Drug Policy Alliance DrugPolicy.org 1
WE NEED A HEALTH APPROACH TO
SYNTHETIC CANNABINOID
FACTS ABOUT
SYNTHETIC
CANNABINOID
JUNE 2016
1. WHAT IS
SYNTHETIC MARIJUANA?
“Synthetic marijuana” is a common, but misleading,
term that refers to a class of substances more
accurately called cannabinoid receptor agonists or
synthetic cannabinoids.
1
Whereas marijuana usually
refers to the dried flowered buds of the actual
plant, which derives its main psychoactive effect
through THC
2
, synthetic cannabinoids get their
name from their action on various cannabinoid
receptors in the brain.
Sacrificing accuracy for simplicity, people in public
office, the media, and law enforcement use the
term “synthetic marijuana” or the brand names of
products sold, such as “Spice” or “K2,” that are known
to contain various synthetic cannabinoids.
3
The
in laboratory research are known as the JWH Series,
but soon after those were banned, newer and less
researched synthetic cannabinoids, such as
XLR-11,
4
AB- PINACA,
5
and AB-FUBINACA
6
were found
in products that were still legal.
The substances that were later identified in these
products were originally discovered by scientific
researchers looking to understand more about the
cannabinoid receptor system in the human brain
and immune system. Many of these substances
have different chemical structures than THC, the
main psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, and are
full agonists at cannabinoid receptors, which can
cause them to produce very different effects than
THC,
7
which is a partial agonist. This is one possible
reason for the higher rates of some of the more
extreme side effects that are only occasionally seen
in adverse reactions to marijuana.
2. WHY DO PEOPLE USE
SYNTHETIC CANNABINOID
PRODUCTS LIKE “SPICE”
AND “K2?”
The emergence of synthetic cannabinoids
has mirrored the same trends seen with other
novel psychoactive substances. People may use
synthetic cannabinoids when experimenting
with other substances, and in some cases use
may be accidental.
MOST PEOPLE AREN’T AWARE THAT
THE EFFECTS ARE UNLIKE MARIJUANA
– THUS REPEATED USE IS RARE.
AND, IF GIVEN THE CHOICE, ADULTS
WOULD VERY LIKELY CHOOSE
TO USE MARIJUANA IF IT WERE
LEGALLY AVAILABLE.
Due to the ongoing prohibition of marijuana,
emergence of the synthetic cannabinoid market
over the last decade has met demand by being a
legal or quasi legal alternative. Because standard
drug testing only tests for THC found in plant-based
marijuana, synthetic cannabinoid products do not
trigger a positive result. This appealed to active
military personnel, professional athletes, people
on parole, and people in treatment for substance
misuse who were among the earliest reported users
of these products. Another group commonly using
synthetic cannabinoids are those suffering from
chaotic life situations, often homeless or low income.
8
Drug Policy Alliance DrugPolicy.org 2
Synthetic cannabinoids became an affordable
replacement to marijuana or other drugs.
While no specific measures are available, people
that continue to use synthetic cannabinoids are
perhaps those looking for a cheaper alternative or
to pass drug tests, rather than due to preference
over marijuana.
9
3. WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN SYNTHETIC
CANNABINOIDS
AND MARIJUANA?
Marijuana is a natural plant that grows both in the
wild and is cultivated for its medicinal properties and
for recreational use. Though synthetic cannabinoids
are considered chemical relatives or analogues
to substances in marijuana, they are not actually
found in plant-based marijuana and therefore have
chemical and pharmacological properties largely
unknown outside of the laboratory.
10
Due to the ongoing prohibition of marijuana and
advances in technology that allowed for access
to drug research and easier chemical production,
a market for synthetic cannabinoids developed in
the early 2000s.
11
Synthetic cannabinoid products
began being produced and sold in herbal smoking
blends as legal marijuana replacements.
12
The
products are packaged and branded to suggest a
similarity to the effects of marijuana, but because
the material are inert herbal mixtures doused with
synthetic cannabinoids, their appearance, taste,
and smell are different.
4. WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF
SYNTHETIC CANNABINOIDS?
Synthetic cannabinoids are mistakenly considered
to closely mimic the effects of marijuana, but in
fact there are significant differences. As their
name suggests, synthetic cannabinoids, like THC
and other substances in marijuana, affect the
brain by stimulating activity at various cannabinoid
receptors.
13
Although research is limited, preliminary
studies suggest that effects include feeling
stimulated and energetic, increased appetite,
and producing a dream-like state, but can also
include nausea and vomiting, seizures, aggression
and agitation, as well as respiratory failure and
loss of consciousness.
14
Whereas THC, the main
psychoactive substance in marijuana, is a partial
agonist, synthetic cannabinoids are full agonists.
