Research scientists trying to study pot face federal hurdles

Nearly four years ago, Dr. Sue Sisley, a psychiatrist at the University of Arizona, sought federal approval to study marijuana’s effectiveness in treating military veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder. She had no idea how difficult it would be.

The proposal, which has the support of veterans groups, was hung up at several regulatory stages, requiring the research’s private sponsor to resubmit it multiple times. After the proposed study received final approval in March from federal health officials, the lone federal supplier of research marijuana said it did not have the strains the study needed and would have to grow more — potentially delaying the project until at least early next year.

Then in June, the university fired Sisley, later citing funding and reorganization issues. But Sisley is convinced the real reason was her outspoken support for marijuana research.

“They could never get comfortable with the idea of this controversial, high-profile research happening on campus,” she said.

Sisley’s case is an extreme example of the obstacles and frustrations scientists face in trying to study the medical uses of marijuana. Dating back to 1999, the Department of Health and Human Services has said it does not see much potential for developing marijuana in smoked form into an approved prescription drug.

Scientists say this position has had a chilling effect on marijuana research.

Although more than 1 million people are thought to use the drug to treat ailments ranging from cancer to seizures to hepatitis C and chronic pain, there are few rigorous studies showing whether the drug is a fruitful treatment for those, or any other conditions.

Amajor reason is this: The federal government categorizes marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug, the most restrictive of five groups established by the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. Drugs in this category — including heroin, LSD, peyote and ecstasy — are considered to have no accepted medical use in the U.S. and a high potential for abuse, and are subject to tight restrictions on scientific study.

In the case of marijuana, those restrictions are even greater than for other controlled substances.

To obtain the drug legally, researchers like Sisley must apply to the Food and Drug Administration, the Drug Enforcement Administration and the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Sisley’s proposed study also had to undergo an additional layer of review from the Public Health Service.

The process is so cumbersome that a growing number of elected state officials, medical experts and members of Congress have started calling for loosening the restrictions. In June, a letter signed by 30 House members, including four Republicans, called the extra scrutiny of marijuana projects “unnecessary,” saying that research “has often been hampered by federal barriers.”

Yet despite the mounting push, there is little evidence that either Congress or the White House is interested in changing marijuana’s status.