted populations (based on advertisements/promotions) included veterans/military (12.4 %), senior citizens (9.3 %), LGBTQ+ (8.7 %), and racial/ethnic minorities (7.5 %). Colorado, Oregon, and Washington prohibited health claims in advertising, found in 65.8 % (Denver = 40.0 %, Portland = 40.0 %, Seattle = 70.0 %). California, Colorado, and Washington restricted outdoor business signage, identified at 36.6 % overall (LA = 18.2 %, Denver = 7.7 %, Seattle = 40.0 %). California, Oregon, and Washington restricted discounting, identified in 93.8 % (LA = 92.3 %, Portland = 96.7 %, Seattle = 86.7 %). Further, 39.8 % promoted online ordering, 33.5 % curbside delivery, pick-up, or drive-through options, and 13.7 % home delivery. Given compliance-related issues with many regulations (e.g., required signage, prohibitions on youth-oriented marketing, health claims), states' cannabis retail regulations and enforcement must be strengthened.

Objective: This study used mystery shoppers to assess cannabis retail practices in 5 US states regulating legal nonmedical cannabis retail. Methods: This mystery shopper study assessed 130 cannabis retailers in 5 cities (Los Angeles [LA], California; Las Vegas [LV], Nevada; Denver, Colorado; Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington) in summer 2025. Researchers recorded: 1) age verification; and 2) retail staff responses to inquiries about: a) use for anxiety, sleep, pregnancyrelated nausea, etc.; b) use-related risks/cautions; c) interstate cannabis transport; and d) availability of derived intoxicating cannabis products (DICPs) and 'mushrooms' (psilocybin). Results: Mystery shoppers were asked for ID at 87.7% of retailers. When asked, most (>88%) retail staff responded that cannabis helps with anxiety and insomnia. While 40.8% warned against use for pregnancyrelated nausea, 36.2% suggested it helps and 24.6% said it depends on the person/situation. Over half (58.5%) warned against driving post-use, but 50.0% said it depends (on person/situation). When asked about interstate transport, several indicated not to (42.3%) and/or it was illegal (39.2%); however, 44.6% indicated ways to pack cannabis to be undetectable, and 27.7% said not to worry about getting caught. Retail staff generally indicated DICPs are not as safe as delta-9 THC (27.7%) or are illegal (20.0%). The majority said mushrooms were illegal (67.7%), but 53.8% indicated they were easy to obtain, and 29.2% suggested their mental health benefits. Conclusions: Cannabis retailer frequently made prohibited health claims and minimized risks, reinforcing public health concerns and the need for ongoing cannabis retail surveillance and stronger regulatory oversight and enforcement.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Use of derived intoxicating cannabinoid products (DICPs) has grown in the United States (US), as have associated poisonings, emergency department visits and psychotic episodes. Brand marketing on social media, a largely underregulated marketing channel, may be contributing to this growth. To inform prevention efforts, this study characterized marketing features used by leading DICP brands on Instagram. DESIGN:Qualitative content analysis. SETTING AND CASES:A total of 837 Instagram posts published by nine leading DICP brands' (CannaAid, Cycling Frog, Delta Extrax, Elyxr, Fly Urb, Hometown Hero, Koi CBD, Mood and Official Canna River) accounts between February 2024 and February 2025. MEASUREMENTS:The research team developed a codebook of marketing features using both inductive and deductive methods, and two trained coders analyzed the content of the posts (n = 837). Frequencies were calculated for each marketing feature, and Chi-squared tests were used to examine associations of marketing feature themes by brand and product type. FINDINGS:Social media posts featured product descriptors and imagery (product theme; 75.3%), recreational effects and enjoyment appeals (recreational theme; 52.0%), youth-oriented imagery and cultural cues (youth theme; 49.6%), brand and value positioning (brand theme; 35.7%), health and therapeutic benefit claims (health theme; 10.2%) and health and age warnings (warning theme; 2.5%). Theme presence differed statistically significantly by brand (Ps< 0.001). Cycling Frog used product (93.4%), recreational (83.7%) and brand (50.6%) themes most frequently. Mood (64.4%) and Delta Extrax (60.1%) used the youth theme most frequently, while Hometown Hero (23.7%) and Koi CBD (17.7%) used the health theme most frequently. Themes also varied statistically significantly by product type (Ps< 0.05). Beverages were the product type most commonly marketed with product (97.4%), recreational (84.3%), youth (56.9%) and brand (40.5%) themes. Edibles (60.8%) and pre-rolls/blunts (52.9%) were frequently marketed with the recreational theme, while cartridges/vapes (53.5%) and edibles (49.2%) were frequently marketed with the youth theme. CONCLUSIONS:Between February 2024 and February 2025, Instagram posts from leading brands of derived intoxicating cannabinoid products frequently emphasized product, recreational and youth-oriented themes, while age restrictions and health warning messages were less common. Marketing content varied by brand and product type, with beverages particularly likely to feature recreational, lifestyle and youth-appealing elements.

