One of the major problems with most drug policies worldwide is the branding of users as criminals. This has led to many incidents where normal, everyday people have been locked up with hardened crims and left to defend for themselves in the vicious prison system. Ironically as Mexico decriminalised small amounts of drugs, one young man was detained for possession of cannabis only a few months shy of the new laws. Whilst in lockup, he was raped.
Youngster Was Detained For Marijuana Possession And Raped At Police Station Momento24
August 2009
A young man was raped in the cells of Boulogne police station. He’d been detained for marijuana possession. The youngster’s lawyer, Jose Vera, announced that his client will file a millionaire suit against the state.
The fact came into light today, a day after the Supreme Court decriminalized the possession of drugs for personal use, but it had taken place in February 2007, .
The Court sentenced the rapist to 23 years in prison and ordered further proceedings against the police who didn’t watch over the boy.
“His life was ruined for a joint. It’s one of those cases that should have never happened,” said Vera.
“Many things failed. But above all we must point out the sensless criterion for detaining a boy for a whole weekend for a spliff.”
“Besides, it is also very serious that a college kid like this were locked into the same dungeon with really dangerous prisoners.”
The boy, named David, was arrested for a previous case so he didn’t possess any marijuana when he was nabbed by police.
The patrol officers decided to take him anyway and put him in jail.
The boy was placed in a cell with the prisoners’ leader Ricardo Juarez, alias “El Cabezon”, for two days. As soon as Juarez saw David threatened to impale him with a stick with a knife on the tip. Then he stole his belongings. The rape took place the following night. Juarez’s cell was unlocked and while the guard nodded off the accused sneaked off his cell, took David by the throat and raped him for ten minutes.
The next day David was released. The boy went to a hospital, who testified at trial that the boy had been abused. Then he contacted his attorney to take the case to Court where two years later Juarez was sentenced to 23 years in prison for aggravated sexual abuse and use of weapon. He also requested an appeal against the guard who neglected the victim.
South Australia had the chance but blew it and now Canada are going to take the honour. You might remember back in June 2008 when SA Democrat, Sandra Kanck recommended using MDMA (aka ecstasy) to treat Iraq war veterans with post-traumatic stress syndrome(PTSS). She was heavily criticised and knocked as some sort of loopy, pro-drug activist. Sandra had previously suggested using MDMA for the victims of the Eyre Peninsula bushfires in 2006 and the response from parliament and the media was no different back then. Now it seems, those who criticised her are looking pretty damn stupid. Her very suggestions are being taken up by Canada by way of a trial of treating PTSS patients with MDMA.
Preliminary studies have shown that MDMA in conjunction with psychotherapy can help people overcome PTSD. MDMA has empathogenic effects, and it is also known as the popular drug Ecstasy (although "Ecstasy" does not always contain pure MDMA). In laboratory studies, MDMA has been proven sufficiently safe for human consumption when taken a limited number of times in moderate doses. -Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies
There were many who criticised Sandra Kanck simply for looking to our medical know-how to solve a medical problem. It was like being back at school where mob mentality took over the playground and some poor kid copped hell for being different. Sandra was mocked and made fun by many so called adults in a disgusting display of ignorance and political point scoring. From the media to Veterans' Affairs Minister, Michael Atkinson. From Veteran groups to her own party. They all joined in without researching a thing. And now they must feel like absolute morons as another country initiates her suggestions. How long will Australia suffer from ignorance and fear? How long will our policies be decided by narrow minded, ideological, self righteous fools? I fear that it will be long after the rest of the world changes.
Landmark B.C. study lets trauma sufferers find relief with ecstasy The Globe and Mail By Frances Bula
September 2009
Vancouver therapists get green light to use drug in trial to treat post-traumatic stress
Two Vancouver therapists have become the first Canadians to be permitted to give ecstasy to patients in a scientific trial aimed at finding new ways to help people with post-traumatic stress disorder.
Psychologist Andrew Feldmar and psychiatrist Ingrid Pacey, with the help of the Boston-based organization Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, also known as MAPS, are recruiting 12 people to take part in the trial, which they hope might include Canadian soldiers and police officers.
Mr. Feldmar said that like Vancouver's supervised-injection site, the trial has obtained an exemption from Canada's narcotics laws, and is waiting for an import permit for the Swiss-manufactured drug.
The Vancouver experiment is part of small but growing international movement to use drugs such as LSD, MDMA or ecstasy, and psylocibin as part of therapeutic treatment, which has received significant backing from MAPS. The organization, founded in 1986, is a non-profit focused on lobbying to have psychedelic drugs and marijuana used for treatment.
“There is a new interest,” said Mr. Feldmar, who worked at Vancouver's Hollywood Hospital in the 1960s when it used LSD as a treatment for alcoholism. “These substances are extremely effective. It was just when they were used irresponsibly that it created a senseless panic.”
MDMA was first synthesized by Merck Pharmaceuticals in 1912, but was rediscovered in the 1960s. It was considered an aid to psychotherapy before it was popularized as a party drug.
Mr. Feldmar said MDMA, often defined as an entheogen or psychoactive drug used to induce a mystical experience, helps people with post-traumatic stress disorder by breaking down barriers that are blocking their recovery.
