The history of #physicians attitude to #marijuana, from antiquity to recent Trump’s #declassification Physicians’ attitudes toward marijuana have shifted dramatically over time, from widespread acceptance as a versatile medicine in antiquity and the 19th century, through a period of prohibition and skepticism in the 20th century, to a complex modern stance of caution, support for research, and increasing willingness to recommend it for specific conditions. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] Antiquity to the 19th Century: Widespread Medical Acceptance [6] For millennia, physicians and healers across various cultures utilized cannabis for a wide range of ailments. Ancient China: Emperor Shen Nung, the father of

The history of  #physicians attitude to  #marijuana, from antiquity to recent Trump’s  #declassification

Physicians’ attitudes toward marijuana have shifted dramatically over time, from widespread acceptance as a versatile medicine in antiquity and the 19th century, through a period of prohibition and skepticism in the 20th century, to a complex modern stance of caution, support for research, and increasing willingness to recommend it for specific conditions. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Antiquity to the 19th Century: Widespread Medical Acceptance [6]
For millennia, physicians and healers across various cultures utilized cannabis for a wide range of ailments.

Ancient China: Emperor Shen Nung, the father of Chinese medicine, included cannabis in his pharmacopoeia around 2700 BCE, prescribing it for gout, rheumatism, and malaria. Physician Hua T’o later used it as an anesthetic during surgery.
Ancient Greece and Rome: Physicians like Dioscorides documented cannabis’s use for treating earaches, inflammation, and pain in their medical texts.
19th Century US & Europe: In the 1800s and early 1900s, U.S. physicians and pharmacists widely dispensed cannabis tinctures and extracts for pain, nausea, and various other conditions, and it was included in the U.S. Pharmacopeia. [3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12]

The 20th Century: Prohibition and Skepticism
The 20th century marked a significant reversal, driven by social and political factors rather than medical evidence.

Marihuana Tax Act of 1937: This act imposed burdensome requirements on physicians who prescribed cannabis, effectively discouraging its medical use. The American Medical Association (AMA) opposed the Act, arguing against the criminalization of a medicine, but their objections were overruled.
Removal from Pharmacopeia: Cannabis was removed from the U.S. Pharmacopeia in 1941, signaling a decline in its medical legitimacy.
Controlled Substances Act of 1970: This law classified cannabis as a Schedule I substance, defining it as having “no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse”. This federal stance severely restricted research and made medical use illegal, solidifying a period of physician skepticism and fear of legal repercussions. [3, 12, 18, 19, 20]

Late 20th Century to Present: Shifting Tides and Calls for Research [21, 22]
Public opinion shifts, patient advocacy (especially from cancer and AIDS patients in the 1980s and 90s), and the discovery of the endocannabinoid system led to renewed interest and a gradual change in physician attitudes.

1996: California became the first state to legalize medical marijuana, initiating a state-by-state movement that conflicts with federal law.
Physician Knowledge Gaps: Despite growing state-level legalization, many physicians still report a lack of knowledge and formal training regarding medical cannabis, leading to varied attitudes across specialties.
Current AMA Stance: The AMA no longer actively opposes medical cannabis but advocates for comprehensive, well-controlled studies to determine its role in treatment, supporting the removal of federal research roadblocks. [4, 19, 24, 25]

Trump’s Administration & Reclassification Efforts
The user’s query mentions “Trump’s declassification,” which likely refers to administrative actions concerning the legal status of marijuana. The Trump administration weighed reclassifying pot and was generally seen as having a complex approach to the issue. [26, 27, 28, 29]
While there was no outright “declassification” (a term usually reserved for secret government documents), the Department of Justice under the Trump administration issued guidance on federal prosecution in states with legal medical cannabis (the “Ogden Memo” guidelines were eventually rescinded, then a new memo issued, leading to an inconsistent landscape). More significantly, the administration’s actions and public comments reflected a broader national dialogue about moving away from federal prohibition. [19, 30, 31, 32, 33]
The most substantial recent federal development occurred under President Biden’s administration, which initiated a formal review and proposed the rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act, a move that is currently in progress and would acknowledge its accepted medical uses. This reflects the culmination of decades of shifting public and medical opinion. [4, 34, 35, 36, 37]

AI responses may include mistakes.