BACKGROUND:Cannabis vaping prevalence and marketing has increased, but limited research has assessed effects of specific advertising messages, warnings, or their combinations on young adults' perceptions. This study aimed to advance this research. METHODS:In 2024, 3581 US young adults aged 18 to 34 (40.8% reporting past-month use) participated in an online survey-based experiment using a 2 × 4 factorial design (advertising message: psychological effects vs flavors; warning: none, adult-use, intoxication, vape-specific) and then reported on 5 perception outcomes: addictiveness, harm, cautiousness, appeal, and interest (0 = not at all to 7 = extremely). Multivariable regression assessed advertising message, warning, and message-by-warning interactions in relation to outcomes, overall and by past-month use status. RESULTS:Among the total sample and among participants reporting no cannabis use, there were no main or interaction effects of advertising message or warning conditions. Among participants reporting use, adult-use (vs no) warning exposure was associated with lower addictiveness and cautiousness; intoxication (vs no) warning exposure was associated with lower harm. A significant interaction indicated that participants reporting use who were exposed to both psychological effects (vs flavors) advertising messages and intoxication (vs no) warnings reported greater appeal, whereas those exposed to both flavors (vs effects) advertising messages and intoxication (vs no) warnings reported lower appeal. CONCLUSIONS:These findings highlight the importance of understanding how advertising messages may affect how warnings are interpreted (or vice versa), strengthening the evidence base informing advertising restrictions and warning requirements, and elucidating the mechanisms driving the differences among young adults who use versus do not use cannabis.

BackgroundAlcohol pricing policies can reduce population-level alcohol consumption. To inform these policies, it is essential to understand the price per standard alcoholic drink of the least expensive brands. This study focused on prices of ready-to-drink products because of their accessibility, popularity among young people, and market expansion in recent years.MethodsIn 2023, we systematically identified 39 retail stores selling alcohol online in Fort Worth, Texas. For each product, we recorded information regarding brand name, alcohol-by-volume (abv), liquid volume, and price (n = 10,818). Ready-to-drink products encompassed beer, malt liquor, cider, premixed cocktails, and flavored alcoholic beverages (FAB) including hard beverages (seltzer, soda, tea, lemonade), excluding wine and distilled spirits. We limited analyses to brands sold by at least three stores and deduplicated products within stores. Our analytic sample size was 3924.ResultsThe least expensive brands included the following: Four Loko, MXD Drinks Co., Steel Reserve (High Gravity Lager and Alloy Series), Hurricane High Gravity, Natural Ice, Natty Daddy, Clubtails, Sauza Agave Cocktails, Truly Extra, and Icehouse. The average abv among all products was 5.9%. Among the 20 least expensive brands, the average abv was 9.0%, and 70% were available in single-serve containers.ConclusionsThe least expensive brands of ready-to-drink alcohol products were often high abv, single-serve containers of FAB, malt liquor, or beer. Retail price assessments can strengthen the case for policy solutions, such as targeted taxes and re-classification of products, to reduce the risks posed by low-priced alcohol. The current study identifies some brands these retail assessments should include.