He said it allows them to experience a sense of being in the present, of feeling connected to their therapist, and of feeling supported and loved.
“You feel connected, therefore you feel able to go back and deal with the trauma.”
MAPS executive director Rick Doblin said a U.S. trial in Charleston, S.C., recently ended, and “it got tremendous results,” although they haven't been published in a science journal yet.
Small studies have already been done in Israel and Switzerland along the same lines, he said. A study in Spain had to be cancelled after running into opposition there.
An article published this year in the Journal of Psychopharmacology noted the two trials showed initial signs of promise in treating trauma.
Authors Pal-Orjan Johansen and Teri Krebs of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology looked at the three effects MDMA has on brain chemistry:
- It boosts levels of oxytocin, which is what produces the feelings of connectedness and warmth that people on ecstacy experience.
- It balances two regions of the brain, helping a person to control emotional responses better.
- It boosts levels of cortisol and norepinephrine, which control emotional learning.
Mr. Doblin said MAPS designed the Vancouver study, got it through the regulatory process, and will now start raising the $200,000 needed to run it. Eight of the 12 patients will get full-strength doses of ecstacy up to three times during their treatment, while four will get a placebo.
“We want to see if we can replicate the U.S. results in a similar cultural context,” he said. “Also, it's important to start research in Canada, because you have a tradition of being pioneering in psychedelic research.”
Mr. Doblin said Mr. Feldmar and Dr. Pacey are exceptionally qualified therapists, which made them ideal for the trial.
The two have sent out messages to other Vancouver therapists to recruit patients for the trial. Mr. Feldmar said that could include Afghan war veterans, police, firefighters, people who have been victims of crime, or immigrants who have been tortured in their home countries.
Mr. Feldmar achieved minor fame in 2007, after it was made public that he had been barred from entering the United States when a border guard searched online for his name and found that he had written an article saying he had taken LSD in the 1960s before it became illegal. His story was later featured on The Colbert Report show.
Last week, the Mexican government signed into law, the decriminalisation of small amounts of drugs including heroin, cocaine, ecstasy, methamphetamines, cannabis, LSD etc. The law slipped through quietly with virtually no media uproar or condemnation as the country remained focussed on the bigger drug war involving the cartels. Most surprising was the lack of response from the US government. In 2006, an almost identical bill passed by congress was not signed by the Mexican president, Vicente Fox at the last moment after pressure from the Bush administration. The US Drug Czar, Gil Kerlikowske remains unusually quiet compared to his hard core predecessors and when questioned, said he will, “wait and see”.
A few days later, Agentina’s supreme court ruled that penalising people for using cannabis when it didn’t effect anyone else, was unconstitutional. Is this the start of a new trend in South America that rejects the strict prohibitionist strategies of the last 40 years? Is South America leading a revolt against the US stranglehold on the UNODC and world drug policies? Has South America had enough of being a scapegoat for the US and their insatiable hunger for illicit drugs? But not all countries in South America are in a hurry to distance themselves from Washington. A few weeks ago, Colombia signed an agreement with the United States allowing them to use local military bases for continuing drug operations. Columbia already has a strained relationship with neighbouring countries over it’s US ties and a move to allow the DEA and the CIA to use their military bases has been deplored by most South American leaders. Venezuela and Ecuador currently do not have diplomatic relations with Columbia.
Argentina follows Mexico toward decriminalizing marijuana. What does this mean for the war on drugs?
The war on drugs is getting complicated, said Jacob Sullum in Reason. Argentina’s Supreme Court ruled that it’s unconstitutional to punish adults for private marijuana use, a big step toward decriminalizing the drug. The ruling is based on the “privacy clause” of Argentina’s constitution—private pot use doesn’t “offend public order or morality”—but it comes just days after Mexico eliminated criminal penalties for holding small amounts of drugs. And Brazil and Ecuador are close behind.
That’s not a coincidence, said Alexi Barrionuevo in The New York Times. From Mexico to Argentina there’s “an urgent desire to reject decades of American prescriptions for distinctly Latin American challenges,” including drugs. In February, ex-presidents of Mexico, Brazil, and Colombia called the U.S. “war on drugs” a “failure,” and urged Latin America to adopt the less-punitive “drug policies found in some European countries.”
The report from the three leaders may be a “big factor” in the Argentine ruling, said Joshua Keating in Foreign Policy, as well as the region’s “major rethink on drug policy.” But it “remains to be seen” if it will have any impact north of the border. U.S. drug czar Gil Kerlikowske is taking a “wait-and-see attitude,” but President Obama has too much on his plate to “touch drug policy right now.”
Latin American leaders, especially in Mexico, wish he would, said Katie Hammel in Gadling. But while a drug policy that focuses “more on reducing harm to drug users and society” wouldn’t be a new approach to the war on drugs, I don’t see it happening “any time soon” in the U.S. Meanwhile, I’ll “stick to booze.”
At last! A sensible drug related opinion piece from the Sydney Morning Herald NOT written by Miranda Devine. Instead, we are treated to some much needed wisdom from Australia’s leading advocate for drug reform, Dr. Alex Wodak.
