3 ms·

Although I don't know, I would assume that some of the 10,000 scientific abstracts reviewed were funded by NIDA, which does not fund any study on cannabis that

• snovv_crash 10y ago
  So are you saying that they retract funding if the study shows harm? Because funding needs to be given before the conclusions of the study are available.
  • ImTalking 10y ago
    > The University of Mississippi grows and harvests cannabis for studies funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, yet because NIDA's congressionally mandated mission is to research the harmful effects of controlled substances and stop drug abuse, the institute isn't interested in helping establish marijuana as a medicine. http://www.popsci.com.au/science/why-its-so-hard-for-scientists-to-study-medical-marijuana,379437 http://www.popsci.com.au/science/why-its-so-hard-for-scienti...
  • dekhn 10y ago
    Grants like this are basically negotiated, between the PI (principle investigator, who carries out the work) and the PM (program manager who provides the funding). They already know each other and talk about what kind of research is going to be done. I've tracked NIDA-funded MJ studies for at least a decade, and it's pretty clear they're vetting for scientists who publish conclusions consistent with the mission of their agency. I'm sure a sufficiently motivated scientist could get funding, publish something that disproved the NIDA (it's not hard), and then they would probably not get their funding renewed; it's basically career suicide unless you have other sources of funding.
  • dekhn 10y ago
    Actually, funding is usually given after the scientist shows some preliminary data suggesting the study will be "successful".