Walk into a gas station in most U.S. states today and you can legally buy a gummy containing 100mg of delta-8 THC — a hemp-derived intoxicant that can produce effects comparable to traditional marijuana. No age verification required. No potency labeling standard. No regulatory framework at all. Yet, a few miles away, an adult buying a regulated cannabis product from a licensed dispensary faces an ID check, child-resistant packaging, lab-tested potency disclosure, and a state excise tax.
This is the absurdity the U.S. hemp and cannabis industry finds itself in today — and it's one that IHPA believes must change.
"We don't oppose intoxicating cannabis products. We oppose an unregulated market that treats them like candy. The answer isn't prohibition — it's the same framework we already use for alcohol and tobacco."
First: Let's Define the Terms
The confusion starts with the plant itself. The 2018 Farm Bill drew a legal line at 0.3% delta-9 THC by dry weight — anything below that threshold is "hemp," anything above is "marijuana." But that binary never accounted for the chemistry of the plant, which produces dozens of cannabinoids that can be converted, synthesized, or concentrated into intoxicating products at scale.
Used for fiber, hurd, seed, biochar, CBD, and — increasingly — converted into intoxicating products like delta-8, delta-10, and THCA flower. The legal gap has been exploited at an industrial scale since 2018.
High-THC products regulated at the state level in 24+ legal states. Subject to lab testing, child-proof packaging, dosage labeling, age verification, licensed retail — everything hemp-derived intoxicants lack.
The result? A consumer buying an unregulated hemp-derived THC gummy has no idea how potent it is, whether it was third-party tested, or whether the facility that made it was ever inspected. Meanwhile, the scientifically identical product sold in a regulated dispensary carries a COA (Certificate of Analysis), a milligram count, and a legal paper trail.
The Intoxicant Problem: What "Hemp-Derived" Really Means Now
Since the 2018 Farm Bill, a growing category of hemp-derived cannabinoids has flooded convenience stores, smoke shops, and online retailers. These include:
- Delta-8 THC — a mild psychoactive cannabinoid converted from CBD. Federally unaddressed, legal in most states.
- THCA Flower — raw cannabis that converts to delta-9 THC when smoked. Exploits a technicality in how potency is measured.
- Delta-10, THC-O, HHC, THCP — semi-synthetic cannabinoids with little to no safety research, sold with essentially zero oversight.
- High-dose hemp gummies — products marketed with 50–500mg "hemp extract" per serving, clearly intended as intoxicants, requiring no age verification at point of sale.
This isn't the industrial hemp that IHPA and American farmers grow for fiber, seed, and biochar. This is a regulatory loophole being exploited to sell intoxicating products without the safeguards that both alcohol and tobacco have carried for decades.
The Data: How Cannabis Risk Compares to Alcohol & Tobacco
Before advocating for any policy position, it's important to understand what the science actually shows about cannabis and mortality — because the comparison to alcohol and tobacco is both striking and rarely discussed in mainstream media.
CDC Est. — including secondhand smoke
CDC — 2020-2021 avg.; up 29% since 2017
DEA & CDC — no confirmed fatal overdose
U.S. Substance-Related Deaths Per Year (2016–2023)
Estimated annual deaths attributable to tobacco, alcohol, and cannabis — based on CDC, NIAAA, and DEA data. See methodology note below.
Data sources & methodology: Tobacco: CDC long-standing estimate of ~480,000 annual deaths (includes secondhand smoke); updated research projects ~450,000 annually from 2020 onward as smoking rates decline (Le et al., AJPM 2024). Alcohol: CDC MMWR (Esser et al., 2024) — average annual deaths: 138,000 (2016–17), 145,000 (2018–19), 178,000 (2020–21); 2022–23 estimated by IHPA based on published trend data. Cannabis: No confirmed fatal overdose deaths on record per DEA and CDC. Cannabis is associated with a subset of traffic fatalities (cannabinoids detected in ~21.5% of traffic deaths; NHTSA), but isolation of causation from other substances is not established by current research. Chart reflects confirmed attributable overdose deaths only. This chart is for educational purposes. Data should not be used as a basis for investment decisions.
The data tells a clear story: the two substances that are already legal and regulated kill hundreds of thousands of Americans every year. Cannabis, for all the political controversy that surrounds it, has never produced a confirmed fatal overdose in the recorded history of its use. That is not an argument for recklessness — it is an argument for proportionality in how we regulate it.