I would be safe in saying that many readers are sick of reading selectively researched and totally biased dribble from the Devine Miranda. You see, Dr. Wodak is an expert in his field and relies on medical facts, science and human compassion. This is a stark dichotomy compared to Miranda Devine. Appealing to the ignorant masses or stroking the ideological G-spot of anti-drug zealots may be Devines forte but it just uncovers her real agenda ... her belief that drug use is a moral issue and drug users need to be punished. Ironically, it’s Devine who regularly accuses Dr. Wodak and other medical professionals as having an agenda under the guise of that evil scourge called Harm Minimisation. The very policy that has saved millions of lives, given hope to desperate addicts and aims to treat people humanely. According to Devine, these “elitists” who support Harm Minimisation have a secret agenda to legalise drugs and they must be stopped. But what Devine and other prohibitionists conveniently overlook is that drug reformers simply want a system that works better than the current "War on Drugs" strategy. And their reasoning is simple ... drug use and addiction is a medical/social issue, not a law & order problem stemming from a moral decision to use drugs. It’s the likes of Miranda Devine who simplify an extremely complex issue to what they consider is right or wrong, good or bad, righteous or sinful, holy or evil. No wonder one side consists of doctors, specialists, medical experts, scientists, researchers, welfare workers, academics, realists, human rights supporters etc. and the other side is made up of moral crusaders, the religious right, modern conservatives, evangelists, born again Christians, politicians, the ignorant, neocons etc. Who would you trust?
One hundred years ago, the US convened the International Opium Conference. This meeting of 13 nations in Shanghai was the beginning of global drug prohibition.
Prohibition slowly became one of the most universally applied policies in the world. But a century on, international support for this blanket drug policy is slowly but inexorably unravelling.
In January, Barack Obama became the third US president in a row to admit to consumption of cannabis. Bill Clinton had admitted using cannabis but denied ever inhaling it. George Bush was taped saying in private he would never admit in public to having used cannabis. When Obama was asked whether he had inhaled cannabis, he said: ''Of course. That was the whole point.''
Obama has candidly discussed his drug use. ''Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow [cocaine] when you could afford it.'' He has also admitted the ''war on drugs is an utter failure'' and called for more focus on a public health approach.
In February, a Latin American drug policy commission similarly concluded that the ''drug war is a failure''. It recommended breaking the ''taboo on open debate including about cannabis decriminalisation''. The same month, an American diplomat said the US supported needle-exchange programs to help reduce the transmission of HIV and other blood-borne diseases, and supported using medication to treat those addicted to opiates.
In March, the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs met in Vienna as the culmination of a 10-year review of global drug policy. A ''political declaration'' was issued which, at the urging of the US, excluded the phrase ''harm reduction''. This omission caused a split in the fragile international consensus on drug policy and resulted in 26 countries, including Australia, demanding explicit support for harm reduction in a footnote.
In April, Michel Kazatchkine, of the Global Fund to Fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria, argued in favour of decriminalising illicit drugs to allow efforts to halt the spread of HIV to succeed. The same month, a national Zogby poll in the US provided evidence of changing opinion on the legalisation of cannabis: 52 per cent supported cannabis becoming legal, taxed and regulated.
In May there was movement on several fronts. The Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, said: ''I think it's not time for [legalisation], but I think it's time for a debate.'' He was supported by a number of other American politicians, while Vicente Fox, a former Mexican president, said he was not yet convinced it was the solution but asked: ''Why not discuss it?'' The Colombian Vice-President, Francisco Santos Calderon, is already convinced. ''The only way you can really solve the problem [is] if you legalise it totally.''
Obama's drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, said he wanted to banish the idea of fighting a ''war on drugs'', while the United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, said criminal sanctions on same-sex sex, commercial sex and drug injections were barriers for HIV treatment services. ''Those behaviours should be decriminalised, and people addicted to drugs should receive health services for the treatment of their addiction,'' he said.
In Germany, the federal parliament voted 63 per cent in favour to allow heroin prescription treatment.
In July, the Economic and Social Council, a UN body more senior than the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, approved a resolution requiring national governments to provide ''services for injecting drug users in all settings, including prisons'' and harm reduction programs such as needle syringe programs and substitution treatment for heroin users. This month, Mexico removed criminal sanctions for possessing any illicit drug in small quantities while Argentina is making similar changes for cannabis.
Portugal, Spain and Italy had earlier dropped criminal sanctions for possessing small amounts of any illicit drug, while the Netherlands and Germany have achieved the same effect by changing policing policy.
It is now clear that support for a drug policy heavily reliant on law enforcement is dwindling in Western Europe, the US and South America, while support for harm reduction and drug law reform is growing. Sooner or later this debate will start again in Australia.
Alex Wodak is director of the Alcohol and Drug Service at St Vincent's Hospital.
I had just finshed writing about the success of the latest study by the North American Opiate Medication Initiative (NAOMI) when I stumbled on a news article titled, “Rehab centre upset after Quebec pulls funds for heroin study”. Slightly confused, I quickly read the article and discovered that the fucked up Harper government in Canada were again playing god with people’s lives and putting their ideology before science. Just days after the New England Journal of Medicine published the positive results for Canada’s latest heroin trial, the Harper Government has pulled funding for the second phase of the study called SALOME.
