Recreational drugs policy

UK adults are ditching alcohol for cannabis and psychedelics, report finds

On the face of it the arguments seem compelling that access to drugs should be carefully managed but legal, just like booze… but:

Just a sad anecdote from me, a good friends lad had a drug induced psychosis, it destroyed his life and he almost took his family down with him.

He grew up with my lad and it was horrible to watch the events unfold and completely horrific for his family.

I can think of multiple examples of this. Most of them are still affected ~30 years later. Two died in their 30s. To think an evening as a 15-year-old could effectively ruin a life is tragic.

Personally, i can manage my alcohol intake. I got addicted to tobacco from combining it with dope but quite that as found myself increasingly anxious when high. MDMA gave me a come down so bad i’d never go near it again. Same with Meth. Coke did bugger all, could barely feel it – total waste of money. Whizz was just convenient and acid probably the most interesting of the lot – but too many stories from friends that scared me off.

I’d be all for the legalisation of cannabis and psylocybin in the uk.

At the moment, with only alcohol being the only legal recreational drug, it’s actually an extremely sexist policy decision.

Alcohol/ floor polish is a pretty dodgy substance, but more so for men.

There’s a qualitative difference in the experience between the sexes.

For women, it seems to induce some kind of hormonal rush that’s obviously lost on men.

For men, a trip to the pub is as interesting as spending an evening at the corporation bus depot. You’re drumming your fingers, glancing at you’re watch every thirty seconds.

Just mindless tedium, whilst you’re waiting for a ride.

But to women, they can’t understand why men are not flocking around them, at the corporation bus depot, and get extremely frumpy in the process.

Women, take note. If you want to meet the hot blokes, go to the Netherlands, or petition the govt to legalise cannabis.

Given that the drinks lobby exercises so much influence over the govt, it may be easier to collectively abstain from alcohol purchases. You’ll see a pretty rapid policy reversal. As would abstaining from county-lines drug purchases.

Should you want to rejuvenate the high st, take a note from the Netherlands.

The revenue from cannabis tourism must be staggering.

The cannabis works as a bulwark against the skank and squalor that goes hand in hand with alcohol consumption.

What about the risk of psychosis?

Theres so much crap in alcohol that it does induce psychosis. To the non-drinker, it’s like  venturing out, into a world of mass hysteria.

People are literally tripping on the latest social panic.

With cannabis, it’s all about finding the strain with the ratio of THC/ CBD that works for you.

As for psylocybin, the only problem with these substances is that they only ever reached the already converted.

Your Farage, Trump, Putin, Vatican, wriggled out of their grasp.

Inagine the kind of world we could be living in, had ISIS or Le Pen had been force fed DMT☺️☺️☺️

it does change brain chemistry and many folk become life long stoners but this does not effect their ability to hold down professional jobs and be contributing members of society.

I worked with a guy like that, back in the 70’s. Long hair, flairs, long-sleeved tee shirts, used to roll up joints in the studio, for what he called ‘herbal insporation’. He was a brilliant freehand artist, he used to sit doodling steam locomotives, with all the details, and in perspective too, just out of habit, while thinking about a design. He’d roll a joint, then there’d be a flurry of activity from his corner of the room. Smashing bloke, went to his place in Bath the afternoon before a gig, gave me a small piece of resin to chew on because I wouldn’t smoke it.
Completely off my face for hours afterwards, even while waiting for the train home late that evening – according to a friend I saw. I can’t remember…

I remember seeing some amazing things looking through a book of his about Antoni Gaudi, which did prompt a question about whether he was using it as well.

I’ve never tried it since, that’s what, fifty years ago, and never felt the need. Nor anything else, except alcohol, and that in moderation, I don’t actually like the out of control sensation. Or the spinny room thing, either. Especially that!

I think skunk can be psychologically addictive . At least with legalization the occasional spliff could be purchased rather than having to buy it in quarters or halves and be permanently off your face. I’ve known Cambridge professors who were regular users and an actor in a popular agricultural (!) radio series, all stayed on top of their game.

nevermind.

the rave generation would never have happened without MDMA.

It’s true that every music has its drug – but drugs don’t ‘make things happen’.

theres a romantic notion that drugs are a sort of creative performance enhancer. But they’re not – they just compliment to mood. People who like the franticness of speed will enjoy the franticness of punk. But you can enjoy punk anyway..People who like the visual and aural qualities of LSD will enjoy the dreaminess of psychedelia, but you can write or enjoy psychedelia any.

The drugs are incidental but compilmentary   – its like saying you wouldn’t have had the cheese generation without wine.

I want to drink in the bus depot where Greatbeardedone drinks – sounds like an easy pull!