Adverse reactions to synthetic cannabinoids saw
calls to poison control centers peak at just under
10,000 in 2015,
15
and the number of emergency room
visits in the tens of thousands
16
(these figures have
since gone down). One explanation for the high
number of hospital visits is that other substances
in marijuana known to protect against anxiety
and psychotic symptoms
17
likely balance out the
direct effects of THC on the brain but are absent in
synthetic cannabinoids.
Until more research is done on individual synthetic
cannabinoids specific causes for these effects will
remain only partially understood.
5. WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN “SPICE”, “K2,
AND OTHER SYNTHETIC
CANNABINOID PRODUCTS?
A synthetic cannabinoid product is a branded
package containing herbal matter sprayed or
doused with liquid synthetic cannabinoids. “Spice”
and “K2” are examples of very early brands of
synthetic cannabinoid products. The first synthetic
cannabinoids found in these products are known
as the JWH series, which were the most extensively
studied in laboratory research. As laws banning
the JWH compounds took effect, newer and less
researched synthetic cannabinoids such as XR-11,
AB-PINACA, and AB- FUBINACA were used in products
since they had not been banned.
There are hundreds of different name brands, but
synthetic cannabinoids are not always sold that
way. They may also simply be sold as marijuana
might be, as a joint or in a plastic bag without any
information as to the actual contents.
sold in a branded package does not mean the
synthetic cannabinoids used are always the same.
18
Drug Policy Alliance DrugPolicy.org 3
Due to lack of regulation there is no incentive for
manufacturers, mostly consisting of clandestine
labs in Asia, to ensure a consistent, high-quality
product. These labs are constantly changing
formulations in an effort to work around laws
19
attempting to prohibit them, and brands often
contain an inconsistent and unreliable combination
of synthetic cannabinoids.
20
Therefore, the
difference between synthetic cannabinoid products
can be as variable as the difference from packet
to packet of the same brand name. Furthermore,
material within the packet itself may even have
varying levels of potency, which could result in very
high levels of chemicals unintentionally ingested.
21
6. HOW RISKY ARE SYNTHETIC
CANNABINOID PRODUCTS
COMPARED TO MARIJUANA
OR OTHER DRUGS?
These substances are generally more harmful
than plant-based marijuana. Many of the adverse
reactions to synthetic cannabinoids have been
reported to involve dangerous physical symptoms,
whereas adverse reactions to natural marijuana
typically involve symptoms resembling anxiety
and panic, which though worrisome, are not lethal.
In 2012, state public health department officials,
poison control centers and CDC researchers
identified 16 cases of acute kidney injury related
to use of synthetic cannabinoids in six states
(Kansas, Oklahoma, Oregon, New York, Rhode Island &
Wyoming).
22
The sudden rise of synthetic cannabinoid related
calls to poison centers, hospitalizations and even
instances of fatal reactions has never been seen
with marijuana, which has only ever been indirectly
associated with drug-related deaths, and never
shown to result in a fatal overdose. Deaths linked to
synthetic cannabinoids do not compare to numbers
from drugs like heroin and cocaine,
23
and while
the brief rise in ER visits and poison center calls
did signal a temporary cause for concern (these
figures have since gone down),
24
alarmist responses
and harsh law enforcement crackdowns often
overshadow the need for public education and harm
reduction measures and ultimately cause more
harm than good.
7. IS “SYNTHETIC
MARIJUANA” ADDICTIVE?
Given the lack of scientific evidence, the
addictive potential of synthetic cannabinoids
is inconclusive. The most credible information
available are limited to case reports
25
and
anecdotal accounts. These sources suggest that
compulsive use exists, though these alone cannot
qualify the argument on addiction.
8. HOW MANY PEOPLE
ARE USING “SYNTHETIC
MARIJUANA” PRODUCTS?
Despite widespread media attention throughout
the country over the past few years, relatively few
people are using synthetic cannabinoid products
compared to other drugs. While there are a few
ways to measure for usage rates of synthetic
cannabinoid products, they come with a few
caveats. Data from emergency room visits rose
sharply in the early 2010s,
26
with the most recent
national numbers reaching almost 30,000 (from
2011, compared to 2.5 million ER visits in 2011 from
all drugs).
27
Calls to poison control centers started
climbing around the same time frame, going from
a couple thousand in 2013 to almost 8,000 in 2015.
28
But the Monitoring the Future survey of 8th-12th
graders showed less than 5% of 8th graders had
tried synthetic cannabinoid products in the past
year for 2012-2015, less than 10% for 10th graders,
and aside from 2012, less than 10% of 12th graders.