What is the NAOMI clinical trial? (Phase 1) The North American Opiate Medication Initiative (NAOMI) was a randomized trial aimed at testing whether medically prescribed diacetylmorphine, the active ingredient in heroin, was more efficient than methadone therapy for individuals with chronic opioid dependence who were not benefiting from other conventional treatments. The results show that patients treated with injectable diacetylmorphine were more likely to stay in treatment and more likely to reduce their use of illegal drugs and other illegal activities than patients treated with oral methadone. -SALOME Clinical Trial Questions and Answers
What is the SALOME clinical trial? (Phase 2) The Study to Assess Longer-term Opioid Medication Effectiveness is a clinical trial that will test whether diacetylmorphine, the active ingredient of heroin, is as good as hydromorphone (Dilaudid®), a licensed medication, in benefiting people suffering from chronic opioid addiction who are not benefiting sufficiently from other treatments. Also, this study will test if those effectively treated with these 2 injectable medications can be successfully switched and retained to the oral formulations of the medications. -SALOME Clinical Trial Questions and Answers
It has always surprised me that the conservative Canadian government actually agreed to fund this study but to pull out as soon as the first study produced such positive results raises my suspicions. Were they expecting the trial of heroin assisted treatment (HAT) to fail? Was the promise to fund the 2nd phase just empty rhetoric with the expectations that they would never have to fund part two of a failed study? Considering that the government has just recently introduced new harsher laws for small time drug users including mandatory sentencing and the success of the latest heroin trials, how can we not be suspicious of the Harper Government’s motives.
A Montreal drug-treatment centre is accusing the provincial government of playing politics in killing funding for a three-year study to treat heroin addiction.
The cancellation of the $600,000 grant follows the publication this week of a study showing that giving heroin to hard-core addicts at the centre's supervised clinic leads to higher rates of recovery.
"We're very surprised because all the discussions that we had with the (Social Services) minister in the last few weeks were very positive," said Eric Fabrès, the centre's co-ordinator of quality services. "We can't understand why the minister has changed her position. ... But we find it very peculiar that at the moment that we published the results in the New England Journal of Medicine, the minister decided to withdraw her support from the project."
The study, titled the North American Opiate Medication Initiative (NAOMI), sought to analyze whether heroin-assisted therapy offers more benefit to addicts who want to kick their habit than standard methadone treatment.
The researchers monitored 251 addicts in Montreal and Vancouver. In Montreal, addicts were given heroin at the Centre de recherche et d'aide pour narcomanes.
The study found that among addicts who received heroin by injection, 88 per cent completed the recovery program, compared with a 54-per-cent completion rate for those who took oral methadone.
But researchers also discovered that 10 per cent of addicts who took Dilaudid, a legal prescription opiate known as hydromorphone, did as well as those on heroin.
For the second phase of the research, titled SALOME (Study to
Assess Longer-term Opioid Medication Effectiveness), scientists wanted to compare heroin and Dilaudid for a three-year period.
The rationale is that if Dilaudid is truly as good as heroin in helping diehard addicts recover, it would solve the legal problem of having to use heroin, Fabrès said.
"But without the funding, the project is dead," he added.
Once again, a trial of prescription heroin for long term addicts has proven to be superior to other treatments including Methadone Maintenance Treatment(MMT), buprenorphine and abstinence programs. The results of the study from the North American Opiate Medication Initiative (NAOMI) in Canada has been eagerly awaited as the final proof that heroin assisted treatment (HAT) is indeed a viable and effective solution. Of course, it’s just conversation unless more countries implement it as part of their drug treatment policy & health plans. I especially want the Australian government to look at the evidence and continue on from where the ACT trials abruptly ended. There’s no John Howard anymore to veto an almost unanimous decision and no Major Brian Watters to misrepresent the ANCD. More importantly, there is now more evidence than ever before and a almost universal acceptance that HAT is the most effective treatment for long term heroin addiction.
Study Backs Heroin to Treat Addiction
New York TimesBy Benedict Carey
August 2009
The safest and most effective treatment for hard-core heroin addicts who fail to control their habit using methadone or other treatments may be their drug of choice, in prescription form, researchers are reporting after the first rigorous test of the approach performed in North America.
For years, European countries like Switzerland and the Netherlands have allowed doctors to provide some addicts with prescription heroin as an alternative to buying drugs on the street. The treatment is safe and keeps addicts out of trouble, studies have found, but it is controversial — not only because the drug is illegal but also because policy makers worry that treating with heroin may exacerbate the habit.
The study, appearing in the current issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, may put some of those concerns to rest.
“It showed that heroin works better than methadone in this population of users, and patients will be more willing to take it,” said Dr. Joshua Boverman, a psychiatrist at Oregon Health and Science University in Portland.
Perhaps the biggest weakness of methadone treatment, Dr. Boverman said, is that “many patients don’t want to take it; they just don’t like it.”
In the study, researchers in Canada enrolled 226 addicts with longstanding habits who had failed to improve using other methods, including methadone maintenance therapy. Doctors consider methadone, a chemical cousin to heroin that prevents withdrawal but does not induce the same high, to be the best treatment for narcotic addiction. A newer drug, buprenorphine, is also effective.