Unless…. it actually is a bus depot

It feels like there are a lot of drugs already being handed out at this ‘bus depot’… 😉   Agree with the conclusions (decriminalise), but the reasoning felt like some sort of psilocybin induced essay.

maccruikeen

I think you can be right for folk listening to the music but without the drugs the performers / creators would not create it.  I have no doubt that some drugs increase creativity

why would I go to a shop when the dealer will come to my door, will have drugs of known quality that will always be cheaper?

Eh? That’s pretty much the opposite of reality. Do you think dealers are looking out for you and want to ensure you get the highest quality drugs? lol, they’re cut to a crazy extent (you’re lucky if the coke you might buy is 10% actual coke these days). Sure if you live in that world and know the dealers well you might get better stuff but that’s not most people.

Who really wants a drug dealer driving to their house selling them something illegal vs being able to go to a shop and buy the legal quality-controlled version (maybe it ends up being available on Deliveroo anyway…).

And why cheaper? A lot of the cost of illegal drugs comes from a mix of the high overheads that come with smuggling and the nature of the market where supply is artificially controlled and protected. Remove that and the only real cost to worry about is how much tax the government would be applying to the product.

As for the wider argument…

I’ve never really been into cannabis myself but agree with controlled legalisation, that said I think it’s best limited to edibles as it removes the smoking aspect which is not only damaging to your health but also horrible for your neighbours to deal with.

Heroin is the problematic one, whilst I agree criminalising it’s use mostly just harms society’s most vulnerable people you have to have something in place to stop people trying it and getting addicted in the first place (afaik it’s the only recreational drug that’s pretty much instantly addictive, not something you can just try once or twice to see what it’s like)

Coke, yeah it’s hard to argue for legalising it in any way but I’m sure, with research they could come up with less harmful synthetic versions that might have a place…

Crack is basically a poor man’s coke but even more harmful (shorter but more intense high meaning it often ends up being much more abused than coke). It’s not helped by often being bought alongside heroin, by the same vulnerable people but unlike heroin can’t really be prescribed as a way to reducing it’s harmful impact.

MDMA, if it were available legally you’d take away one of the main problems with it (in that it’s often cut, sometimes with harmful stuff but also people just don’t know how much to take as they don’t know it’s purity).

Micro-dosing on psychedelics I think needs a lot more research and has the potential to help a lot of people (if the limited positive research that’s been done turns out to be true and there not being long-term harmful side effects etc.)

A few thoughts after catching up with the thread and thanks Tj.

Often some poor teenager drowns in their own vomit after too much vodaka. Please educate your kids and grandkids about units.

Even one unit of alcohol is too toxic to pass today’s current tests so wouldn’t be allowed on sale if it was a new invention.

This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t enjoy a drink but we certainly need to be aware of its minus’s. Plus this was world’s first failed attempt at having a War on Drugs…

Someone mentioned that we should make policy once we have properly assesed each drug. That research has been done by highly qualified researchers all over the world using FMRI scanners, etc. We know what each drug does the body and brain but only if that drug is exactly what it says on the tin.

Heroin addiction is often a way of coping with something horrific in your past so the longer term answer is to improve society but once addicted we proved years ago in the Merseyside Experiment that addicts can function in society if given a clean and regular supply. Ironically we banned this idea but the clever Swiss went around the world looking for a solution to their growing problem and copied it.

Heroin is the problematic one, whilst I agree criminalising it’s use mostly just harms society’s most vulnerable people you have to have something in place to stop people trying it and getting addicted in the first place (afaik it’s the only recreational drug that’s pretty much instantly addictive,

This is why I suggest using medicinal heroin for long term maintenance rather than Methodone because it would take away the illegal market.  In the UK we spend huge sums on giving folk methodone but it does not satisfy the need – so they still try to get heroin ( gross generalisation).  If you use heroin for maintenance of long term addicts you remove a large part of the market so there ends up less illegal heroin available

I really don’t know where I sit on this. I am probably old fashioned in my thinking that a bit of hash is ok but coke/heroin etc should be off limits. If we were to legalise drugs it would need a lot of work/funding of health services before hand as I think we would need to adapt current funding models, moving funding from the illegal costs of police/court/prisons into health/gp/hospitals/support counselling etc. would it lead to an increased consumption? if we look at alcohol and tobacco and how they impact on the health services we would need a huge shift of investment to support any law change. Then, ignoring the cost implications, what would the society implications be? As previously mentioned, a lot of drug (and alcohol) abuse is because of life/society circumstances , so we need to address these causes too. I don’t feel you should legalise more drugs without having these issues sorted first or you risk an increase in use/abuse that cannot be supported.

anyway I think all you big hitters have to solve the housing crisis first.

