There's one huge caveat to that: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/health/policy/19marijuana.html http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/health/policy/19marijuana..

There's one huge caveat to that: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/health/policy/19marijuana.html http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/health/policy/19marijuana.... [If] a researcher wants to use a variety of marijuana that the University of Mississippi does not grow -- and there are many with differing medicinal properties -- they are out of luck, Dr. Doblin said. "As the National Institute on Drug Abuse, our focus is primarily on the negative consequences of marijuana use," said Shirley Simson, a spokeswoman for the drug abuse institute, known as NIDA. "We generally do not fund research focused on the potential beneficial medical effects of marijuana." NIDA controls the supply, the strains available and the research on a proposal-by-proposal basis. They admit that their first priority is not accurate science, via their active discriminating against research into beneficial effects. While I'm not going to declare all the research they've allowed is necessarily bad, it's clearly limited and incomplete to a dysfunctional degree.