Alcohol killed roughly 29% more Americans in 2020–2021 than it did in 2016–2017, partly driven by COVID-era availability policies and social isolation. Tobacco continues to be the single largest cause of preventable death in the country. Yet both remain fully legal, heavily marketed, and available in virtually every corner store. The inconsistency in how we treat cannabis — particularly at the federal level — is not science-based policy. It is legacy politics.
IHPA's Position: Regulate It Like Alcohol and Tobacco
IHPA is not in the business of producing intoxicating products. Our mission is industrial hemp infrastructure — fiber, hurd, seed, biochar, and advanced carbon materials. But we are deeply invested in a coherent, science-based regulatory framework for the entire Cannabis sativa L. plant, because regulatory chaos in the intoxicant market creates downstream harm for legitimate industrial hemp operators.
Here is where we stand:
IHPA Policy Position — Cannabis & Hemp Intoxicants
- Full legalization of Cannabis sativa L. at the federal level — ending Schedule I classification and allowing states to regulate in a manner consistent with their existing alcohol and tobacco frameworks.
- Any product intended to intoxicate — natural or synthetic, cannabis-derived or hemp-derived — should be regulated as an intoxicant. If a delta-8 gummy or a THCA pre-roll produces the same effect as a delta-9 product from a licensed dispensary, it should face the same oversight: age verification, potency labeling, lab testing, licensed retail, and excise taxation.
- The regulatory floor should mirror alcohol and tobacco: child-resistant packaging, no retail sales to minors, independent third-party testing, consumer disclosure at point of sale, and state/federal revenue participation.
- Redefine the hemp/cannabis threshold at 3% delta-9 THC by dry weight. The current 0.3% limit — borrowed from a 1970s academic paper, not modern agronomic science — is arbitrary, unworkable for farmers, and has no basis in pharmacology or consumer safety. Hemp should be defined as Cannabis sativa L. testing at or below 3% THC by dry weight; anything above 3% is cannabis/marijuana subject to the intoxicant regulatory framework described above.
- Industrial hemp used for non-intoxicating purposes — fiber, hurd, seed, and processed materials — should remain on a streamlined agricultural pathway, distinct from intoxicant-product regulation.
- Synthetic cannabinoids with no safety data (THC-O, THCP, and novel isomers) should be subject to a pre-market safety review process before retail availability, analogous to FDA's approach to novel food additives.
The DEA's Role — And Why It Matters Right Now
DEA Docket No. DEA-1362 — the proceeding that will determine how the federal government handles cannabinoid regulation going forward — is one of the most consequential open regulatory questions in the hemp industry today. IHPA has prepared a formal public comment for submission when the docket reopens, advocating for the framework above: regulate intoxicants like intoxicants, and protect legitimate industrial hemp from regulatory overreach.
We are also watching the anticipated federal cannabis descheduling process closely. If a descheduling commission is formed, IHPA intends to participate — not as a voice for the intoxicant market, but as an advocate for American hemp farmers, processors, and the communities that depend on this crop's industrial applications.
"Prohibition of cannabis failed. Regulatory chaos around hemp-derived intoxicants is failing right now. The path forward is the one we already know: transparency, consumer protection, and age-restricted access — the same model that governs every other legal intoxicant in America."
What This Means for Hemp Farmers
The unregulated intoxicant market also creates real problems for industrial hemp growers. When hemp-derived THC products generate headlines about contaminated batches, unverified potency, and products marketed to children, it pollutes public perception of the entire crop. Every farmer growing fiber hemp for rope, hurd for hempcrete, or grain for food is associated — fairly or not — with the chaos in the intoxicant channel.
A clear, science-based regulatory framework that separates industrial hemp from intoxicating products doesn't just protect consumers — it protects the farmers, processors, and infrastructure builders who are doing the legitimate work of building an American hemp industry from the ground up.
That is the industry IHPA is building toward. And that is the policy framework we will continue to advocate for.
Industrial Hemp Processing of America (IHPA) is building Washington State's first vertically integrated, carbon-negative industrial hemp processing facility in Mead, WA. We process hemp into fiber, hurd, biochar, and certified seed — and we advocate for science-based policy that supports legitimate hemp agriculture. Learn more at ihpamerica.com.