29
Based on overall trends from the MFS synthetic
cannabinoids actually do not appear to be of much
interest to youth in the United States.
30
Even when synthetic cannabinoid use peaked in
survey data around 2012, overall prevalence has
remained relatively low compared to other drugs.
31
While no specific measures are available, people
that continue to use synthetic cannabinoids are
likely those looking for a cheaper alternative or to
pass drug tests.
Drug Policy Alliance DrugPolicy.org 4
9. ARE SYNTHETIC
CANNABINOIDS LEGAL?
For the most part, no.
When synthetic cannabinoid products began to
appear in convenience stores in the mid-2000s they
contained substances that were not specifically
banned by state or federal drug laws. But by the end
of the decade, a few states passed laws to ban their
sale, and in 2011 the DEA used emergency protocols
to temporarily schedule some of the substances
found in synthetic cannabinoid products. The next
year, President Obama signed the Synthetic Drug
Abuse Prevention Act, permanently placing several
different classes of psychoactive substances,
32
including many synthetic cannabinoids, into
Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) –
the most restrictive classification.
Each state is currently using various administration
actions, prosecution strategies, and regulations
for product labeling and branding to either quickly
ban individual substances or criminalize sales.
Most states have also enacted (and many others
have pending legislation) criminal and civil penalties
for sale of products that attempt to avoid being
advertised as “synthetic drugs” by claiming products
are, “not for human consumption.” Recently, states
like New York, Virginia and several others have
pushed for new laws that broaden the chemical
definitions meant to be outlined in Schedule I,
as well as call for harsher penalties for sale of
synthetic cannabinoid products.
However, these laws essentially “mark the battle
lines” as manufacturers of synthetic cannabinoids
can make small changes to the chemical
formulas in order to skirt these laws, producing
newer synthetic cannabinoids that have not yet
been scheduled. Regulation that would permit
commercial sale but hold retailers accountable for
products they sell is an alternative that would keep
the public safer than prohibition.
10. WHAT’S A HARM
REDUCTION APPROACH TO
SYNTHETIC CANNABINOIDS?
As demand persists despite attempts to prohibit
supply, a regulated framework is needed to control
the market. Without requiring labelling and product
consistency, people determined to use these
products have no idea what they’re getting.
Instead of further criminalization, alternative
approaches to reduce accidental deaths and
hospitalizations related to drug use, improve public
health outcomes, care for vulnerable populations,
and protect young people include:
Provide outreach and resources for
vulnerable populations.
Provide comprehensive drug education
about emerging substances.
Revisit plans to tax and regulate
marijuana as a means of reducing
demand for synthetic cannabinoids.
Drug Policy Alliance DrugPolicy.org 5
1. Atwood, Brady K., John Huffman, Alex Straiker, and Ken Mackie.
JWH018, a Common Constituent of ‘Spice’ Herbal Blends, Is a Potent
and Efficacious Cannabinoid CB 1 Receptor Agonist.” British Journal
of Pharmacology 160, no. 3 (2010): 585-93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-
5381.2009.00582.x.
2. Taura, Futoshi, Supaart Sirikantaramas, Yoshinari Shoyama, Yukihiro
Shoyama, and Satoshi Morimoto. “Phytocannabinoids in Cannabis
Sativa: Recent Studies on Biosynthetic Enzymes.” ChemInform 38, no.
47 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1002/chin.200747225.
3. “Drug Enforcement Administration’s National Forensic Laboratory
Information System NFLIS Home.” Drug Enforcement Administration’s
National Forensic Laboratory Information System NFLIS Home.
Accessed June 09, 2016. https://www.nflis.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/.
4. “UR-144 (TCMP-018; KM-X1) and XLR11 (5-F-UR-144).” Drug Enforcement
Administration, Office of Diversion Control: Drug & Chemical
Evaluation Section. May 2013. Accessed June 9, 2016. http://www.
deadiversion.usdoj.gov/drug_chem_info/spice/spice_ur144_xlr11.pdf.
5. “N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-
indazole-3- carboxamide (AB-CHMINACA), N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-
oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl- 1Hindazole-3-carboxamide (AB-PINACA)
and [1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazol-3- yl](naphthalen-1-yl)methanone
(THJ-2201): Background Information and Evaluation of ‘Three Factor
Analysis’ (Factors 4, 5, and 6) for Temporary Scheduling “ Drug
Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control: Drug
& Chemical Evaluation Section. December 2014. Accessed June
9, 2016. https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/news/
upload/3- factor%20analysis%20AB-CHMINACA%20AB- PINACA%20
THJ2201%2012172014.pdf.
6. AB-FUBINACA” Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion
Control: Drug & Chemical Evaluation Section. April 2014. Accessed
June 9, 2016. http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/drug_chem_info/
spice/ab_fubinaca.pdf.