[1]  maps.org/research-archive/mm…
[2]  journalofethics.ama-assn.org…
[3]  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medica…
[4]  ama-assn.org/about/leadershi…
[5]  werehistory.org/pot-politics…
[6]  pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/article…
[7]  sydney.edu.au/lambert/medici…
[8]  centralavecare.org/the-evolu…
[9]  silverstemcannabis.com/news-…
[10]  shorehousecanna.com/ancient-…
[11]  grunge.com/1478740/how-marij…
[12]  pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1966…
[13]  thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/a…
[14]  avenuesrecovery.com/understa…
[15]  pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/article…
[16]  cambridge.org/core/books/sem…
[17]  regask.com/cannabis-cannabin…
[18]  time.com/4298038/marijuana-h…
[19]  pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/article…
[20]  sciencedirect.com/science/ar…
[21]  asbestos.com/treatment/alter…
[22]  journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.…
[23]  pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/article…
[24]  frontiersin.org/journals/pub…
[25]  ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article…
[26]  kffhealthnews.org/morning-br…
[27]  washingtonpost.com/business/…
[28]  kffhealthnews.org/morning-br…
[29]  youtube.com/shorts/WUVWEAmTk…
[30]  justsecurity.org/71295/regar…
[31]  rockinst.org/issue-area/ep-1…
[32]  postguam.com/forum/featured_…
[33]  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medica…
[34]  cannabisbusinesstimes.com/ca…
[35]  vicentellp.com/insights/us-o…
[36]  yalelawjournal.org/article/d…
[37]  policycommons.net/artifacts/…

The history of physicians attitude to marijuana, from antiquity to recent Trump’s declassification
.Physicians’ attitudes toward marijuana have shifted dramatically over time, moving from broad acceptance and regular use in antiquity and the 19th century, through a period of prohibition and skepticism in the 20th century, to a modern era of cautious re-evaluation driven by scientific evidence and changing legal landscapes
Antiquity to the 19th Century: A Trusted Remedy
For millennia, physicians in ancient civilizations widely used and accepted cannabis as a versatile medicine.
Ancient China: Emperor Shen Nung included cannabis in his pharmacopoeia around 2700 BCE, prescribing it for gout, rheumatism, malaria, and more.
Ancient Egypt: The Ebers Papyrus (c. 1550 BCE) mentions using cannabis for inflammation and glaucoma symptoms.
Greece and Rome: Physicians like Dioscorides and Pliny the Elder documented its use for conditions such as earaches, gout, and inflammation.
Western Medicine Introduction: In the 1830s, Irish physician William Brooke O’Shaughnessy observed cannabis use in India and introduced it to Western medicine, documenting its effectiveness as an analgesic and muscle relaxant. By the late 1800s, cannabis extracts were readily available in U.S. pharmacies and listed in the U.S. Pharmacopoeia.
Early 20th Century: Decline and Prohibition
Physician attitudes shifted with the rise of alternative synthetic drugs like aspirin and injectable opiates, which offered more consistent potency than variable plant batches. This decline was compounded by a growing political and racialized push for prohibition in the U.S..
1937 Marihuana Tax Act: This act did not ban cannabis but created burdensome reporting requirements that effectively discouraged medical use. The American Medical Association (AMA) initially opposed the act, favoring continued physician control over its use, but their opposition was ultimately unsuccessful.
1942: Cannabis was removed from the U.S. Pharmacopoeia.
1970 Controlled Substances Act: Cannabis was classified as a Schedule I drug, defined as having no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. This classification severely hindered scientific research into its medical potential.
Late 20th Century to Present: Re-evaluation and Shifting Tides
The late 20th century saw a renewed interest in medical cannabis, spurred by patient advocacy (especially during the AIDS epidemic), scientific discoveries (like the endocannabinoid system in the 1990s), and state-level legalization movements.
Physician Attitudes Today: Contemporary physician attitudes are mixed but increasingly favorable, particularly in states with legal medical cannabis. Many physicians, especially oncologists and pain management specialists, perceive benefits for conditions like chronic pain, nausea, and appetite loss. However, many still report a lack of confidence in counseling patients due to a lack of formal education and a desire for more robust clinical evidence. The AMA officially supports research into the medical uses of cannabis and a re-evaluation of its Schedule I status.
Trump Administration Policy: The Trump administration did not “declassify” marijuana. While the administration weighed various policy options and the topic of reclassification was discussed, the federal legal status remained unchanged. In fact, President Trump’s first Health and Human Services Secretary, Tom Price, expressed skepticism about medical benefits. The most significant recent federal action regarding potential reclassification has occurred more recently, with the Biden administration taking formal steps in 2024 to potentially move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act, recognizing some medical value, a move that is still pending.

– Google Search  google.com/search?q=The+hist…

— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) Dec 14, 2025