The Canadian researchers randomly assigned about half of the addicts to receive methadone and the other half to receive daily injections of diacetylmorphine, the active ingredient in heroin. After a year, 88 percent of those receiving the heroin compound were still in the study, and two-thirds of them had significantly curtailed their illicit activities, including the use of street drugs. In the methadone group, 54 percent were still in the study and 48 percent had curbed illicit activities.
“The main finding is that, for this group that is generally written off, both methadone and prescription heroin can provide real benefits,” said the senior author, Martin T. Schechter, a professor in the School of Population and Public Health at the University of British Columbia.
Those taking the heroin injections did suffer more side effects; there were 10 overdoses and six seizures. But Dr. Schechter said there was no evidence of abuse. The average dosage the subjects took was 450 milligrams, well below the 1,000-milligram maximum level.
About 663,000 Americans are regular users of heroin, according to government estimates. The researchers said 15 percent to 25 percent of them were heavy users and could benefit from prescription heroin. That is, if they ever were to get the chance. Heroin is an illegal, Schedule 1 substance, meaning it has a high potential for abuse and serves no legitimate medical purpose. That designation is unlikely to change soon, researchers suspect.
In an editorial with the article, Virginia Berridge of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine concluded, “The rise and fall of methods of treatment in this controversial area owe their rationale to evidence, but they also often owe more to the politics of the situation.”
Enough Lies: The Netherlands Drug Policy Does Work
FACT: Compared to the Netherlands, which allows purchase and possession of small amounts of marijuana by adults, the United States had double the rate of marijuana use overall, with nearly three times as many youths trying marijuana by age 15.
-Marijuana Policy Project 2008
I have just read another article explaining why cannabis legalisation won’t work. And their proof ... The Netherlands. Prohibitionists and moral crusaders portray The Netherlands, especially Amsterdam as some sort of amoral hell where the streets are lined with prostitutes and everyone has to step over strung out junkies in the gutter. A demised nation lost in a selfish orgy of forbidden flesh and rampant drug use. Jeepers, even I wouldn’t go there.
Organisation: Various Campaign: The Netherlands Drug Policy / Cannabis “Coffee Shops” When: 1976 - Propaganda: 9/10 Laugh Out Loud Rating: 7/10
... However, I have lived in the Netherlands for a five-year period. And frankly, I don’t want to see what takes place there happening here. The city of Amsterdam is awash with drugs and crime. Indeed, drug-related crime is four times the rate of the US. You can’t walk down a street of central Amsterdam without being accosted by drug pushers and addicts. I lost count of how many times our push bikes were stolen by the druggies to help support their habits. I don’t want that cesspool of crime, drugs and violence to be replicated here.
-Bill Muehlenberg: CultureWatch
This is of course so far from the truth, it only incites humour in those who aren’t ignorant or are well travelled. The Netherlands is actual conservative compared to other western countries and has some amazing countryside including the beautiful city of Amsterdam. The lifestyle is uniquely European which might be a tad confronting for those used to massive shopping malls and other US influenced cityscapes. Yes, there are druggies, prostitutes and other public inconveniences that the non European drug warriors like to focus on but there needs to be some perspective. Compared to the large US slums, Vancouver's downtown east side or Kings Cross on a Saturday night, Amsterdam is a like a walk through a flowery suburb of the North Shore of Sydney. I remember reading about a journalist looking for crack cocaine in Amsterdam where it took him 35 minutes to find with the help of a local addict. He was only able to find one dealer of any drug and he had to get it from someone else. The same task would take 5 minutes in any major US city. The journalist reported that he encountered no junkies lying in gutters but instead was entertained by a local church music ensemble. What struck him most was how clean and family orientated the streets were compared to his experience back in the USA.
You can't walk down the street in Amsterdam without tripping over junkies
-US Drug Czar
Bill O'Reilly - The Poster Boy for Anti-Drug Conservatives
Fox News monkey-man, Bill O’Reilly is joined by a fellow Fox News monkey-woman and some GOP strategist for what must be the most ludicrous description of The Netherlands ever seen on T.V. The story is actually about how the radical left have exploded since Barrack Obama became president of the USA but The Netherlands are put on display as what can happen if conservatives values are overlooked for liberal freedoms. I must point out to any extreme right wing nutters reading this that the perceived image of The Netherlands portrayed by the 3 casuistic hosts is laughable.
Anne Bressington
Anne Bressington once claimed that the term, "War on Drugs" was coined by the legalisation movement to get people on their side. So you can only imagine what she has said about The Netherlands. Here are some of her gems:
In 1993 the National Intelligence Report (AFP) stated that the streets had been flooded with a new hybrid of cannabis known as “mad weed”. It was called madweed because in Europe it was responsible for psychotic episodes even after one time use. It originated in the Netherlands and the THC content tested as high as 30%.