Given the rapid expansion of the derived intoxicating cannabis product (DICPs) market and product diversity, this study assessed marketing information provided by online retailers regarding specific DICP compounds. In May 2023, we searched "buy delta thc" in Google's incognito, selected the 20 most trafficked online retailers, and assessed product descriptions and related marketing claims across DICP compounds. 18/20 websites provided descriptions for various DICPs. The top five themes were psychoactive/intoxicating profile (100% of the 18 sites), physical effects (94%), mental effects (94%), naturalness (83%), and safety recommendations (83%). All DICPs, except for THCA and HHC-O, were described as psychoactive/intoxicating; potency was often discussed in relation to delta-9 or delta-8 THC. Claims related to physical effects included improvements to general health, pain management, sleep/insomnia aid (mostly for delta-9 THC). Each compound was described on at least 1 website as having relaxing/calming effects; all compounds except for THCP were described as having anti-anxiety effects. Safety recommendations included buying from trusted/reputable sources; 12 websites mentioned compounds "suitable for new users" (deltas-8,9,10 THC, HHC, THCP, THCV). Findings highlight potentially misleading information in DICP marketing and the need for stricter regulatory oversight, as well as required health warnings to protect and educate consumers.

Within the expanding US cannabis market, young adult cannabis use has increased, underscoring the need to understand key influences on cannabis use. This study examined cannabis-related social and marketing exposures in relation to cannabis use and related mechanisms among US young adults. This study analyzed 2023 survey data from 4031 US young adults (ages 18-34; ∼48.8% past-month cannabis use (by study design); Mage = 26.39, 59.4% female, 37.4% racial minority, 19.0% Hispanic). Path analyses assessed: (1) parental use, friends' use, and advertising exposure in relation to past-month use status and frequency (among those reporting use); and (2) potential mediation by perceived risks (addictiveness, harm) and use motives. Parental use was associated with lower perceived harm and higher motives; friends' use with lower perceived harm and higher motives; advertising exposure with higher perceived addictiveness, harm, and motives; higher perceived addictiveness with lower use likelihood but more frequent use among those who used; and lower perceived harm and higher motives with use status and frequency. Parental and friends' use showed direct effects on use status and frequency; advertising exposure showed direct effects on use status. Perceived harm and motives mediated associations between parental use and use status and frequency. Perceived addictiveness, harm, and use motives mediated associations between friends' use to use status and frequency, and advertising exposure to use status and frequency (except not perceived addictiveness for friends' use to frequency). Understanding these links is crucial to inform policies and interventions to reduce cannabis exposures and use-related harms.

Since the 2018 Agricultural Improvement Act, derived intoxicating cannabis products (DICPs) emerged as largely unregulated products; meanwhile, traditional cannabis use has increased. To inform effective prevention, research is needed to assess differences in motives for using cannabis only versus both cannabis and DICPs, as well as use-related consequences. We analyzed survey data (June-November 2023) from 4031 US young adults aged 18 to 34 (average age = 26.9; 63.9% white; 59.0% female; aiming for ~50% past-month cannabis use). The analytic sample included participants reporting past-month cannabis use (n = 1968). Two cross-sectional mediation models were conducted to examine: (1) cannabis use motives (social/cognitive enhancement and coping) in relation to use-related consequences (psychophysiological and sociobehavioral) via use category (cannabis-only vs cannabis-DICP co-use) and (2) consequences in relation to use category via use motives. Overall, 54.4% reported cannabis-only use and 45.6% reported cannabis-DICP co-use. Greater enhancement and coping motives were associated with cannabis-DICP co-use (vs cannabis-only use). Regarding Model No. 1, lower cannabis coping motives and cannabis-DICP use (vs cannabis-only use) were associated with greater psychophysiological and sociobehavioral consequences, and the associations between coping and enhancement motives and psychophysiological and sociobehavioral consequences were indirectly mediated via cannabis-DICP co-use. For Model No. 2, lower psychophysiological and greater sociobehavioral consequences were associated with greater coping and enhancement motives, greater sociobehavioral consequences was associated with higher odds of cannabis-DICP co-use (vs cannabis-only use), and psychophysiological and sociobehavioral consequences were indirectly associated with cannabis-DICP co-use through enhancement and coping motives. Considering the risks associated with cannabis and DICP use, future intervention and prevention efforts should focus on the observed associations to reduce risk.

