Nutty Professor goes into bat for Marijuana ! lol

[Frazz]

Professor David Nutt, works in addiction psychiatry at the University of Bristol , United Kingdom.

 

 

A new UK study suggests that the current UK drug classification system of A, B, and C of the Misuse of Drugs Act is flawed and should be replaced by an evidence-based system of potential harm that would place alcohol and tobacco higher than cannabis and ecstasy.

 

The study is published in The Lancet.

 

Professor David Nutt from the University of Bristol, Professor Colin Blakemore, Chief Executive of the Medical Research Council, and two colleagues developed a new drug ranking system that would class socially acceptable tobacco and alcohol as more harmful than cannabis, and considerably more dangerous than Class A drugs such as ecstasy and LSD.

 

They say the current classification system used in the UK is flawed and should be scrapped.

 

Their proposed system of classification asesses harm in an "evidence-based fashion". They use three main factors to determine the potential harm that a substance causes:

 

(1) Physical harm to the user,

(2) Tendency to induce dependence in the user, and

(3) The effect of its use on families, communities and society in general.

 

Within each factor there are three sub-categories which altogether made up a nine-category "matrix of harm". Each category attracts a score of between 0 and 3, with 3 representing the most harm. An overall mean harm score of between 0 and 3 is then calculated for each drug.

 

They asked two independent expert panels to score 20 different substances using this new system. The 20 drugs included five legal potentially misused substances (alcohol, khat, solvents, alkyl nitrites, and tobacco) and one recently classified one (ketamine) so that the league table showed some familiar "benchmarks".

 

The two panels found the method easy to use and came up with very similar harm scores for each drug.

 

In order of overall harm, the 20 drugs were given the following ranking (the most harmful, heroin at number 1 scored nearly 3, while the least harmful khat at number 20 scored less than 1):

 

(1) Heroin (most harmful).

(2) Cocaine.

(3) Barbiturates.

(4) Street Methodone.

(5) Alcohol.

 

(6) Ketamine.

(7) Benzodiazepines.

(8) Amphetamine.

(9) Tobacco.

(10) Buprenorphine.

 

(11) Cannabis.

(12) Solvents.

(13) 4-MTA (para-methylthioamphetamine).

(14) LSD.

(15) Methylphenidate (ritalin).

 

(16) Anabolic steroids.

(17) GHB (gamma hydroxybutyric acid).

(18) Ecstasy.

(19) Alkyl nitrites.

(20) Khat (least harmful).

 

Prof Nutt who led the study said, "Drug misuse and abuse are major health problems. Our methodology offers a systematic framework and process that could be used by national and international regulatory bodies to assess the harm of current and future drugs of abuse".

 

Prof Blackmore said that while drug policy is aimed at reducing harm to users, their families and society as a whole, the present system was not a "Rational, evidence-based method for assessing the harm of drugs". He said the system they have devised, on the other hand, is.

 

"We hope that policy makers will take note of the fact that the resulting ranking of drugs differs substantially from their classification in the Misuse of Drugs Act and that alcohol and tobacco are judged more harmful than many illegal substances," he added.

 

Under the current system in the UK, which is regulated by the Misuse of Drugs Act, drugs are classified in three groups, A, B and C. The heaviest conviction penalties are applied for possession of Class A drugs (up to 7 years in prison or unlimited fine or both), while Class C drugs are liable to the lowest penalties (up to two years in prison, unlimited fine or both).

 

Class A drugs include: Ecstasy, LSD, heroin, cocaine, crack, magic mushrooms (if prepared for use) amphetamines (if prepared for injection).

 

Class B drugs include: Amphetamines, Methylphenidate, Pholcodine.

 

Class C drugs include: Cannabis, tranquillisers, some painkillers, GHB, ketamine.

 

(Crystal meth is pending classification as a Class A drug.)

 

Profs Nutt, Blackmore and colleagues criticized the current Class A, B, C system saying it was too arbitrary, put too much emphasis on unusual reactions that affect very few users, and did not specify the relative risks of a drug.

 

Professor Leslie Iversen, of the University of Oxford, said there was a widespread myth that skunk, from the tips of the cannabis plant, was 20 to 30 times more powerful than that available 30 years ago. "It is simply not true," he said. "The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs looked at this carefully. Cannabis resin [hash] has changed little and is about 5 per cent tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Skunk has 10-15 per cent THC. That makes it two to three times more powerful, not 20 to 30 times."

 

In their conclusions they comment on what they see as its most glaring deficiencies:

 

"The fact that the two most widely used legal drugs lie in the upper half of the ranking of harm is surely important information that should be taken into account in public debate on illegal drug use. Discussions based on a formal assessment of harm rather than on prejudice and assumptions might help society to engage in a more rational debate about the relative risks and harms of drugs".

 

"Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs of potential misuse."

David Nutt, Leslie A King, William Saulsbury, Colin Blakemore.

The Lancet 2007; 369:1047-1053

DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60464-4

---------------------------------

 

The Original report can be viewed here : http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/a...604644/fulltext

 

You have to register with The Lancet , but this is free and just needs simple registration

 

I must say this report Cannot be pushed to one side , it is powerful ammunition in the fight for re-clasification of present anti- cannabis laws

 

[Budman2012]

Excellent story Fraz .. thx for postin it ...

 

I definatly agree with The Nuttmeister ... altho maybe the simplicity of the rating system has made their analysis somewhat flawed ..

They can't seriously think that Ecstasy and most of the other ones listed there are less harmless than Cannabis or Pure LSD lmao , even Solvents are listed as safer than MJ wtf

Also , given the amount of people who die from tobacco or Alcohol related problems , they should definatly be higher on the scale of risk Imo .. Heroin is at the top of the list .. and altho it certainly can cause problems for some is as far as I know Pure Herion is even less toxic than the Morphine they use in Hospital ..

 

Anyway , they are along the right lines .. and as we all know there has never been a documented case of death caused by Cannabis .. effect on society is debatable and lies with personal opinion and experience ..

 

They must start to think along the lines of risk for drugs , especially Cannabis .. they talk about harm minimization , but that seems to mean still charging people plus making them undertake "rehabilitation courses" .. There is such a demand for Cannabis and some of these other drugs that it should be obvious to authorities that their NWO Zero Tolerance policies can not and will not work ..

Why don't they make a Zero Tolerance policy on Violence ? .. or Idiocy .. heheh fuckers!

 

Ahem .. well , all ranting aside .. I think , give it another 10-30 yrs and the amount of people who condemn Cannabis and Its users , compared to the amount of people who who are pro Cannabis or Easy going about the Stoners will start to equalize .. if not entirely tip in our favour heheh fingers crossed ..

 

Cheerz all and seeya later

 

Budman

[Luke Skywalker]

Ecstasy is actually a relatively safe drug, compared to most other recreational ones. It's more the black market that causes harm with drug use or abuse.

 

Good on 'im. I remember this report coming out a while back now. Typically shouted down at the time, but that's normal.

 

The heroin being safer than morphine thing is a bit dodgy, but they are close analogues. (Heroin is the isomer of morphine, it's true name being di-acetyl-morphine.) There is little reason it should claim as many lives as it does, once again it's a black market thing.

 

There are plenty of abusers out there, and they need help. (not gaol, as some would have it today) Those who use drugs however, shouldn't be lumped in or treated as abusers. Same as you don't worry about dad having a beer each arvo but you would if he woke up and had one first thing and didn't stop. Telling the Drug-Warriors that is like talking to a brick wall sometimes though...

[Al B. Fuct]

Frazzle, thanks for posting this- great stuff!