-Anne Bressington Media Release(Dec. 2006) - Adelaide Is “Cannabis Capital Of The World”
We are like the Netherlands, she says; we may not have cannabis cafes but if you know the right places all you have to do is ask. “I did a tour of Hutt Street this morning,” she said. “I saw people shooting up next to a charity drop-in centre, they score, go into an abandoned paddock next door and they’re all sitting around shooting up. I was told if I wanted drugs to go to the compound, the Caltex station in Hutt Street at 10 a.m. but be there a bit early because its pension day so there will be a bit of a line-up. It’s frightening.” -Penelope Debelle - "Accidental” MP Finds Her Feet (Article about Anne Bressington) (2004)
What is it that politicians and some doctors do not understand about drug policy? In Sweden where drug use is one third of other European countries and where less than 2% of their youth use drugs like cannabis and amphetamines we could look to them for solutions. Instead we continue to replicate the Netherlands policies that have failed dismally.
-Anne Bressington Media Release(Dec. 2006) - Politicians At Raves & Doctors Giving Up On Drug Abuse
Very soon we are going to hear Dr Caldicott and his crew go ‘We must look to the Netherlands for our drug policy’ because we have even outstripped the Netherlands. We have doubled the Netherlands’ drug use in this country. Who would have ever thought? Do not be fooled by the Netherlands having half the drug use that we have because it has an almost legalised, decriminalised system. It is because in this country we have gone to sleep at the wheel. We have taken our eye off the ball and we have allowed this problem to disintegrate to a point where our children’s lives and our grandchildren’s lives are affected and it is not going to get better if we do not change what we do.
Dr Caldicott himself has admitted that one of the costs of having harm minimisation in this country is that we will have more people using drugs, but best to have them using drugs and keeping them alive than having them die in the gutter. Now, I do not quite get the logic.
-Anne Bressington: House Of Representatives Standing Committee On Family And Human Services - Impact Of Illicit Drug Use On Families (May 2007)
Maybe Anne Bressington should spend more time researching her claims.
Despite tough anti-drug laws, a new survey shows the U.S. has the highest level of illegal drug use in the world.
The World Health Organization's survey of legal and illegal drug use in 17 countries, including the Netherlands and other countries with less stringent drug laws, shows Americans report the highest level of cocaine and marijuana use. For example, Americans were four times more likely to report using cocaine in their lifetime than the next closest country, New Zealand (16% vs. 4%),
[...]
In contrast, in the Netherlands, which has more liberal drug policies than the U.S., only 1.9% of people reported cocaine use and 19.8% reported marijuana use.
-CBS News (July 2008)
Closing The Coffee Shops
When the media started reporting that The Dutch were closing some coffee shops, the anti-drug warriors went berserk. This was the great news they had been waiting for. After having to lie for nearly 30 years, they finally had some proof that The Dutch experiment had failed.
We’ve been even doing work with the Dutch, who are usually thought of as the opposite side of us on marijuana or cannabis, where they are talking about higher potency causing acute health problems that they are seeing in the Netherlands. So they too now have been taking steps to reduce the number of coffee houses, to treat the especially higher potency cannabis almost as a different drug in their system. -US Drug Czar, John Walters
The fact is that coffee shops are being closed down because of “drug tourism” from neighbouring countries and because of new laws that restrict coffee shops being too close to schools. It was mainly the border towns and cities that wanted to close up the coffee shops, usually under pressure from other countries. Interestingly, some people couldn’t wait for the news and made claims The Dutch were “winding back” their drug laws 10 years prior.
If the Netherlands is winding back its drug laws, does that not tell us something? Does it not tell us that the Netherlands has conceded that it got it wrong. It is now trying to regroup from the previous untenable position. It is now trying to counter the cancer it released into the community in the best way it can by winding back the previously very liberal drug laws.
-The Hon. M. J. Gallacher - NSW Parliament (1997)
Cannabis is illegal in The Netherlands but the Dutch Ministry of Justice applies a gedoogbeleid (tolerance policy) which is an official set of rules guiding the judicial system to how offenders should be dealt with legally. This allows cannabis to be sold via designated “coffee shops”, the personal possession of up to 5 grams and the growing of 5 plants or less. This loophole is necessary to get around the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of which they are a co-signer. To implement any drug policy or law, countries must work within the UN’s strict guidelines. For example, Australia’s Medically Supervised Injecting Centre(MSIC) and the heroin assisted treatment (HAT) programs in some countries contravene UN drug policy so they are declared as medical research, which is allowed. Similarly with The Netherlands - cannabis remains illegal but they choose to be tolerant under certain conditions. These strict conditions include age restrictions, quantity limitations and quality control. Hard drugs are not tolerated.
Although marijuana sales are regulated and taxed in the Netherlands' famous coffee shops under Dutch "pragmatism" policies, the sale or manufacture of marijuana officially remains a crime under Dutch law. The current conservative Dutch national government has attempted to shut down the coffee shops, but without popular support for such a move has had to settle for tightening regulations on the marijuana outlets and gradually reducing their numbers.
-Drug War Chronicle
Although certain conservative groups want to remove the Dutch coffee shops, there is still overwhelming support from the public, the police and politicians. What we don’t hear about is the growing support to legalise cannabis ... even when half of the countries' judges support it.
It seems the only people opposed to the Dutch coffee shops are a small group in the Netherlands and countries that have dismal results from applying the very drug policies they are trying to push on the Dutch.
UN Tweak Drug Statistics And Facts Cannazine
By Marten Blankesteijn
The United Nations manipulate statistics to suggest that the liberal Dutch drug policy doesn’t work. This statement comes from Tim Boekhout van Solinge, criminologist at the University Utrecht.
