Prof. Nutt

Home Forum Chat Forum Prof. Nutt

Viewing 39 posts - 1 through 39 (of 39 total)
  • Prof. Nutt
  • Premier Icon el_boufador
    Subscriber

    Good on him.

    Jamie
    Member

    Step away from the bong sir and go hand yourself in at the nearest prison.

    belgianbob
    Member

    Scientist tells the truth as he sees it, as he is paid to do, and is sacked by his boss, a politician, because it shows the politician, and most government policy on drugs, to be misguided and based on fear and ignorance. Typical of politicians, really.

    I'm behind him 100%, but what did he really expect to happen? Probably not this, as most scientists are not politicians as they like to deal with facts, not herding public opinion.

    I'm sure he won't be removed too far from a sphere of influence, whatever the Home Office currently thinks of him, but I bet he won't be on the christmas party list at No. 10 this year.

    Smee
    Member

    Am I missing something here? Whats the story?

    ernie_lynch
    Member

    Whats the story?

    I think this bloke has been sacked by the government for saying that horse riding should classed as a dangerous addiction.

    belgianbob
    Member

    Government's senior drugs advisor being sacked for saying that various drugs weren't nearly as harmful as politicians and drugs policy would have us believe, as per his job description (well, almost!)

    Smee
    Member

    Having read the story now there is only one person that should be sacked and they aren't a scientist.

    Keva
    Member

    from the bbc July 2006…

    Perhaps most surprising is the presence of two Class A drugs – ecstasy and LSD – in the bottom six.

    from
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm

    Kev

    Premier Icon Shandy
    Subscriber

    Yet another pathetic example of the government getting rid of anybody that doesn't agree with their message.

    RichPenny
    Member

    Christ I'm getting old. I don't recognise half the stuff on that chart 🙁 Surprised to see GHB so low though, and speed higher than tobacco?

    awh
    Member

    Blair/Brown said they wanted evidence based policy, unfortunately it appears to only be when the scientific evidence agrees with their point of view, otherwise not interested. There are many many more examples in health, education, defence etc where the government has asked for advice from the experts (and I was one!) then ignored it. They appear to have forgotten scientists deal in experimentally determined fact rather than opinion. If Newton discovered gravity today, and it wasn't governemnt policy to have a law of attraction between objects with mass, I'm sure some politicians would agrue it didn't exist, despite us all being able to see its effects all the time!

    CaptJon
    Member

    Politicians in politics playing shocker.

    ernie_lynch
    Member

    Blair/Brown said they wanted evidence based policy

    I thought this was a decision made by Edward Heath 1971 ? And whilst Gordon Brown might have some responsibility for the sacking of Professor Nutt, I'm not sure why Blair needs to be mentioned. Incidentally the Conservative Party fully supports Professor Nutt's sacking. Although the LibDems do oppose it.

    New Labour and Old Conservatives, simply follow the agenda which is set for them by the tabloids.
    As suggested here by Professor Nutt himself, quote :

    "If ministers care so little for independent scientific advice, they should save public money by sacking the entire group of experts and instead appoint a committee of tabloid editors."

    PapaWheelie
    Member

    Christ I'm getting old. I don't recognise half the stuff on that chart Surprised to see GHB so low though, and speed higher than tobacco?

    That's hilarious. That was my first thought as well.
    My second was, hmmmm . . . which ones have I done . . .

    Premier Icon el_boufador
    Subscriber

    eloquently put awh

    DrP
    Member

    Mr Nutt works hard at science, makes some bouncy rubber, and now becomes a Professor.
    Still a crazy mo fo though….

    DrP

    Pigface
    Member

    In the drawing room with the lead pipe……… I win 😳

    grumm
    Member

    "If ministers care so little for independent scientific advice, they should save public money by sacking the entire group of experts and instead appoint a committee of tabloid editors."

