Have you been to a licensed cannabis dispensary lately?
My team and I often visit them in the Greater Lansing area to invite cannabis users to participate in our studies. As soon as we walk in, we are met with a dazzling array of products: high-potency vape cartridges, gourmet gummies, premium marijuana flowers and more.
This broad array of choice is common in Michigan, a state where per capita sales now rank among the nation’s highest. I confess I look at those shelves with some professional frustration. As a Michigan State University researcher who has spent nearly two decades studying cannabis use and human health, I face severe restrictions under federal law that mean I cannot study the products that so many of my neighbors are buying.
Under federal law, cannabis is a Schedule I drug. According to this designation, cannabis has “a high potential for abuse” and “no currently accepted medical use,” even though millions of Americans consume it every day. Other Schedule I drugs include heroin and LSD.
In my view, a proposal to reclassify cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III represents a significant, though incomplete, step forward. The change was introduced during the Biden administration and supported by an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in late 2025, but it seems stalled in a regulatory morass.
For researchers like me, whose work is rooted in understanding how this widely available substance affects the health of Michiganders, the change opens some doors while leaving other critical barriers intact.
Table of Contents
1 in 6 pregnant Michiganders use cannabis
Michigan’s robust legal market has recently seen a wave of dispensary closures due to oversaturation and falling prices. However, access is still widespread.
Cannabis is widely consumed in Michigan’s diverse communities, from Detroit to the Upper Peninsula. Data that my colleagues and I have collected confirm that use is not only high overall but notably prevalent among specific populations, including older adults and pregnant women.
As more women of reproductive age use cannabis, it becomes more important to research how prenatal exposure affects the health of mothers and babies. This will allow researchers to provide clear information to families across Michigan who are making decisions in a landscape where cannabis is legally accessible and socially normalized.
However, federal law limits researchers to cannabis samples provided by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which often bears little resemblance to the products Michiganders are actually using. The institute supplies low-potency, standardized products, while the commercial market is flooded with high-potency concentrates, edibles and vapes. This limits the real-world applicability of our findings.
Heart disease, diabetes, cancer, nausea
Much of my research focuses on cannabis use by people with chronic disease. Michigan legalized the recreational use of cannabis in 2018 by popular referendum, and use is highly prevalent among middle-aged and older adults.
Arturo Barajas/The Conversation, CC BY-ND
At the same time, Michigan grapples with a high burden of chronic diseases, such as heart disease, diabetes and cancer. The risk of these conditions increases with age. In southeast Michigan, this burden is even more acute. A Forbes analysis ranked Detroit as the least healthy city in the nation, with the highest rates of diabetes, high blood pressure and obesity. These conditions disproportionately affect Black residents, who make up nearly 80% of the city’s population.
A significant portion of my research seeks to clarify the effects of cannabis use on heart health. This work is particularly urgent in Michigan, where the rates of heart disease are persistently high. Moving cannabis to Schedule III would facilitate larger, more rigorous longitudinal studies, like my team’s Cannabis Legalization in Michigan, or CALM, cohort. For instance, if a Michigander has high blood pressure and uses high-THC vape products, we want to know how that affects their heart health compared to using other forms of the drug. We cannot design a rigorous study answering this question because we are barred from using the specific products consumers purchase in dispensaries.
My research team and others are also investigating cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, a condition characterized by cycles of severe nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain that can result from chronic cannabis use. As regular cannabis use grows among Michiganders, understanding who is at risk and how to treat this debilitating syndrome has become a critical clinical priority.
Hurdles will remain
Even when rescheduling happens, significant barriers to cannabis research will remain.
Schedule III was designed for prescription pharmaceuticals, such as steroids and testosterone, not for a substance available at a store down the street. Moving cannabis to Schedule III does not resolve the fundamental conflict between federal drug policy and real-world consumption in Michigan and around the U.S.
The mismatch between federal law and the patchwork of state cannabis policies will also mean that federally funded, multisite studies remain limited to states where cannabis is fully legal, narrowing the geographical scope and diversity of our research. It also does not eliminate the unique administrative burdens that apply only to cannabis research. Those burdens add years and drive up the cost of studies that are urgently needed. For example, researchers often face lengthy federal review delays before a study can begin.
Researchers could do more useful studies using the products that consumers buy in their own neighborhoods. This would be made possible by removing lengthy federal review requirements, a change that would require congressional action.
The Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act of 2022 was a step in this direction. It aimed to streamline the application process for researchers and expand the supply of research-grade cannabis. However, it did not eliminate the fundamental Schedule I classification or the redundant federal reviews that continue to delay research.
For the people of Michigan, where cannabis is easy to buy and chronic disease is common, these policy restrictions leave families without the science they need to make informed decisions.