7. Fantegrossi, William E., Jeffery H. Moran, Anna Radominska-Pandya,
and Paul L. Prather. “Distinct Pharmacology and Metabolism of
K2 Synthetic Cannabinoids Compared to Δ9-THC: Mechanism
Underlying Greater Toxicity?” Life Sciences 97, no. 1 (2014): 45-54.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2013.09.017.
8. Winstock, Adam R., and Monica J. Barratt. “Synthetic Cannabis: A
Comparison of Patterns of Use and Effect Profile with Natural
Cannabis in a Large Global Sample.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence
131, no. 1-2 (2013): 106-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2012.12.011.
9. Missing
10. Missing
11. Missing
12. Missing
13. Missing
14. Missing
15. Missing
16. Missing
17. Missing
18. Missing
19. Walton, Alic G. “Why Synthetic Marijuana Is More Toxic To The Brain
Than Pot.” Forbes. August 28, 2014. Accessed June 09, 2016. http://
www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2014/08/28/6-reasons-synthetic-
marijuana-spice-k2-is-so-toxic-to-the-brain/#1db656f849eb.
20. Griffiths, Paul, Roumen Sedefov, Ana Gallegos, and Dominique Lopez.
“How Globalization and Market Innovation Challenge How We Think
about and Respond to Drug Use: ‘Spice’ a Case Study.” Addiction 105,
no. 6 (2010): 951-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02874.x.
21. Vandrey, Ryan, Kelly E. Dunn, Jeannie A. Fry, and Elizabeth
R. Girling. “A Survey Study to Characterize Use of Spice
Products (synthetic Cannabinoids).” Drug and Alcohol
Dependence 120, no. 1-3 (2012): 238-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
drugalcdep.2011.07.011.
22. “Synthetic Cannabinoids.” Synthetic Cannabinoids.
Accessed June 09, 2016. http://www.aapcc.org/alerts/
synthetic-cannabinoids/.
23. “Update: Drug-Related Emergency Department Visits
Involving ...” Accessed June 9, 2016. http://www.samhsa.gov/
data/sites/default/files/SR-1378/SR- 1378.pdf.
24. Campos, A. C., F. A. Moreira, F. V. Gomes, E. A. Del Bel, and
F. S. Guimaraes. “Multiple Mechanisms Involved in the
Large-spectrum Therapeutic Potential of Cannabidiol in
Psychiatric Disorders.” Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 367, no. 1607 (2012):
3364-378. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0389.
25. Auwärter, Volker, Sebastian Dresen, Wolfgang Weinmann,
Michael Müller, Michael Pütz, and Nerea Ferreirós.
“‘Spice’ and Other Herbal Blends: Harmless Incense
or Cannabinoid Designer Drugs?” Journal of Mass
Spectrometry J. Mass Spectrom. 44, no. 5 (2009): 832-37.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jms.1558.
26. “Synthetic Cannabinoids and ‘Spice’ Drug Profile.” EMCDDA.
Accessed June 09, 2016. http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/
publications/drug-profiles/synthetic- cannabinoids.
27. “Notes from the Field: Increase in Reported Adverse Health
Effects Related to Synthetic Cannabinoid Use — United
States, January–May 2015.” Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention. 2015. Accessed June 09, 2016. http://www.
cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6422a5.htm?s_
cid=mm6422a5_ w.
28. “Overdose Death Rates.” National Institute on Drug Abuse
(NIDA). 2015. Accessed June 09, 2016. https://www.drugabuse.
gov/related-topics/trends- statistics/overdose-death-
rates.
29. Zimmermann, Ulrich S., Patricia R. Winkelmann, Max
Pilhatsch, Josef A. Nees, Rainer Spanagel, and Katja Schulz.
“Withdrawal Phenomena and Dependence Syndrome After
the Consumption of “Spice Gold”” Deutsches Ärzteblatt
International. 2009. Accessed June 09, 2016. https://www.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2719097/.
30. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration, Drug Abuse Warning Network, 2011: National
Estimates of Drug-Related Emergency Department
Visits. HHS Publication No. (SMA) 13-4760, DAWN Series
D-39. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration, 2013.
31. “Monitoring the Future Study: Trends in Prevalence of
Various Drugs.” National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).
Accessed June 09, 2016. https://www.drugabuse.gov/trends-
statistics/monitoring-future/monitoring-future- study-
trends-in-prevalence-various-drugs.
32. “MTF Data Tables and Figures.” MTF Data Tables
and Figures. Accessed June 09, 2016. http://
monitoringthefuture.org/data/15data.html#2015data-
drugs.
END NOTES