Youth psychiatrist disappointed in Nova Scotia’s marijuana age decision
Health officials are disappointed that the province has set the legal age for marijuana consumption at 19 years.
The consensus among provincial and national health organizations is that the minimum age should be 21, and some believe it should be even older, said Dr. Phil Tibbo, director of the Nova Scotia Early Psychosis Program and a psychiatry professor at Dalhousie University.
“Regular cannabis use can actually have a significant impact on brain development up until about your mid-20s,” he said in an interview Thursday.
“The structure’s there but it’s all that fine-tuning of the connections, making sure the synapses are in the right place, making sure the white matter is in the right place to help all those connections as well.”
If that doesn’t happen, the person’s cognitive development can be affected, Tibbo said. He emphasized that studies have focused on the effects of daily or neardaily use. “We honestly don’t have the research on occasional use, once a month or something like that, in this age group.”
Doctors Nova Scotia said Thursday it also recommends age 21 given the potential negative impacts on brain development for children and youth.
“We have endorsed the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health’s cannabis policy framework, which recommends 21 because that prevents cannabis from being sold alongside alco- hol,” spokeswoman Janice Hudson said in an email Thursday. “Legalizing cannabis is the right thing to do from a public health perspective, but we think that selling it alongside alcohol might not send the right message to the public.”
In its marijuana policy announcement Thursday, the province said 19 years for cannabis is in line with Nova Scotia’s legal age for alcohol, and it pointed out every province except Manitoba chose ages that align with their legal drinking age.
Tibbo questioned that rationale.
“I think from a population health and the medical aspect of things, you know, perhaps using the age of something that’s already in place as your marker may not . . . be the right argument from a medical standpoint,” he said.