Mugboo  I do not agree that various recreational drugs effects are all well understood.  One of the issues with prohibition is that high quality research is hard to do.

Another adverse effect of prohibition is that medical benefits of these drugs are very much under utilized.  Its often hard to separate out the overvalued claims made by enthusiasts for positive effects from what is provable but the hallucinogens would appear to have potential for use in mental illness and distress.

IIRC the swizz were trying MDMA in relationship counseling – because it releases oxytocin so it reminds couples what its like to be in love

Ketamine seems to have a use in profound depression – something that would not be known without its recreational use

And I think the current Fentanyl problem is blurring the lines regarding changing current drug laws.

Its one of those chicken/egg things. The explosion in users has come from the fallout of OxyContin, plenty of documentarys to watch if you are’nt up to speed on that but basically, as the governement in the States caught up with reality and banned its use, the heroin market was’nt able to cope with all the new addicts so handily the chinese stepped in with Fentanyl. Hey Presto, everyones a winner (or loser…).

Since then the Chinese have stopped doing it directly and just ship the precursers to Mexico.

And mu understanding is that the Taliban have made moves against the poppy growers over there so our traditional Afghanistan/Pakistan supply is about to slow done so we may saddly see our own synthetic opiate crisis.

Tj – give the Drug Science Podacsts a listen, very enjoyable. David Nutt and his friends across the world, working at Imperial College London/ John Hopkins, etc, have been testing these drugs on themselves and volunteers for years now. Its been slow going due to the hoops they have to go through but very good progress, often to the point of Stage 3 testing.

I’m sure there is lots left to learn but they do know what each drug is doing to the brain and body.

There is not a lot of love for cocaine though but coca leaves by all acounts would be a nice swap for caffeine.

Interesting that the thread has been about legalisation of drugs which again is just a sticking plaster , rather than trying to solve the issue

For those countries that have legalised, have they seen a reduction in use ?

Fentanyl is massively more effective than other opiates.  dosag is in microgrammes not milligrams thus its easier to smuggle and also harder to work out dosages.  Hence ODs are common with it.  Its also often used to adulterate low quality heroin – again vastly increasing OD risk as its very hard to add a consistent amount

(afaik it’s the only recreational drug that’s pretty much instantly addictive, not something you can just try once or twice to see what it’s like)

Not sure that’s right, I remember reading it’s about comparable with nicotine, it’s the shit it’s cut with that produces most of the negative effects.

Meth and crack on the other hand are the “instantly addictive” sort. Obviously not for everyone.

For those countries that have legalised, have they seen a reduction in use ?

Again different drugs different effects.  I think with Cannabis legalisation there tends to be a initial rise in usage then it falls away even to lower than pre legalisation levels – but this is compounded by folk taking cannabis rather than other drugs.  Again from memory I think less dutch teenagers smoke cannabis than in the UK – because its seen as boring and for old folk.  there is no element of teenage rebellion in taking drugs if they are legal.  Again this will depend on what level of cannabis decriminlaisation / legalisation.  I am concerned that some US states and Canada may have gone too far with allowing THC to be refined to pure and then added to products.  apparently the US market in THC laced drinks is huge and in canada you can buy pure THC and also THC edibles not weedlaced edibles.

If you use heroin maintenance for heroin addicts then the use of black market heroin drops and fewer folk are recruited to addiction

Hallucinogens my guess would be that usage might increase

I think most countries with liberal drug laws have seen harms decrease – after all that is the aim – harm reduction

I think most countries with liberal drug laws have seen harms decrease

This is not the case. See the article I posted on the first page about Oregon’s experience. The reduction in crime and black market drugs isn’t as clear cut either. In most cases/studies the decrease is reported crime. Which makes sense; if you’re not criminalising it, then the cops aren’t treating it as a priority. But that doesn’t mean that crime or gangs have gone away, it just means the cops aren’t doing anything about it/them.

Edit: Portugal has seen reduction in use and harm, and they’ve invested in treatment and are trying to de-stimatise addiction. They seem however to be alone, pretty much, in both having a long term and broadly successful policy. But, even their crime stats are misleading for the same reasons everyone’s else’s are. If the cops aren’t investigated/arresting anything then crime is ‘going down’

In the UK we spend huge sums on giving folk methodone but it does not satisfy the need – so they still try to get heroin ( gross generalisation).

