If you can't prove marijuana is bad then just make something up about it. Well that's not my advice but the FDA did it! Original Article Rebuffing scientists, FDA says marijuana has no medical value Gardiner Harris New York Times Apr. 21, 2006 12:00 AM 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. Republic staff contributed to this article.