As far as the DFRC is concerned, one of the biggest problems lies in the fact that most people consider themselves to be cannabis advocates or critics, with no real middle-ground. DFCR founder and board president David L. Nathan said in an interview that it’s not necessary to be a marijuana advocate to understand the fact that current prohibition is proving to be entirely counterproductive. Or in other words, the way forward means seeing the matter as something that is far from black and white – even if in the eyes of critics it means contemplating the lesser of two perceived evils.

Contrary to popular belief, the DFRC is not in fact supportive of the use of recreational marijuana and nor do they advocate its use where unnecessary. They agree that it is considerably less harmful that tobacco, alcohol and other drugs, though are not at all suggesting that it should be smoked routinely by the public in general, should it be made legally available. Instead, their focus is on removing the outdated stigma attached to marijuana use in general, in order to bring about a new era of sensible regulation, research and progress.

And as far as this group of doctors is concerned, implementing new marijuana regulation to bring the subject out into the open is the only way of making this happen.

Rather, Nathan says, the best way to manage those risks is to bring use of the drug, as well as the associated commerce in it, out into the open via regulation.

“Doctors should affirmatively support this,” Nathan added.

“If you’re going to make something against the law, the health consequences of that use have to be so bad to make it worth creating criminal consequences. That was never true of marijuana. It was banned in 1937 over the objections of the American Medical Association (AMA).”