‘It is no coincidence. The UN wants to propagate the idea that things are getting out of hand here. This idea is wrong: The Netherlands, on the contrary, are doing very well.’ To substantiate his claim Boekhout van Solinge mentions the 2000 World Drug Report, which stated that The Netherlands harbored the most addicts of all EU members at that time. ‘The UN had reduced the list of 15 to 13 countries by counting the Benelux as one country.
This was a questionable simplification, because by doing so the country with the largest number of addicts (Luxemburg) was added to the country with the smallest number (The Netherlands).
These numbers were not properly linked to total population estimates, instead averages were calculated. That’s how the Benelux ended on top of the list of drug addicted countries. The message for the public was clear: Dutch drug policy is not working.’
The UN are outspoken supporters of the war on drugs, the war against growers, dealers and users that should lead to a drug free world.’ Experts have been clamouring for years that this battle can never be won’, says Boekhout van Solinge. ‘Things are just getting worse.’
In the mean time the UN see Sweden as the lighting example. Since 1977 harsh measures are used in a relentless drug hunt. And this has been a great success – at least, that’s what UN reports say: Sweden has the smallest number of blowers in Europe. But even the Swedish facts are polished to fit the UN message. ‘The reports ‘forget’ to mention that The Netherlands have fewer addicts. Nor is there any reference to the 8% of Swedish students that sniff glue. That Sweden tops the European list in drug mortalities, is also conveniently omitted. When talking drugs, the UN is not a reliable club. These reports have little to do with science.
There are more international organisations that fumble with opinions and research to justify the war on drugs. Says the criminologist: ‘On a conference of the World Health Organisation on cocaine all experts agreed that an overwhelming majority of cocaine users are in perfect control of their use, which led them to conclude that cocaine wasn’t that much of a problem. This conclusion was never made public under pressure of the American government.’
Another example? ‘A WHO report on cannabis paints a dramatic picture of the drug. But when you examine the documents and research used as a basis for the report, you learn that specific research was conducted to estimate what would happen if cannabis would be used as much as alcohol and tobacco are used.
The remarkable conclusion of this research? Cannabis would still be the least harmful.
This is just a friendly reminder for those who want methadone treatment cut back or stopped - methadone and buprenorphine have once again been shown to be more effective for treating opiate addiction than rehab, detox and 12 steps programs.
Thumbs Up For Methadone and BNX Pharmacy News August 2009
Buprenorphine-naloxone and methadone have received endorsement as the most effective opioid replacement therapies.
A paper published in the latest issue of the Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) confirmed that buprenorphine-naloxone (BNX) was less likely than buprenorphine alone to be injected by both opioid replacement therapy patients (ORT) and injecting drug users.
Meanwhile a new Cochrane review confirmed that methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) was more effective than "cold turkey" methods in treating heroin dependence.
The MJA study found that in the year after its introduction in Australia, BNX was injected less frequently and by fewer regular injecting drug users and ORT clients than buprenorphine, particularly when differences in the availability of medications were taken into account.
Some individuals did nonetheless regularly inject BNX.
BNX is a combination of a partial opioid agonist and an opioid antagonist for treating opioid dependence, which was specifically developed to limit injection.
"Given that BNX has not only overtaken market sales of buprenorphine, but is also generally available as takeaway medication (unlike buprenorphine), the deterrent effect of the combination product may be even greater than the comparisons in our study suggest," the study's authors wrote.
"This finding has important implications for public health, given the potential for severe consequences of buprenorphine injection."
The Cochrane reviewers looked at 11 studies and found that MMT retained patients in treatment and decreased heroin use better than treatments that did not use ORT such as detoxification, offer of drug-free rehabilitation, placebo medication and wait-list controls.
However, MMT did not have a statistically significant superior effect on mortality or criminal activity, the reviewers found.
The US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has long had the reputation as a paramilitary police squad. Their arsenal of crime fighting goodies include tanks and other armoured vehicles, helicopters, military grade weapons including hand-grenades and rocket launchers. But they also have a reputation for something else ... bungling things up. There are dozens of stories about the DEA turning up at the wrong house and shooting some poor innocent sod or arresting whole families only to discover they had dodgy information. In an attempt to clean up their image, they attend public meetings or local schools to help us learn more about those evil drug users and how the DEA is there to stop them. Surely they can’t stuff this up as well?
Diary: A pending work project was finally given the go ahead which means we might be able to buy that huge plasma TV we have wanted for so long. This makes Mrs Wright very happy. Conveniently, I am due for my next fix which is also partly reliant on me bringing in a big job. Even more convenient is that Mrs Wright has gone out tonight with some friends so I’m home alone.
Just as I finished having my long awaited fix, I suddenly had an urge to write down what I was about to experience. I thought I might just write what comes to me and edit it later. After reading what I wrote, I was a bit surprised about how little there was. It felt like I was writing non stop for at least an hour. It all seems a bit bland so I am just going to show what I wrote without editing.
It’s 8:09pm on this Friday night. I have just had half a gram of heroin.
I’m writing this out in point form and I will edit it later. I want to catch my feelings and emotions whilst high on heroin.
I’m internally calm but a little shaky on the outside.
