Have you visited a licensed cannabis dispensary recently? My team and I frequently explore these establishments in the Greater Lansing area, engaging with cannabis users to invite them to participate in our research. Upon entering, we are greeted by an impressive assortment of products: high-potency vape cartridges, gourmet gummies, premium cannabis flowers, and much more.
This extensive selection is typical in Michigan, a state where per capita cannabis sales are among the highest in the nation. As a researcher at Michigan State University, I often face professional frustration when viewing those shelves. Federal law imposes severe restrictions that limit my ability to study the very products that are readily available to many Michiganders.
Cannabis Classification and Research Limitations
Under federal law, cannabis is classified as a Schedule I drug, indicating it has “a high potential for abuse” and “no currently accepted medical use.” This classification persists despite millions of Americans consuming cannabis daily. Notably, other Schedule I substances include heroin and LSD.
A proposal to reclassify cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III represents a significant, albeit incomplete, advancement. Introduced during the Biden administration and supported by an executive order from former President Donald Trump in late 2025, this change currently appears stalled in regulatory complexity. For researchers like myself, this shift presents some opportunities while leaving other critical barriers unaffected.
Prevalence of Cannabis Use in Michigan
Recent trends in Michigan’s legal cannabis market show a wave of dispensary closures due to oversaturation and decreasing prices; however, access remains extensive. Cannabis consumption spans diverse communities across the state, from Detroit to the Upper Peninsula. Data collected by my colleagues and me reveal that usage is particularly high among certain demographics, including older adults and pregnant individuals.
As more women of reproductive age turn to cannabis, it becomes increasingly essential to investigate how prenatal exposure may impact the health of mothers and infants. This research is vital for providing comprehensive information to families in Michigan, where cannabis is both legally accessible and socially accepted.
Unfortunately, federal restrictions limit researchers to cannabis samples from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which often do not reflect the products consumed in dispensaries. The institute primarily supplies low-potency, standardized samples, contrasting sharply with the high-potency concentrates, edibles, and vapes that dominate the commercial market. This discrepancy complicates the real-world applicability of our findings.
Impact on Chronic Diseases
Much of my research focuses on cannabis use among individuals with chronic illnesses. Since Michigan legalized recreational cannabis use in 2018 via popular referendum, cannabis consumption has soared, particularly among middle-aged and older adults.
Simultaneously, Michigan faces a significant burden from chronic diseases like heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. These conditions are exacerbated with age, and in southeast Michigan, the situation is even more dire. Forbes ranks Detroit as the least healthy city in the nation, marked by the highest rates of diabetes, high blood pressure, and obesity, disproportionately affecting its predominantly Black population.
A substantial portion of my research aims to clarify how cannabis use affects heart health, especially critical in Michigan, where heart disease rates are consistently high. Rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III would allow for larger, more rigorous longitudinal studies, such as the Cannabis Legalization in Michigan (CALM) cohort. We seek to understand how high-THC vaping products affect individuals with high blood pressure compared to other consumption methods; however, federal restrictions hinder our ability to study the precise products used by consumers.
Ongoing Challenges
Even if cannabis is reclassified, significant research challenges will remain. Schedule III was designed primarily for pharmaceutical prescriptions, not for substances widely available at local dispensaries. Transitioning cannabis to Schedule III does not resolve the disconnect between federal drug policy and actual consumer behavior across the U.S.
This inconsistency will ultimately confine federally funded studies to states where cannabis is completely legal, thereby limiting both geographical scope and diversity in research. Additionally, researchers must navigate unique administrative hurdles that prolong study timelines and increase costs. Delays in federal review can add years before a study is initiated.
Conducting meaningful research with the cannabis products that consumers readily access would require the elimination of these lengthy federal review processes, necessitating congressional action. The Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act of 2022 was a step forward, aiming to streamline research applications and broaden access to research-grade cannabis, but it did not eliminate the core Schedule I classification or redundant federal review processes.
For residents of Michigan, where cannabis is easily obtainable and chronic diseases are prevalent, these policy limitations leave families without the essential scientific guidance they need to make well-informed decisions.