I spent some time discussing this with a very experienced addiction doctor.  His view (I’ve not researched it myself) was that methadone can work and correctly dosed can be a complete substitute.  He was quite scathing about GPs who don’t seem to understand what they are doing with the dosing.  He felt a lot of GPs were intentionally underdosing believing it will help their patient wean themselves off it – when actually higher dosing would enable them to regain control.  He likened it to someone who is addicted to 20 fags a day, being given enough Nicorette gum to compensate for 15 ciggies, but expecting them to stop going to the shop and buying fags.

He wasn’t opposed to legalising heroin for the same use but questioned whether the current delivery approach would do any better than with methadone.  But of course he was arguing that his services were underfunded and deserved more investment because they could make a big difference.  He was very clear though you can’t solve a drug problem (personal or societal) through medical intervention alone – you have to recognise it’s caused by what TJ called “shitty life syndrome” and fix as much of that as possible.

He made an observation that for many prisoners being released returns them to that shitty life and the cycle begins – that was certain not a “prisoners have it too easy” claim… he was saying – how badly we treat addicts on release that actually it’s worse than being inside.

Another point I meant to add to the discussion was, how legal/accessible do you make drugs? Walk into a shop/prescription only etc? Legalising drugs would have companies seeing an opportunity to make money and how do you regulate them? Look at how big pharma can behave with OxyContin/ Purdue, drinks companies trying to attract drinkers to their product with alcopops, vaping that was once used primarily for smoking cessation now widely used by youngsters who would never of smoked. If you give companies free rein then some will seek to exploit this in a bid to gain customers, make too many regulations and you just drive the use back underground into the hands of the cartels. People/ companies are smart and will always seek a loophole or way to exploit us in their quest to make money. Again I don’t know the answers and I have more questions than answers so good luck to those trying to solve a very difficult problem.

FunkyDunc – Portugal changed their laws to tackle a growing heroin problem but the key to it was money spent on bringing these people back into society rather than just decriminilizing. It worked and lead to a big drop in heroin users.
Its important to note that this came from both sides of their house getting together and doing something sensible.

As Tj says, this is about harm reduction, there is no magic bullet, us human beings are often self destructive, especially when we are young. We get the ability to enjoy pleasures around the age of 12 but us boys mostly don’t understand risk properly till we are 24 ish according to research.

Opiate/crack type addiction is mostly due to a shitty start in life.

Merseyside Experiment podcast about giving addicts heroin.

Really? Because I never tire of hearing bams talking about taking 2 or 3 of an evening. Either they’re talking shit or taking shit.

One of my mates can hack 3 pills in an evening with a bit of crystal MD on top (not to mention other stuff). He’s away with the fairies but he can still operate (he drives his mobility scooter home from the pub afterwards!). It’s all about tolerance, and you can build that up quite quickly with frequent MDMA use. Back in the 90s when I was going out raving every weekend 1 pill was never enough.

Lots of MDMA usage or stronger hallucinogens can lead to “fried brains” it would seem

It’s absolutely a thing – I have direct experience – but it takes a lot, like every weekend over a couple of years. It’ll happen with any drug if you use it enough (although I have heard stories of people going crazy after a single nuclear dose of LSD).

Look at how big pharma can behave with OxyContin/ Purdue, drinks companies trying to attract drinkers to their product with alcopops, vaping that was once used primarily for smoking cessation now widely used by youngsters who would never of smoked.

This is largely my fear if you legalise it. Oxytocin should be a big red flashing signal to everyone regarding the behaviour of pharmaceutical companies if you give them the opportunity to exploit vulnerable people for profit.

TJ not sure you’re right on the price thing. If MDMA was ever legalised there’s no way it would be cheap, otherwise the alcohol industry (who are the main opponents of legalisation for obvious reasons) would be annihilated. I reckon a legal pill would probably be half as strong as they currently are (ie a single dose) and cost upwards of £10. Possibly even more than that as who is going to spend £40-50 drinking on a night out when you can pop a pill for a tenner?

The only answer I can think of to this question is “It is complicated”.

Dugs have both the actual and potential capability for so much harm to individuals and society all the way through their supply chain from that I think it is next to impossible to create a legal ecosystem without accepting some harm along the way. In the worst case, that could be harming people on the streets and their families, or destroying communities where the drugs or precursors are produced/harvested. Even the question about legalising cannabis is tough to answer. If you legalise it, will people buy from a government controlled source (which may require ID) or continue buying from a dealer to avoid this? Will a dealer be cheaper? Will they have a better quality product? You could say that _this_ government may not record/retain user information, but what would another one do? Would the info be sold to a third party for further use?

Manufactured chemicals… Well, it would be easier for a large company to buy, manufacture and distribute a synthetic chemical to the end-user with a known quality and purity, so a drug like MDMA _could_ be made available as a safer product, but could also be copied illegally and distributed as the ‘legal’ version with a higher level of risk to the end user. Again, who do you trust to make and distribute the drugs? How do you guarantee that the data from the purchase and use is not misused? How do you keep people safe?

