Skip to content

Anatomy of a Joint: Comparing Self-Reported and Actual Dose of Cannabis and Tobacco in a Joint, and How These Are Influenced by Controlled Acute Administration

Chandni Hindocha, Tom P. Freeman, Helen Valerie Curran

Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research 2017 DOI: 10.1089/can.2017.0024 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial Peer reviewed
Sample size 24
Population Recreational co-users of cannabis and tobacco
Interventions Cannabis Tobacco
Topics Cannabis
Citations 42
Key findings Self-reported cannabis dose per joint was about double the actual amount measured (0.28 g vs 0.14 g), while tobacco estimates were accurate. Active cannabis, compared with placebo, reduced the actual amount of both cannabis and tobacco participants put in a joint; participants accurately estimated the tobacco reduction but not the cannabis reduction. The authors argue self-reported cannabis dose should be viewed with caution and propose the 'Roll A Joint' paradigm for assessing dose per joint.

Abstract

Abstract

Introduction: Major gaps exist in the measurement of cannabis exposure. The accuracy of self-reported cannabis and tobacco dose per joint is poorly characterized and has never been investigated following acute cannabis/tobacco exposure. Using an innovative “Roll a Joint” paradigm, this study aims to (1) compare estimated and actual dose of cannabis and tobacco per joint at baseline and (2) examine the acute effects of cannabis and/or tobacco on estimated and actual dose.

Materials and Methods: We investigated this by using a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover 2 (active cannabis, placebo cannabis)×2 (active tobacco, placebo tobacco) design in a laboratory setting. Participants were 24 recreational cousers of cannabis and tobacco. At baseline, they were asked to measure out the amount of cannabis and tobacco they would put in an average joint for themselves (dose per joint). Then, on each of four drug administration sessions, participants were again asked to do this for a joint they would want to smoke “right now.” Self-reported and actual amount was recorded (g).

Results: At baseline, the estimated amount of cannabis per joint (0.28±0.23 g) was double the actual amount (0.14±0.12 g) ( p =0.003, d =0.723). No difference emerged between estimated (0.43±0.25 g) and actual (0.35±0.15 g) ( p =0.125) amount of tobacco per joint. Compared to placebo, active cannabis reduced the actual dose of both cannabis ( p =0.035) and tobacco ( p <0.001) they put in a joint. Participants accurately estimated this reduction for tobacco ( p =0.014), but not for cannabis ( p =0.680).

Conclusions: Self-reported dose per joint is accurate for tobacco but dramatically overestimates cannabis exposure and therefore should be viewed with caution. Cannabis administration reduced the amount of cannabis and tobacco added to joints, suggesting a reduction in dose during a smoking session. The “Roll A Joint” paradigm should be implemented for better accuracy in assessing dose per joint.

Comparable studies

Other randomized controlled trials on cannabis, most cited first.

Study Year Design Participants
Cannabidiol inhibits THC-elicited paranoid symptoms and hippocampal-dependent memory impairment Healthy participants 2012 Randomized controlled trial n = 48
Distinct Effects of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol on Neural Activation During Emotional Processing Healthy, English-native, right-handed men who had used cannabis 15 times or less in... 2009 Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled crossover trial n = 15
Acute Effects of a Single, Oral dose of d9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and Cannabidiol (CBD) Administration in Healthy Volunteers Healthy male subjects 2012 Randomized controlled trial n = 16
Modulation of Mediotemporal and Ventrostriatal Function in Humans by Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Healthy, native English-speaking, right-handed men of white race/ethnicity who had used... 2009 Randomized controlled trial n = 15
Cannabidiol (CBD) content in vaporized cannabis does not prevent tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-induced impairment of driving and cognition Healthy volunteers with a history of light cannabis use 2019 Randomized, double-blind, within-subjects crossover n = 14

Citations in the library

Cited by 6

and 1 more in the library

Cites 7

and 2 more in the library

Explore topics