    That's class. 😆

    MrNutt
    Member

    bunch of tossers I'm off to get whasted!

    awh
    Member

    Blair/Brown said they wanted evidence based policy

    Agree not specific to this case but I remember labour making a fuss about how they would have a different approach to making policy after the previous Tory governement. There was a Prof speaking on Breakfast TV this morning and he covered the mess the Conservative Health ministers got into after not listening to advice and loosing the public's trust (BSE, eggs etc), unfortately I was still half asleep and can't remember everything 🙂 The best politicians are always the ones that listen to, and engage in the agruement and don't just say what they've been told to say again and again.

    Premier Icon Stoner
    Subscriber

    Im frankly surprised at Johnson for getting involved in what is really Sloppy Jacqui's mess.

    I had much more respect for Johnson than this sort of behaviour. I shall have to reconsider.

    Good on the professor, I hope it raise a rally cry from other independent advisers and scientists to not take the governments ignorant responses to their work lying down.

    The Cambridge review of primary education is another case in point. One of the highest quality, practical and informative papers produced in education in 40 years and its dismissed by that sub-ignorant twot Balls with a couple of soundbites. It's a pity the Tories didnt take the political advantage it offered and praised it and drew parts of it into their own education policies. It may not be too late to do so…

    Keva
    Member

    Letter from Johnson to Nutt…

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/

    and the reply…

    "The government's desire to use the class of a particular drug to send out a signal to potential users or dealers does not sit comfortably with the claim that the primary objective of the classification system is to categorise drugs according to the comparative harm associated with their misuse."

    It is supporting this argument that has cost Professor Nutt his job today. He does not accept that there is much evidence to show that the class of a drug acts as a deterrent and therefore sees the only point of classification as being "to provide the public with an evidence-based and rigorous appraisal of relative harms".

    But to suggest that taking ecstasy is less dangerous than horse-riding, or that cannabis is safer than alcohol and tobacco – however true that may be – is to say the unsayable in the political drugs debate.

    So basically what the message here is don't let the public know the real truth about drugs, keep them in the dark, feed them on bullshit and prevent them from accessing freedom in their own consciosness. Well the truth is that every single religion on the planet has it's roots in shamanism and the use of plant hallucinogens… this is what governments are absolutely $hit scared of.

    Kev

    awh
    Member

    From the reporting I've heard it seams that Johnson didn't like the scientific evidence the government were given being put into the public arena. I've not googled yet, but there must be loads of supporting evidence out there, from all over the world. Prof. Nutt was only summarising it. Anyone with an interest would have seen the policy was contradictory to the science. I expect there'll be a damning report from a parliamentary select committee soon!

    ernie_lynch
    Member

    Well the truth is that every single religion on the planet has it's roots in shamanism and the use of plant hallucinogens… this is what governments are absolutely $hit scared of.

    😕 …….. Are you sure ? Governments are are basing their drugs policies on the fact that they are absolutely $hit scared of new religions springing up ? 😯

    Stoner – whilst I have become used to expecting surprises from you, education was an area which I didn't expect you to be much of a 'liberal' on. Although I am also surprised that you are surprised, that "the Tories didn't take the political advantage it offered"

    The Tories are imo even more susceptible to tabloid driven agendas. An excellent example of this was the Conservative shadow home secretary Ann Widdecombe's famous speech at the 2000 Tory conference, in which she called for a fixed penalty of £100 for a first offence of possessing drugs – no matter how small the quantity.

    Whilst in government, the Tories have had a long record of knee-jerk reactions to tabloid campaigns. The Tories have for the last 30 years, and New Labour for the last 15 years, considered the views of the unelected foreigner Rupert Murdoch, to be far more important than the views of independent advisers and scientists.

    Law and order in particular, is an area in which Sun editors are huge experts in. Which explains the former Tory Home Secretary Michael Howard's famous mantra "prison works" even though he knew full well that is indeed the problem, ie, relying on prisons to resolve rising crime levels. It has to be said that a fair few STWers are also susceptible to tabloid induced knee-jerk reactions. Although interestingly enough, not when it comes to recreational drugs, apparently.