BACKGROUND:Cannabis and derived intoxicating cannabis product (DICP; e.g., delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]) use is increasing, particularly among young adults. We examined how state cannabis and DICP laws and cannabis advertisement exposure impact cannabis/DICP risk perceptions and use motives and how those, in turn, impact cannabis and DICP behaviors (use, frequency, intentions) and consequences. METHODS:We analyzed two waves (2023-2024) of longitudinal survey data among 3,437 US young adults ages 18-34 (∼50 % past-month cannabis use by design). Multivariable regressions assessed direct and indirect associations via parallel mediation. RESULTS:Participants in states with legal (vs. illegal) non-medical cannabis had lower DICP use motives, higher odds of cannabis-only use (vs. neither or both), and used cannabis more frequently; associations with use behaviors were mediated by cannabis/DICP motives and risk perceptions. More restrictive delta-8 THC laws were associated with higher odds of cannabis-only use (vs. neither or both). More digital cannabis ad exposure and less exposure to traditional/store-based ads were associated with lower risk perceptions and higher use motives, odds of cannabis/DICP use, use intentions, and consequences; associations were mediated by cannabis/DICP use motives and/or risk perceptions. Lower cannabis/DICP risk perceptions and higher use motives were associated with higher odds of using each respective substance, co-use, and intentions. Using cannabis/DICPs more frequently was associated with experiencing more cannabis consequences; cannabis/DICP frequency mediated associations of cannabis state laws, advertising exposure, and motives with cannabis consequences. CONCLUSIONS:These pathways underscore how laws and marketing shape use, supporting interventions targeting risk perceptions and motives to reduce harm.

Derived psychoactive cannabis products (DPCPs) are chemically synthesized and intoxicating. Despite their widespread use, factors associated with DPCP use remain largely unknown. We analyzed 2023 survey data among 4,031 U.S. young adults (48.9% past-month cannabis use per study design). Multivariable regressions examined sociodemographics in relation to DPCP awareness (yes/no) and patterns of DPCP knowledge, derived based on latent class analysis on five questions. Sociodemographics and DPCP knowledge class were assessed in relation to past-month DPCP use and future use intentions. Results indicated 67.1% were aware of DPCPs and 24.4% reported past-month DPCP use. DPCP knowledge classes were all correct (20.5%), mostly incorrect (36.9%), mostly unsure (21.9%), and all unsure (20.7%). Participants more aware of DPCPs were typically White (vs. Asian), male, residing in states where nonmedical cannabis was illegal, and reported past-month cannabis or cannabidiol (CBD) use. Being Black or Asian (vs. White) or Hispanic was associated with knowledge classes of "mostly incorrect" or "unsure" (vs. all correct). Correlates of using DPCPs: all correct knowledge (vs. all unsure), nonmedical cannabis illegal, female, and past-month cannabis or CBD use. Correlates of higher DPCP use intentions: all correct knowledge (vs. all unsure), nonmedical cannabis illegal, older, White (vs. multiracial), and past-month cannabis or CBD use. In sum, White participants were more aware and knowledgeable of DPCPs; participants in the "all correct" knowledge class had higher odds of DPCP use and higher use intentions, despite correctly knowing that DPCPs lacked regulations. Findings highlight the need for targeted prevention and intervention efforts and DPCP bans.