I keep thinking of the supply chain for heroin and cocaine and the way that this has destroyed nations and their populations. Could this be reversed if drugs were legalised? I don’t think so. Money will always be something people will want more of, either because they have none and just want t little bit more to feed their families (Opium in Afg) or because they have a shit-tonne and want to control it all (Cocaine in South America). Drug companies would probably fall into the latter category here… If they managed to secure the contract for producing legal MDMA, they’d want to optimise their profits.

The only way I see the war on drugs being won is by education and help. Show people the harms the drugs cause, educate them on what they can do in a way that works with them, help them effectively if they do have a problem. If the dealers are dealing because tit’s the only way they can get money, give _them_ opportunities, allow them to learn new skills, get real jobs, break that cycle too.

Honestly, the only thing I can see being remotely working as legalisation is small scale, self-grown cannabis and, even then, I do not think that will happen in the UK.

That’s pretty much the opposite of reality. Do you think dealers are looking out for you and want to ensure you get the highest quality drugs?

Nope.

Not all drugs dealers are balaclava wearing yuffs from the local council estate.

One of my old dealers was very professional. He used to give out 2g tasters (try before you buy), throw in some THC laden munchies on big orders and even refunded me on a batch of weed that wasn’t all that.

Will be interesting when I see him next to find out what the legalisation of weed in Germany has done to his business.

Eh? That’s pretty much the opposite of reality.

My son’s dealer was a professional woman who delivered to the door in her Merc. Product was always good quality and reasonable price. It was just as easy as using Deliveroo

IMO legalise the lot and tax its sale and production.

Germany and Spain have a setup where you have “cannabis clubs” that you can join and these clubs are allowed to grow so much per member and simple possession is legal.

You don’t need to be a member of a cannabis club in Spain. You can grow your own, as long as it’s only for personal use. 3 plants/adult is apparently acceptable, although I doubt that’s a hard, legal limit, and presumably if you pissed off a police officer / judge you could still end up in trouble. A plantation of 50 would definitely be for dealing and would no doubt lead to jail time.

Honestly, the only thing I can see being remotely working as legalisation is small scale, self-grown cannabis and, even then, I do not think that will happen in the UK.

thats the model in Germany and Spain.

I think it is next to impossible to create a legal ecosystem without accepting some harm along the way. In the worst case, that could be harming people on the streets and their families, or destroying communities where the drugs or precursors are produced/harvested.

Its certainly difficult.   This is why I want to look at things from a harm reduction viewpoint not a moral one.  My belief and the experience from other countries is that liberalising drug laws reduce harm overall.  the third country issue is a real one.  Note I do not advocate personally any change to the status of cocaine but I do advocate legal heroin prescribing for maintenance under supervision – which creates a legal avenue for growers to sell and reduces the black market

If you legalise it, will people buy from a government controlled source (which may require ID) or continue buying from a dealer to avoid this? Will a dealer be cheaper? Will they have a better quality product?

The spanish or German model of “cannabis clubs” avoids this issue.  You have to be a member of the club to be able to buy from the club and that does leave a record

the canadian model of a full legal market means that tested and safer products are available and the dealer is cut out as you have a choice of products in the legal shops rather than take it or leave it.  The only ID check is like alcohol ie an age check.  Nothing is recorded.

IO think we should look at best practice worldwide and use that to inform our laws.  The key thing is our current laws have failed.  We have huge issues with drugs.  The status quo does not work.  We need to find something that does.

Ta Mogrim – I had forgotton that.  The clubs are for those who do not want to grow their own?  I think Germany is the same?

Cannabis clubs here have a tendency to get raided and shut down, I’m pretty sure they operate on the fringes of legality.

 I think Germany is the same

Not 100% up on things in the Vaterland, but there aren’t any clubs set up and running as yet, at least in Bavaria.

Bavarian government is trying to make it really difficult for people. Every club application is being looked at very carefully and they’re taking their time doing it.

From my clique back in Munich I don’t know anyone who has put their name down for a club. Who wants their details handed over to the authorities?

the canadian model [sic]   Nothing is recorded.

It’s not Canada, just BC. When my wife bought some mushrooms (she’s Canadian from Vancouver) she had to sign a document to become a patient of their ‘clinic’ and had to indicate the ‘treatment’ she was seeking to use mushrooms to alleviate. They kept that record. It’s very much still a legal grey area

Article 

thats not cannabis.  They have a full legal market Canada wide for cannabis IIRC.