    Premier Icon Stoner
    Subscriber

    the Tories stance on drugs is as bad as new labour. I certainly dont endorse it and Grayling (? Shadow HS) has got this wrong in supporting Johnson.

    MrNutt
    Member

    if only the church could side with the Gov.Inc then perhaps we could know the truth, High General Alan Johnson clearly knows better what is good and evil. Stupid science!

    alpin
    Member

    i smoke lots of weed daily. lots of people smoke weed daily and all them i know are normal, well functioning (ok, perhaps a little slower than others) people.

    drugs….. don't touch the white powder (coke), but the pills are ok(ish – mostly)

    I;ve never taken recreational drugs aside from a couple of pints a week. IMO – the drug problem is their illegality and consequently unregulated standards. Nutt is right about the relative risks and had the courage to say so knowing that he would get fired. Politicians and newspapers are all idiots. Scientists should petition the govt to re-instate him.

    Keva
    Member

    ernie… dunno about scared of new religions but definately scared about the truth of existing ones.

    alpin, I've been smoking pot/weed regularly for twenty or more years, I can run a 40min 10k, ride a lap of skyline in about 4hrs and Im currently studying for a CCNP certificate.

    http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/le3/le2/le37/le10/learning_certification_type_home.html

    Im far from slow thanks 😉

    I also usually indulge in magic mushrooms once a year and for the last two years I've been travelling to the Amazon rainforest to partake in ayahuasca ceremonies.

    Home

    People are quite capable of ruining their health without going anywhere near illegal drugs.

    Kev

    Premier Icon chakaping
    Subscriber

    Solvents less dangerous than pot or booze!

    Now where's that can of Glade got to?

    Premier Icon wormhole
    Subscriber

    things will be so much better when the Tories are in power…………..

    alpin
    Member

    Keva, agreed…..

    Premier Icon ahwiles
    Subscriber

    politician: – you there, mr scientist, go and find some evidence.

    Scientist: – i've found some evidence, i think it's quite interesting.

    politician: – you're so sacked.

    me: – and i thought Blair had a lot to answer for…

    He's a smart bloke though – statements make forced the govt to fire him – maximum publicity and embarrassment. Revenge for ignoring the truth for years. The tories are twerps for joining in though.

    noT very straight here at the moment.

    DoeS tht pretty grpah thing meen I am better off dropping acid that fags and booze?

    If so I am getting my chemistry kit back out.

    RichPenny
    Member

    IMO – the drug problem is their illegality and consequently unregulated standards.

    Wouldn't agree with that, specifically because lots of drugs are fairly harmful. In particular where mental health is concerned. Although obviously being unregulated doesn't help.

    My problem is with misrepresentation. I remember well the reporting of ecstasy usage after Leah Betts died. COMPLETELY counterproductive, because they placed so much emphasis on the drug itself and not what actually killed her (drinking too much water). There was a genuine chance to educate people there and it was not really taken advantage of.

    The problem with drugs is the associated criminality. I finished years ago with weed and pills because I couldn't justify the fact that it supported criminal behaviour.

    There is an obvious answer to that predicament.

    In sacking Prof Nutt and walking away from any further debate on the issue, the Government are displaying the weakness of their position. Votes and the media ride roughshod over evidence based science, once again.

    Is this the "Unenlightenment" yet?

    Premier Icon kimbers
    Subscriber

    in an election year labour/torries were never gonna agree with the science, no matter how much it couls help society when there is balanced responsible media coverage of drug taking like this……..
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1089125/Government-experts-soon-plans-downgrade-Ecstasy-Class-B-drug.html

    once nutt had started doing tv appearances telling it how he sees it his days were numbered

Viewing 39 posts - 1 through 39 (of 39 total)

The topic ‘Prof. Nutt’ is closed to new replies.

Comments are closed, but trackbacks are open.

Skip to top