Lack of clear edible rules hard to swallow
Is Health Canada doing its job?
I’m not returning here to the topic of the vaping crisis. But looking ahead to legally-about-to-go-on-sale cannabis edibles.
Six months ago, Health Canada announced the finalization of regulations for the production and sale of edibles, extracts and topicals. The news was cheering insofar as the government mandated a cautionary single-dose packaging limit of 10 mg for edibles, which are slated to go on sale as early as Dec. 17. Expect gummies and chews and all things chocolate to be big business. In Colorado, which introduced legal edibles in 2014, the “candy” category quickly shot to top spot in terms of spending share, followed by chocolate.
Health Canada said it paid close attention to the edibles evolution in the U.S., noting particularly that the 10 mg limit drew on “lessons learned” in those states that had legalized cannabis.
Packaging in Canada must be plain and child-resistant and bear a standardized cannabis symbol — the tricolour stop-sign-shaped symbol features a cannabis leaf in the top two-thirds of the octagon, with the letters THC printed below. As I noted in a column in June, the “win for business” was that only the package has to bear the THC symbol and not the gummy/chew/mint itself.
This was in contrast to Colorado which in 2017 tightened its own laws, requiring that each individual edible be stamped or lasered with the state’s THC symbol — an exclamation mark within a diamond accompanied by the abbreviation for tetrahydrocannabinol. Some edibles makers had to modify their offerings, eliminating sweet cannabis treats that were too soft to take the THC symbol and remaking moulds for gummies to add the THC caution.
What I didn’t anticipate then was the potential for Canadian producers to sell pouches of five unstamped strawberryflavoured gummies with 2 mg per candy, or milky five-section chocolate bars, similarly unmarked.
As Canadian producers were establishing their edibles lineups, the state of Nevada announced that it had decided to follow Colorado’s lead. As of Jan. 1 of this year, each single serving had to be THC identified.
Asked about the thinking behind the change, a public information officer from the state’s department of taxation, which regulates cannabis, sent this note by email: “If those products are separated from the packaging, without a stamp or mould identifying the product as containing THC, it can be impossible to distinguish a product with cannabis from a product that does not have cannabis. A THC chocolate square or gummy without a symbol for instance may look identical to any other chocolate or gummy. That could pose a danger to the public, parents and children that may unsuspectingly consume the product.” All single servings in a multiserving pack must be stamped. Nevada also ditched its initial leaf identifier for a stronger warning sign.
Teaser videos and still images of what will be on offer in Canada suggest that not following these U.S. examples has not only resulted in a lack of standardization, but a confusion of ideas as to how informative a single serve edible should be. Canopy Growth’s Bean & Bud dark chocolate medallions, made in partnership with Hummingbird Chocolate at Canopy’s Smith’s Falls facility, come in a box of two, with each moulded medallion clearly showing a 5 mg cannabis content. The letters THC are moulded right into each medallion, though in a swooping cursive as opposed to a stern sans serif caution.
A production video for Aurora Cannabis Inc. shows the moulded making of domeshaped 2-mg gummies, which would sell five to a pack. The product will be in full packaging and labelling compliance, the company notes, but each gummy will be free of any THC identifiers.
The custom-moulded strawberry fruit chews from Olli, made with real fruit strawberry purée, are imprinted with the Olli brand name and nothing else. The chew will come in packages of two at 5 mg of THC each.
Health Canada’s advisory for edibles initiates is a first-time consumption of 2.5 mg followed by patience.
The absence of standardization seems contrary to the government’s “must not be appealing to youth” regulations. And just in time for Christmas, too.
I called up Nancy Whiteman for her thoughts. Whiteman’s business, Wana Brands, is based in Boulder with expected sales this year, in Colorado alone, in excess of $24 million (U.S.). It has operated through that state’s transformation to tougher regulations. Is there an upside to being more rigorous? “In terms of pros it certainly can’t hurt to have more information on the edible itself,” she says.
She cites a first responder situation as an example where the information could be key. “At least on the edible itself there would be some kind of marking that it had THC in it.” As to the oft-cited examples of increasing numbers of emergency room visits with children who have ingested THC, Whiteman says this: “What they don’t tell you is that at least here in Colorado they don’t track whether those are legally made edibles or black market edibles where parents were just leaving them around the house.”
So there’s an information or statistical vacuum. “The question is really what is the problem we are solving with the stamping? The truth is we don’t really know the answer to that. Like I said, I don’t see how it can’t hurt.”
One might have thought that Health Canada’s approach would be the most cautionary.
“The best thing for manufacturers is to make it as tight and as safe as you can, but do it early,” Whiteman says. “We had all been producing products for a number of years without the requirement for stamping or marking in some way. When that regulation got passed we had to completely overhaul our manufacturing processes.” Yes, expensive. There will be an outcry if Health Canada tightens its requirements in the future. But it should. The government kept talking about keeping cannabis out of the hands of youth. Well, this should be about keeping everyone informed.