• More Blogs
• Observations »
• Bering in Mind »
• Cross-check »
• Extinction Countdown »
• Solar at Home »
• Expeditions »
• Guest Blog »
• Anecdotes from the Archive »

Unless you have  an Rx and live in a state with a medical marijuana provision, the federal government won’t let you grow or possess your own pot. But who knew the feds have been farming the stuff for decades? The Marijuana Project at the University of Mississippi cultivates nearly 100 varieties of the herb, and today we have a smidge more insight into the controversial lab.

The New York Times today ran an interview with Mahmoud ElSohly, 62, who heads up the project – the country’s only federally approved marijuana plantation. ElSohly offers some background: Scientists first determined the chemical structure of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), marijuana’s active ingredient, in 1964, then started the lab four years later to continue studying its chemistry.

The lab’s plants – grown, ElSohly says, from seeds seized from Mexico, Colombia, Thailand, Jamaica, India, Pakistan and the Middle East – are distributed to scientists studying, among other things how pot may ease pain, nausea, glaucoma and loss of appetite from AIDS. Those researchers need special permits from the Drug Enforcement Agency (D.E.A.) and approval from the Food and Drug Administration (F.D.A.) and Department of Health and Human Services (H.H.S.) to conduct their research – if, that is, they’re lucky enough to get any of the coveted G-Man weed to begin with.

Scientists complain that they can’t get the official pot to develop THC-based drugs – and then are forbidden from growing their own, a 2006 piece in The Scientist noted. But they also criticize its quality, describing the government’s marijuana as weak, with an inconsistent chemical makeup.

Most of the feds’ marijuana is grown outside, which, like any other crop, leaves its quality to chance. (The weed is grown on 1 to 1.5 acres, yielding variable amounts of pot every two to three years.) But the disgruntled scientists’ criticism is “negative propaganda” that is “very, very false,” ElSohly told The Scientist in 2006 adding that he can custom grow the weed per scientists’ needs and produce pot containing up to 40 percent THC.

It's not clear whether the Times asked ElSohly about those criticisms; the reporter, Claudia Dreifus, does not have a phone number at the newspaper and didn't immediately respond to an email.

Steve Gust, special assistant to the director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, tells us in an email that most of those concerns "have come from a very few individuals (some of whom have actually been quite successful at obtaining and using the marijuana in their research). The truth is that for almost 10 years the US Gov policy on provision of marijuana for research on potential medical uses has been open to researchers and the great majority of those who have applied for it have received it. 

"The amount available generally exceeds what is requested from researchers," Gust says.

"As for the claims regarding quality, we provide marijuana in a range of 'potencies,' from placebo (0 percent THC) up to 8 percent THC, and could provide it at higher concentrations if there were a demand from researchers," he adds. "The upper range closely tracks the THC potency of marijuana that is generally available in the illicit market. The marijuana provided now is of consistent quality and is well tolerated by research subjects."

Curious Marijuana Project passersby have less, er, heady concerns, ElSohly tells the Times. “We have visitors at the building now and then who ask, ‘Oh, do you give samples?’” he notes. “We say, ‘No!’”

Updated at 6:25 p.m. with additional information from NIDA.

Image of marijuana leaf by iStockphoto © Vladimir Vladimirov

6 Comments

1. 1. BruceMirken 06:30 PM 12/23/08

   Unfortunately, Mahmoud ElSohly continues to tell tall tales to the Times. Among others, he continues to perpetuate two long-discredited myths.
   
   Contrary to El Sohly, THC is not "the active ingredient" in marijuana. Though THC is responsible for essentially all of the "high," it is now well documented that other cannabinoids contained in the plant, such as cannabidiol (CBD) contribute significantly to its therapeutic value -- including pain relief, anti-inflammatory, and even anti-tumor actions. Unfortunately, the marijuana ElSohly grows in Mississippi contains such miniscule amounts of these other cannabinoids that it's useless for researching them, and his enforced monopoly on researchers' marijuana supply is a major obstacle to medical marijuana research. And the low quality of ElSohly's marijuana is legendary among patients, discouraging patients from enrolling in medical marijuana studies.
   
   Second, the notion that most marijuana in the 1970s contained less than one percent THC has been thoroughly debunked, the result of a small number of samples stored for long periods in hot evidence lockers, causing the THC to degrade. Marijuana with under one percent THC is not noticeably psychoactive, yet our government -- speaking through ElSohly -- would have us believe that marijuana's popularity skyrocketed based on a product that had no effect on most users. Yeah. Right.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. jackl 08:24 PM 12/23/08

   Without casting too many aspersions on the quality of the reporting or Dr. ElSolhly's contentions, the readers should be aware that there is an application pending at the DEA for an alternative research center for cannabis, to a large extent based on perceived limitations with Dr. Elsohly's legislated monopoly of research facilities, as overseen by the DEA and NIDA under the U.S. Controlled Substances Act. That alternative research grow application was sponsored by the University of Massachusetts and MAPS.org. and that such application, after a trial type contested hearing with expert witnesses including Dr. ElSohly I believe before the DEA, their ALJ, against the recommendations of the DEA Staff, voted to grant the license. http://www.maps.org/mmj/DEAlawsuit.html
   
   I cannot believe that this article could run without mention of Dr. Lyle Craker's competing operation, but it continues to speak poorly of Dr. ElSohly's credibility and that of this science publication not to mention this very significant controversy that attends two competing research facilities and ideologies.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. danimalman 10:51 AM 12/24/08

   The writer's first sentence contains a couple major factual errors. For one, that someone may live in a medical marijuana state is irrelevant to the DEA. Growing or possession is still illegal under federal law. Second, medical marijuana patients do not get prescriptions from physicians as marijuana is still a Schedule 1 drug. Here in California they are instead called recommendations.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. jackl 11:24 AM 12/24/08

   From the MAPS.org website, regarding Dr.ElSohly's monopoly, DEA/NIDA regulation of medicine and congressional oversight hearings held on 12 Jul 07 before the House subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security. A link to the full transcript is provided.
   
   Bottom line: Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) tries to get a commitment from the DEA to act on the ALJ's positive recommendation on the competing Craker application before the end of the Bush term, or even to get the DEA to discuss such anodyne topics as 'generally how long the agency takes to review a recommended decision and take action'. The DEA, Dr. ElSohly's patron, of course, blows off Congressman Nadler's questions. And of course, almost two years later, no action has been taken, leaving it up to the incoming Obama administration. See, http://www.maps.org/mmj/#background
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. MPele 11:42 AM 12/24/08

   Interesting the propaganda both sides are spouting... yet the reality is that sick people are being harassed and jailed for their choice of non-lethal medicine and their doctors recommendations by the same government that brought you this article.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. jamesodba 02:03 AM 12/25/08

   "...he can custom grow the weed per scientists needs and produce pot containing up to 40 percent THC." Really? 40%? I don't think so; more like 4%. How could anyone think the plant could contain 40% of anything except cellulose? Particularly a single chemical compound?
   Who writes and edits this junk?

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this