# Characterizing public comments via Regulations.gov in response to proposed cannabis rescheduling in the United States. > **Author:** Benjamin Caplan, MD (ABFM Board Certified, MA Lic. #240562, NPI: 1962722637) > **Publisher:** CED Clinic (https://cedclinic.com) > **Canonical URL:** https://cedclinic.com/characterizing-public-comments-via-regulations-gov-in-response-to-proposed/ > **Published:** 2026-04-28T20:05:40-04:00 | **Last Modified / Clinically Audited:** 2026-09-28T16:04:50-04:00 > **Clinical Summary:** The United States Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA) proposed rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances A... --- CED Clinical Relevance  #56Monitored Relevance  Early-stage or contextual signal requiring further evidence before action. 🔬 Evidence Watch  |  CED Clinic Journal Addiction (Abingdon, England) Study Type [Clinical Study](https://cedclinic.com/cannabis-hyperemesis-syndrome-psychiatric-risk/) Population Human participants Why This Matters This item covers developments relevant to [cannabis medicine](https://cedclinic.com/essential-oils-industrial-hemp-antimicrobial-benefits/) and [clinical practice](https://cedclinic.com/cannabis-reproductive-health-women-clinical-evidence/). Clinicians monitoring evidence in this area should review the source material. Clinical Summary The United States Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) proposed rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III under the [Controlled Substances](https://cedclinic.com/dea-scheduling-cannabis-policy-march-15-2026/) Act marks a significant shift in [federal policy](https://cedclinic.com/fbi-hemp-policy-clarification-agent-investment-work/). Understanding public sentiment toward this policy is critical for guiding the current cannabis rescheduling effort as well as future reforms. The objective of this study is to characterize public comments submitted to Regulations.gov regarding the DEA’s cannabis rescheduling proposal and identify underlying justifications for support or opposition. A mixed-methods analysis was conducted. Online public comments submitted to Regulations.gov regarding the DEA’s cannabis rescheduling proposal. 42 913 public comments submitted between 21 May and 22 July 2024. Comments were analyzed for sentiment towards the proposed rescheduling (support, oppose or insufficient rescheduling) and thematic justifications using manual and automated natural language processing techniques. A two-stage annotatio Dr. Caplan’s Take “This is a development worth tracking. The clinical implications will become clearer as more evidence accumulates.” Clinical Perspective 🧠 Clinicians should review this item in the context of their current practice and patient population. 💬 Join the Conversation Have a question about how this applies to your situation? [Ask Dr. Caplan →](https://benjamincaplan.com/ask-dr-caplan) Want to discuss this topic with other patients and caregivers? [Join the forum discussion →](https://cedclinic.com/interact/discussion-forums/forum/cannabis-industry/) Have thoughts on this? Share it: [X Share on X](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Just%20read%20this%20on%20CEDclinic.com%3A%20Characterizing%20public%20comments%20via%20Regulations.gov%20in%20response%20to%20proposed%20cannabis%20rescheduling%20in%20...%20%40drcaplan&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcedclinic.com%2Fcharacterizing-public-comments-via-regulations-gov-in-response-to-proposed%2F)[in Share on LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcedclinic.com%2Fcharacterizing-public-comments-via-regulations-gov-in-response-to-proposed%2F)[🦅 Share on BlueSky](https://bsky.app/intent/compose?text=Just%20read%20this%3A%20Characterizing%20public%20comments%20via%20Regulations.gov%20in%20response%20to%20proposed%20cannabis%20rescheduling%20in%20...%20via%20%40drcaplan.bsky.social%20https%3A%2F%2Fcedclinic.com%2Fcharacterizing-public-comments-via-regulations-gov-in-response-to-proposed%2F)[📷 Follow on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/drbenjamincaplan)[📝 Read more on Substack](https://doctorapprovedcannabis.substack.com/)[🔔 Subscribe via RSS](https://cedclinic.com/feed/) 📰 Source: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42029003/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42029003/) Table of Contents - [FAQ](#FAQ)[What change to cannabis scheduling did the DEA propose?](#What_change_to_cannabis_scheduling_did_the_DEA_propose) - [What were the researchers trying to learn from the public comments?](#What_were_the_researchers_trying_to_learn_from_the_public_comments) - [How many public comments were analyzed, and when were they submitted?](#How_many_public_comments_were_analyzed_and_when_were_they_submitted) - [How were the public comments sorted and analyzed?](#How_were_the_public_comments_sorted_and_analyzed) - [Related](#Related) ## FAQ ### What change to cannabis scheduling did the DEA propose? The DEA proposed moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III under the [Controlled Substances](https://cedclinic.com/dea-scheduling-cannabis-policy-march-15-2026/) Act, a change the article describes as a significant shift in [federal policy](https://cedclinic.com/fbi-hemp-policy-clarification-agent-investment-work/). This study looked at how the public responded to that proposal through comments submitted on Regulations.gov. ### What were the researchers trying to learn from the public comments? The study aimed to characterize the public comments submitted to Regulations.gov about the DEA’s rescheduling proposal and to identify the underlying reasons people gave for supporting or opposing it. The authors frame understanding public sentiment as critical for guiding both the current rescheduling effort and future reforms. ### How many public comments were analyzed, and when were they submitted? The study analyzed 42,913 online public comments submitted to Regulations.gov between 21 May and 22 July 2024, all responding to the DEA’s cannabis rescheduling proposal. These comments formed the data set for the study’s mixed-methods analysis. ### How were the public comments sorted and analyzed? Each comment was classified by its sentiment toward the proposal: support, oppose, or insufficient rescheduling. Comments were also coded for the themes people used to justify their positions. The researchers used both manual and automated natural language processing techniques as part of a mixed-methods analysis. [https://cedclinic.com/contact/](https://cedclinic.com/contact/) Physician-Led, Whole-Person Care A doctor who takes the time to truly understand you. Personal care that starts with listening and is guided by experience and ingenuity. Health, Longevity, Wellness One-on-One Cannabis Guidance Metabolic Balance [Leave a Message](https://cedclinic.com/contact/) [Metabolic Care](https://cedclinic.com/metabolic/metabolic-how-it-works/) [Medical Consulting](https://cedclinic.com/book/) [Cannabis Care](https://cedclinic.com/book/) [https://cedclinic.com/contact/](https://cedclinic.com/contact/) ### Related --- ### Verification & Medical Governance - **Lead Clinical Author:** Benjamin Caplan, MD - **Credentials:** Board Certified in Family Medicine (ABFM), Former CMO Canna Care Docs (250,000+ patients supervised), Founder & CMO CED Clinic & CED Foundation, Author of *The Doctor-Approved Cannabis Handbook* (Penguin Random House). - **Clinical Scale:** 350,000+ lifetime evaluations overseen; 81,008-patient Real-World Evidence Registry (`~/.ced_rwe_vault.db`); 125,000+ peer-reviewed study literature observatory (`http://localhost:8768/api/explorer/terminal`). - **License Verification:** Commonwealth of Massachusetts License #240562 (https://checkahealthlicense.mass.gov/). - **NPI Registry:** 1962722637 (https://npiregistry.cms.hhs.gov/provider-view/1962722637). - **Ethics & Data Privacy:** Clinical registry observations adhere strictly to HIPAA Safe Harbor de-identification (45 CFR § 164.514(b)) and criteria for secondary research exemption under 45 CFR § 46.104(d)(4).