The thing about marijuana is that it’s infiltrating the candy world whether we like it or not. Which, of course, leads to the multimillion-dollar question, do we like it?
Currently, Colorado is looking at literally banning the word, “candy” from marijuana-infused products, according to an Associated Press article that ran in The Daily Mail. The ban would apply to sweets such as suckers or gummy chews — otherwise known as, well, “candy.”
Apparently, the move is part of a larger effort to keep pot away from kids. An effort that also includes the possibility of adding red stop signs to all marijuana edibles with the letters “THC” where “STOP” usually is. And, banning pre-made edibles.
“The rules would ban a manufacturer from buying bulk candy and spraying it with cannabis oil, but not altering an existing product so that it's unrecognizable, such as grinding up chocolate chip cookies to make a cheesecake crust,” the article states.
That makes sense even if you’re just looking at it from a trademark perspective, but I can also understand why there would be pushback on a rule like that.
“Manufacturers complained that the made-from-scratch rule needs more clarification because manufacturers routinely use pre-made products. 'Do I have to have chickens out back for the eggs?' asked Dan Anglin of the Colorado Cannabis Chamber of Commerce,” the AP reports.
And all this is not without cause.
“The state already banned pot manufacturers from using cartoon characters on packaging or making "look-alike" products such as candies designed to mimic common foods,” the AP reports. “But the state has seen sporadic reports of people unknowingly eating pot. Perhaps most famous was a man hospitalized after unknowingly eating pot-infused chocolate at the 2014 Denver County Fair.”
I mean, if people are accidentally eating pot, I can understand where some of these rules are coming from. But banning the world “candy” on candy, well, that may be a step too far.
Honestly, my first reaction to the whole “candy” thing is that if the state bans the word on marijuana edibles, those who make them will just alter the word. Kandee. Candi. Kandy. So many choices.
And actually, taking a step back, what do we even call people who make chocolates infused with pot? Are they candy makers? Are they marijuana edibles manufacturers? Are they marijuana-candy makers?
And does calling them candy makers mean they can join the National Confectioners Association? Is there going to pot-candy section at the next Sweets and Snacks Expo?
Of course, there are different ways of looking at this whole thing.
The first question is, should marijuana be legal in the first place? Because if you’re against that, then regulating how people market it isn’t too much a leap.
Personally, though, as someone who deals with chronic health issues, and as a result often has to fight with doctors and insurance companies to get the medicine I need, I’m, at the very least, in favor of medical marijuana. And, Colorado has decided that it too supports legal marijuana.
So that argument doesn’t really hold up.
The next question, then, is, does banning the word “candy” really help the situation?
As a writer, I get really uncomfortable anytime people start talking about banning words.
Plus, the arguments people are using to ban the word “candy” on pot-infused edibles sound a lot like the push back the industry gets about sugar. And that’s a road we definitely don’t want to go down.
I mean, many in the confectionery industry are already in an uproar because the FDA just wants to add “added sugars” to nutritional labels. Imagine if the FDA said you couldn’t call gummy bears, “gummy bears” anymore because they have too much sugar in them, and the words “gummy bears” make kids want to eat all that sugar. All heck would break loose.
At the end of the day though, it really just comes down to whether or not people who make pot-infused candy are part of the confectionery industry that many of us believe we belong to.
Because if they’re not, well, then, it doesn’t really matter if we support them or not. And if the state wants to ban the word “candy” from their chocolates, then who are we to protest? We don’t consider it candy either.
But if they’re just candy makers making candy like all the other manufacturers and artisans out there — just with a little bit of “better-for-you” pot — then I believe we should stand with them and demand their right to use the word “candy.”
So really, it all boils down to the same question we started with — do we like it?