Compared to having no rules at all, yes. Understood.
Why do you professionals at CAMH take this academic approach when you're studying addictive substances instead of cautioning people against a new addiction or cautioning Canadians about the health problems and dangers caused by marijuana, or potential dangers caused by e-cigarettes? It's like you're accepting addictive drugs, like you're saying, well, they're going to be normalized so let's just legalize them, and yet we know that regulations don't always work, to say the least.
I'm wondering why you don't focus your messaging on protecting people from the dangers of addictions and new addictions instead of somehow looking for ways to normalize the use.