NATURE MEDICINE • VOLUME 5 • NUMBER 7 • JULY 1999 721

NEWS

you—they can’t patent marijuana.”In recognizing the need for objective

evaluation of the potential med-ical use of cannabinoids, theHHS states, “If a positive benefitis found, HHS also recognize theneed to stimulate developmentof alternative, safer dosageforms. Researchers seekingaccess to the drug must beinvolved in studies that generally fol-low guidelines from the IOM report.

In other news…The University of Minnesota is to repay

$11,000 to the NIH as a reimbursement

for grant money misappropriated byassistant professor Keith Kajander, whodied of a cocaine overdose in April.

Kajander used cocaine for painresearch, and took receipt

of 140 grams of cocaineover a seven-year

period; however, aUniversity audit

could not deter-mine the quantityused in his experi-

ments, and thusdecided that the funds

should be returned. An internal TaskForce began a review of University use ofcontrolled substances on June 17th.

MARLENE CIMONS, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Signals from the Australian governmentthat universities may be financiallypenalized unless they improve their per-formance and the rate at which studentscomplete doctoral degrees have irritatedthe research sector.

Michael Gallagher, director of the fed-eral Department of Education, Trainingand Youth Affairs (DETYA) higher educa-tion division, startled a University of NewSouth Wales postgraduate symposium byasking whether Australia was “getting anefficient outcome from time and moneyinvested” in higher research degrees.

DETYA figures show that fewer thanhalf of the doctoral students enrolled inthe early 1990s completed their degree infive years. Of the 3,493 doctoral studentsenrolled in 1992, only 1,498, or 43 per-cent, completed their degree in 1997. Sci-ence PhD students performed better thanmost, with a 51 percent completion rate,compared to 29 percent for arts.

Gallagher’s comments—that the dataprovided no evidence that the presentapproach to research training was“appropriate, responsive, efficient, effec-tive or of adequate quality”—have beeninterpreted by the research sector tomean that the government may be con-sidering a new form of benchmarking,with the threat of funding being tied toefficiencies. “It’s inevitable that whenfigures like this are published and com-mented on by a senior public servantthat people at universities get nervous,”David Siddle, pro-vice-chancellor(research) at the University of Sydney,told Nature Medicine.

Siddle is dubious of the claim thatnearly half of the students are “dropping

out,” and questions whether DETYA hastaken into account individuals who haveupgraded their study, or switched disci-plines or universities.

His scepticism about ‘rubbery’ figures isbacked by the president of the AustralianCouncil of Deans of Science, Rob Norris,who also questions whether DETYA wasable to track the cohort properly. “I sus-pect there is the usual witchhunt on tofurther justify reductions in universityfunds,” says Norris. The Council’s pastpresident, John Rice, warns that the gov-ernment will damage higher education ifit attempts to “come up with a naive sys-tem of benchmarks” whereby researchfunding is distributed to areas with appar-ently higher completion rates.

However, no one is arguing with thestatistics that show a switch in emphasisin doctoral commencements from sci-ence and technology (down seven per-cent) to the social sciences (up seven per-cent) over the last ten years. AustralianSociety for Medical Research spokes-woman Moira Clay believes it reflects thepoor funding for science over the lastdecade, which the government has justonly begun to acknowledge with a boostin the federal budget for biomedicalresearch (Nature Med. 5, 598; 1999).

It’s going to take a while to turn arounda situation where science departmentsacross Australia have been losing five to20 percent of staff each year, says Norris,adding that so long as governmentsregard universities as no more thansausage factories, they will continue topress for “measures to churn out thecheapest sausages.”

RADA ROUSE, BRISBANE

Student drop-outs cause university ranking fears

US to make research marijuana more accessibleIn a major policy shift, the Clintonadministration has decided to release itshold on “research grade” marijuana,making it available to scientists who seekto study its medical benefits. The deci-sion, announced by the Department ofHealth and Human Services (HHS), willopen the way to new privately fundedresearch in the field.

The issue has been a contentious andpolitical one abroad as well as the US.Last month, Canadian Health Minister,Allan Rock, authorized the medical use ofmarijuana (to two AIDS patients) for thefirst time. In February, United Nationsofficials called for increased research intoits therapeutic benefits, and last year theUK awarded a license to GW Pharmaceu-ticals to cultivate marijuana and investi-gate its medical uses. Marijuana report-edly eases pain and quells nausea incancer, HIV and multiple sclerosispatients.

The American clamor for medical mar-ijuana has been bolstered by a Marchreport by the Institute of Medicine(IOM), which identified the need tostudy the drug in clinical trials. TheNational Institutes of Health has alreadybegun testing the effects of marijuana onHIV-associated pain and has called foradditional studies (Nature Med. 3, 943;1997). Several US states have approvedlaws permitting its medical use, but havebeen challenged by the federal govern-ment (Nature Med. 3, 134; 1997).

For more than 20 years, the productionand distribution of marijuana for clinicalresearch in the US has been restrictedunder federal law, making it all butimpossible for non-federally fundedresearchers to obtain the plant. It isgrown by the government in a specialplot at the University of Mississippi.

Under the new policy, privateresearchers, including physicians, will beallowed to purchase and use marijuanafor studies. AIDS researcher DonaldAbrams, San Francisco General Hospital,who received a rare NIH grant last year tostudy the use of marijuana in HIVpatients, said the government’s action“will make it easier” for researchers, butpoints out that scientists still face theproblem of funding. “[This may] elimi-nate the step of having to apply to thegovernment for a [special] grant, butwhere are you going to get research fund-ing? Drug companies won’t support