As I start I ask myself if my mind is blank and I get a quick flash of an empty room sized skull from the inside.
As soon as I finish injecting, I start to tidy up after myself. My mind is fixed on waiting for the rush which of course never comes anymore.
First I rinse out the syringe by sucking up water and squirting it back out. I recap the syringe and put it back where it belongs. I can feel the heroin now especially in the back of my throat. Any rubbish or scraps of filter, paper, medical swabs etc. is put into the 4 tissues laid out as a mat. After rolling it up, I put it in an old cigarette packet and toss it in the bin.
I block my ears which gives me a feeling of being safe. It creates a hum which reminds me of the cold rain while being comfortably warm in bed.
I suddendly realise that this feeling is the opposite of cannabis. My thoughts aren’t deep or scary and there’s no worry about where they might lead. I simply close my eyes and stretch which blocks my ears and my mind is clear again.
I notice that my typing is faster and more accurate.
I have a similar feeling to taking speed - optimistic, adventurist (within the confines of my room), happy.
As the high wears off, I try to trigger a mini rush by stretching, blocking ears etc. I start to get a bit restless by tapping feet, jiggling my leg.
My mind wanders from time to time.
[8:33pm]
My leg is shaking up and down - like nervous energy, Now both legs.
I close my eyes and relax.
Thinking about what I’m writing and what to write next.
Time for a drink.
It feels good to get up and stretch my legs. I get a bottle of lime soft drink from the fridge and return.
[8:38pm]
Feeling good and mostly relaxed.
You have to work at it to make heroin work for you.
Close one eye and start to nod off slightly. (20 seconds)
Another smoke.Another drink.
Thinking about what to write. Sudden wave of boredom.
Holding my breath and scratching my head - seems to bring on a wave of slight euphoria(effects of the heroin). I realise I have done this quite a bit since I started.
[8:43pm]
Running out of ideas. Main effects have worn off a lot.
Slight dream about viewing space from the edge of the atmosphere in a crane like pod. With someone I don’t know.
Another drink.
Slightly dreamy when I close my eyes.
I think that’s it. I might just spend some time on the internet looking up those sites you always bookmark but never get around to visiting.
Yes, pleasantly relaxed.
[8:52pm]
After Thoughts
Sunday (2 days later): Boy, it sounds much more boring than it really was. I think I might have nodded off a few times for about 5-30 seconds which I didn’t record. I think I also better explain the “blocked ears” comments. When you yawn, your ears block which is often accompanied by a stretch when your tired. It feels like effect of adjusting to the air pressure when going on a plane or to a mountain retreat. This can be replicated by clenching your jaw which puts pressure on your throat and blocks your ears.
I must say I’m really surprised at how coherent my writing is. Since heroin is converted into morphine in the brain and morphine is well known to create vivid, intense dreams, I was half expecting to write a collage of mumbo-jumbo, morphine infected nonsense (morphine derives it’s name from Morpheus, the Greek god of dreams). The only semi-dream I wrote down sounds weirder than it actually was. Usually dreams are wrapped in emotions and that’s one of the reasons why they are hard to recall and sound so boring yet bizarre when explained to someone else.
The one comment that stands out to me is, “You have to work at it to make heroin work for you”. Heroin is not like other drugs that completely overtake your senses and there is nothing worse than someone or something disturbing your experience. Using heroin mostly requires peace and quiet to get the most out of it. This makes heroin an anti-social drug for regular users. Alcohol, amphetamines, cocaine, ecstasy etc. are much more fun with other people and a social event to attend. I could think of nothing worse than being in that situation when taking heroin and it would just be a waste. The added difficulty for me was my heavy dose of prescription morphine. My opiate receptors were already full of morphine and the heroin had a hard time breaking through. It is the same for those on Methadone Maintenance Treatment(MMT) or buprenorphine. An often used workaround is to postpone your substitution medication until the afternoon and use the heroin in the morning while your brain is almost free from yesterday’s opiates. Heroin crosses the blood/brain barrier much faster than other opiates like morphine and especially methadone. This is why heroin gives you a rush. When you’re mostly free from other opiates, heroin works particularly well but other slower working opiates, take much more time to cross over from your blood to your brain and linger around without much of the high. I suppose it’s somewhat like eating. If you’re really hungry, food tastes so much better but if you have been snacking all day and you don’t have much of an appetite, food will not taste as good. Ideally, you would fast all day and when you finally got to that favourite restaurant, the food will be delicious.
The next day(Saturday), Mrs Wright asked out of politeness, if I had a good night. Normally I would dodge the subject and mumble something about being “just okay” but this time I told her it was very pleasant. And it was. It was the most relaxed I had been for months. After the first hour or so and the feeling of heroin bliss subsided, I actually got to feel human. It was a just like taking a night off from my tense, always compromising life.
I have just read another article explaining why cannabis legalisation won’t work. And their proof ... The Netherlands. Prohibitionists and moral crusaders portray The Netherlands, especially Amsterdam as some sort of amoral hell where the streets are lined with prostitutes and everyone has to step over strung out junkies in the gutter. A demised nation lost in a selfish orgy of forbidden flesh and rampant drug use. Jeepers, even I wouldn’t go there.