REBUFFING SCIENTISTS, FDA SAYS MARIJUANA HAS NO MEDICAL VALUE

WASHINGTON - The Food and Drug Administration declared Thursday that
"no sound scientific studies" support the medical use of smoked
marijuana. The statement, which contradicts a 1999 review by top
government scientists, inserts the health agency into yet another
fierce political fight.

Susan Bro, an agency spokeswoman, said that the statement resulted
from a combined review by federal drug enforcement, regulatory and
research agencies that concluded that "smoked marijuana has no
currently accepted or proven medical use in the United States and is
not an approved medical treatment." She said the FDA was issuing the
statement because of numerous inquiries from Capitol Hill but would
likely do nothing to enforce it.

"Any enforcement based on this finding would need to be by DEA, since
this falls outside of FDA's regulatory authority," she said.

Eleven states have legalized medicinal uses of marijuana, but the Drug
Enforcement Administration and the nation's drug czar, John Walters,
have opposed those efforts. A Supreme Court decision last year allowed
the federal government to arrest anyone using marijuana, even in
states that have legalized its use.

In 1996, Arizona voters approved marijuana use for medical purposes.
Lawmakers quickly gutted the measure, arguing in part that the federal
government first needed to approve marijuana as a legal drug.

In 1998, proponents fought back and put another measure on the ballot,
which voters again approved. The same proponents also passed the Voter
Protection Act, which prevents lawmakers from monkeying with
voter-approved laws.

Even before the Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that medical marijuana
patients could be prosecuted under federal drug laws, no patients in
Arizona were being treated under the state's law, which required a
doctor's prescription. Despite the state law, no physician in Arizona
has prescribed marijuana for medical purposes because federal law
prohibits it. Doctors face the risk of losing their license if they
prescribe marijuana.

Congressional opponents and supporters of medical marijuana have each
tried to enlist the FDA to support their views. Rep. Mark Souder,
R-Ind., a fierce foe of medical-marijuana initiatives, proposed
legislation two years ago that would have required the FDA to issue an
opinion on the medicinal properties of the drug.

Souder believes that efforts to legalize medicinal uses of marijuana
are "a front" for efforts to legalize all uses of marijuana, said
Martin Green, a spokesman for Souder.

Tom Riley, a spokesman for Walters, hailed the FDA statement, saying
that it would put to rest "the bizarre public discussion" that has led
11 states to legalize the drug's use.

The FDA statement directly contradicts a 1999 review by the Institute
of Medicine, a part of the National Academy of Sciences. That review
found marijuana to be "moderately well suited for particular
conditions, such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and AIDS
wasting."

Dr. John Benson, co-chairman of the Institute of Medicine committee
that examined the research into marijuana's effects, said in an
interview that the FDA statement and the combined review by other
agencies were wrong.

The U.S. government "loves to ignore our report," said Benson, a
professor of internal medicine at the University of Nebraska Medical
Center.

Some scientists and legislators said that the agency's statement about
marijuana demonstrates that politics is trumping science there.