Background: Given the substantial expansion of the US cannabis market and the impact of cannabis advertising exposure on use, cannabis marketing surveillance is needed to inform regulations and protect consumers. Methods: Using 2020–2021 Vivvix advertising data from 4 US cannabis companies (Cresco, Mindy’s, MedMen, and Uncle Ike’s), we examined (1) general advertising characteristics (eg, number of unique ads and ad occurrences, ad expenditures, market, and media channel); and (2) ad content (ie, headlines and imagery) and placement (ie, source themes, eg, specific websites and magazines), overall and by company. Results: There were 399 unique ads and 1171 occurrences, totaling $488,617 in expenditures. Cresco and Uncle Ike’s accounted for most unique ads (~45% each); Cresco represented the majority of ad occurrences (52.4%) and expenditures (63.4%). Most ads were disseminated via online displays (occurrences = 69.2%; expenditures = 45.8%). The primary source for ad dissemination was news/weather (occurrences = 36.3%; expenditures = 40.2%). Ad headlines most frequently emphasized product type (occurrences = 40.1%; expenditures = 37.0%). Visual strategies to attract attention included gifs (occurrences = 63.6%; expenditures = 71.1%). Companies differed in their marketing strategies (ie, volume, markets, channels, and content). Conclusions: Findings underscore the need to restrict cannabis marketing, for example, restricting ad content and marketing channels. This may reduce exposure to cannabis marketing, which is associated with cannabis perceptions and use.

Delta-8 THC (D8) is an intoxicating compound linked to poisonings and hospitalizations, and no federal laws prohibit its sale to minors. We examined retail D8 availability near public schools (n=231) in Fort Worth, Texas, where D8 sales are minimally regulated. Between September- October 2021, trained data collectors collected D8 availability data from 1,178 retailers with alcohol, tobacco, and/or consumable hemp licenses. We examined differences in product availability for retailers near (within 0.5 miles) schools vs. not near schools. There was a higher prevalence of retailers selling D8 near (vs. not near) schools (12.4% vs. 8.2%; chi-square test 5.84, p<0.05). Of the 231 public schools, 37.2% (n=86) had at least one D8 retailer nearby. Of the 86 schools with D8 retailers nearby, the cheapest products were for vaping (40.7%) and edibles (31.4%). There were school-level racialized and socioeconomic inequities in availability. Ongoing surveillance of D8 availability and laws are urgently needed.

Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use has increased since e-cigarettes were introduced to the market nearly 20 years ago. Researchers continue to conduct studies to understand the health risks and benefits of e-cigarettes to inform health education and promotion efforts as well as public policy. Studies funded by the tobacco industry examining the potential risks and benefits of e-cigarettes have also been conducted and are sometimes published in the scientific literature. Frequently, tobacco and e-cigarette industry-funded researchers report findings that contradict research funded by other sources. While many industry-funded studies may appear methodologically sound at first glance, in some cases, industry-funded studies include methodological flaws that result in misleading conclusions. The tobacco industry’s use of biased research to influence tobacco-related policy decisions in the past is well-documented. This commentary provides specific examples of recent e-cigarette research funded by the tobacco/e-cigarette industry in which methodological flaws result in misleading conclusions that support industry goals. Given the long history of biased research conducted by the tobacco industry, there is a need to assess whether research funded by the e-cigarette industry similarly contains methodological flaws. We emphasise the need for tobacco and e-cigarette-funded research to be scrutinised by non-industry-funded subject matter experts and call for journals to not consider manuscripts that have received support from the tobacco or e-cigarette industry.

Delta-8 THC (D8) is an intoxicating compound linked to poisonings and hospitalizations, and no federal laws prohibit its sale to minors. We examined retail D8 availability near public schools (n=231) in Fort Worth, Texas, where D8 sales are minimally regulated. Between September-October 2021, trained data collectors collected D8 availability data from 1,178 retailers with alcohol, tobacco, and/or consumable hemp licenses. We examined differences in product availability for retailers near (within 0.5 miles) schools vs. not near schools. There was a higher prevalence of retailers selling D8 near (vs. not near) schools (12.4% vs. 8.2%; chi-square test 5.84, p<0.05). Of the 231 public schools, 37.2% (n=86) had at least one D8 retailer nearby. Of the 86 schools with D8 retailers nearby, the cheapest products were for vaping (40.7%) and edibles (31.4%). There were school-level racialized and socioeconomic inequities in availability. Ongoing surveillance of D8 availability and laws are urgently needed.