Amherst Board of Health Tackles Synthetic Cannabinoid Regulation

In a recent meeting, the Amherst Board of Health delved into the complex issue of regulating synthetic cannabinoids, such as Delta 8 and Delta 10, and discussed the alignment of local tobacco violation fines with state structures, among other significant public health concerns.

The meeting opened with a debate on the regulation of synthetic cannabinoids. These substances, specifically Delta 8 and Delta 10, have become increasingly prevalent in local stores, sold without regulation or clear concentrations. The Board discussed the challenges in distinguishing these products from those containing Delta 9 THC, the main psychoactive component of cannabis. Concerns were raised about the neurological effects of synthetic cannabinoids, which are similar to those of Delta 9 THC, and their accessibility to individuals under the age of 21.

The emergence of products claiming to contain Delta 8 or Delta 10, which are being marketed as compliant with the Farm Act, has led to legal and regulatory ambiguities. The Board referred to statements from the Drug Enforcement Agency and the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources that classify these synthetic products as controlled substances. The Massachusetts Department of Public Health issued guidance declaring products with hemp or CBD to be adulterated, thus violating the food code. Moreover, the Alcohol Beverage Control Commission and the Cannabis Control Commission have set regulations regarding the inclusion of THC or CBD in alcoholic beverages and cannabis-infused products. A lawsuit in California questioning the legality of Delta 8 products under the Farm Act further highlighted the legal complexities surrounding these substances.

The discussion on synthetic cannabinoids led to a broader debate on whether to ban or regulate other products like kratom, a substance some advocate for its potential benefits in aiding individuals to wean off heroin. The legality of CBD products and enforcement challenges were also discussed, with the Board considering options such as sending letters to stores, enacting regulations, or supporting state officials in regulating these issues.

Another topic of the meeting was the alignment of local tobacco violation fines with state fines. The Board debated whether the local fine structure is equitable and effective as a deterrent. Concerns were voiced that the current local fines might be too low and not serve as an effective deterrent in the current economy. The Board discussed the potential need to revisit and possibly increase fines to ensure they remain a significant deterrent for tobacco violations. It was clarified that fines collected go into the general town budget and not directly towards public health programs. No consensus was reached.

The possibility of allowing self-service counters at adult-only tobacco sales outlets was considered, with a focus on whether such a move would yield any public health benefits. The Board discussed the limited number of adult-only tobacco stores such as “lazy lungs” and regulations regarding tobacco retail permits and their proximity to schools. The potential impact of hemp-derived products, particularly CBD in consumable products, was also a topic of concern.

The Board acknowledged the assistance of Cheryl, the executive director of the Massachusetts Association of Health Boards, who provided insights on the complexities of hemp-derived products. The need for clear regulations was emphasized, as well as the importance of Board members having sufficient time to review and discuss proposed changes before making decisions.

In other business, the Board addressed the upcoming flu and COVID clinics, the importance of community outreach, and plans for the fall season. They reflected on the mental wellness workshops, part of the kindness campaign, which aimed to encourage young people to express their emotions through poetry. However, the low attendance at workshops on mental health and suicide prompted a discussion on improving event promotion. The potential hiring of a Communications Manager to enhance outreach efforts was also discussed.

Moreover, the Board considered the issue of mosquito surveillance and treatment, the need for educational material on the pros and cons of spraying, and the use of opioid abatement funds to support individuals using drugs. The future of the Board, including upcoming vacancies and the process for appointing new members, was also discussed. An in-person meeting was suggested, and the successful walk, bike, and roll to school day event was highlighted.

Note: This meeting summary was generated by AI, which can occasionally misspell names, misattribute actions, and state inaccuracies. This summary is intended to be a starting point and you should review the meeting record linked above before acting on anything you read. If we got something wrong, let us know. We’re working every day to improve our process in pursuit of universal local government transparency.

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly:

is discussed during:
in these locations: