Shilly-shallying about what to do about Chinese designer ‘plant food’ drug Methadrone/Mephedrone/MCat is another unwelcome example of how New Labour’s passive/aggressive approach towards protecting citizens’ rights does the reverse. It’s enough to drive a man to spliff.
Last October, former NL drug czar, the (perhaps) aptly named Professor David Nutt resigned/was sacked from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) for stating that so-called Home Secretary Alan Johnson must have been on one if he thought that upgrading cannabis from class C to B was a good trip. I was not surprised when Johnson later confirmed that Prof. Nutt had indeed been sacked, because his ‘advice’ cut across government policy to attack soft targets, such as weed-smoking kids, in order to maintain the pretence that the police, NL’s lard-arsed political wing, were meeting their targets. Or something like that.
Nutt was sacked for arguing common sense. Alcohol misuse is linked to the overwhelming majority of violent crimes, ditto the number of admissions to hospital accident and emergency departments, breaks up families but is perfectly legal. Weed, and even Ecstasy are far less dangerous. Stoners can’t be arsed to do much more than flop around. Ecstasy becomes dangerous when taken in conjunction with alcohol. Banning one and not the other is a heavy trip down the road to – er - somewhere else, man.
David Cameron as he might look were he unfortunate enough to become a Methadrone addict
But the Professor killed his own credibility when he strayed into the twilight zone of policy. A couple of his colleagues joined him and nobody apart from the Guardian gave a monkeys, until last weekend somebody called Dr. Polly Taylor also walked the ACMD plank. Speaking on the radio from Amsterdam yesterday – where he was possibly researching the wonders of legalised hash bars (despite what he was saying, there aren’t many left and it’s a load of bollocks to say that drug use in Holland is any less seedy than in the UK) – Professor Nutt reprised his theme that cannabis/weed is less dangerous than alchohol, criminalising it drives the price up, policing it costs money and wastes resources etc. Heavy.
Of course it is, but it’s a different argument. There is a time for expediency, and in the case of Methedrone, aka Mephadrone/M-kat, the time is now. I’m not a user myself, you may be surprised to know, but living in the ballsachingly trendy Bethnal Green/Shoreditch/Hoxton triangle, I know plenty of people with direct experience - probably more than Alan Johnson or the nutty professor combined – who state categorically that this stuff is very, very bad indeed. Unlike the government or the squabbling scientists I’m happy to hear their unvarnished opinion that Methadrone is more moreish than Ketamine, Amphetamine Sulphide or Cocaine, can quickly reduce kids to a ‘feral’ state and, whether legal or not, creates a burning habit which sucks away money, energy and self-respect. Bummer.
Alan Johnson, as he may appear to David Cameron in his hypothetical state as a Methadrone addict
It is regrettable that political correctness, as represented by Professor Nutt and his grateful-not-to-be-dead academic colleagues, has fetched up against political opportunism, as represented by Alan Johnson and his soon-to-be-dead-in-the-water authoritarian bastard squad. I almost certainly know more about drugs on a first hand level than most of the boneheads in government – not sure about the Tories, though – but surely here is a clear case for decisive legislation. Regardless as to whether it played a small, middling or large part in the recent deaths of three kids, Methadrone is far more dangerous and nasty than weed and hash – think crystal meth and crack cocaine. Criminalising it may well create an underground black market and drive up the price, but it’s facile to argue that notoriety will add to its popularity, since it’s all over the news that the stuff is legal and relatively cheap. Banning its import and resale will only hurt those who wish to go out of their way to use it, and will almost certainly deter recreational/casual/impressionable drug fashionistas. Result.
Ban Methadrone with immediate effect, not because it may or may not have the potential to kill, but because it sure as hell doesn’t do anyone any good. Nor is this a Human Rights issue. If it drives the price up, then boo hoo for the prats who want to use it. And let’s not confuse this with the cannabis/marijuana debate, policy which is in itself influenced by Britain’s costly role as the 51st state of the USA.This is too serious a debate for the chatterati, so while we’re at it, bollocks to the Guardian and the Daily Mail. The drones who write for those rags should get out more. End of.
John J Kelly
9 Comments
Dear John, what a diatribe! Were you on it when you wrote it? Love, Patrick
Swiss chocolate and Lavazza expresso, if you must know, shamefully and wretchedly middle class though it is. Best, John
One of my daughters has developed something of a habit over the last couple of years. She’s not alone. Every day thousands of kids do it; across the country maybe half a million people do it every weekend. It is addictive and it can give a real high. I have to admit sometimes I even do it with her. But every year it kills 2-3,000 people and damages the lives of tens of thousands of others.
I advise caution, but I have no intention of stopping her cycling.
As you know we have seen close up the harm drugs can cause, but I don’t suppose Mephadrone is any more harmful than ecstasy and e has given a lot of fun to millions of people over the last 10 years and may have contributed to the death of a total of about 600 people, 82% of whom were known drug addicts. This leaves the casual raver with about the same chance of being killed by e as being killed by a falling fridge.
The big problem with Mephadrone is that it is insanely cheap. If beer was 25p a pint, how much more damage would it do? Surely there is a really good argument that if the government taxed it and sold it to over 18s like fags, it could be regulated and this would stop party goers having to go to drug dealers for their Saturday night fun. As it is they will have to go back to the drug dealers, and they will be sold up to a whole range of other drugs.
It was an opportunity to try something a bit radical instead of the same old thing that doesn’t work. (Tho’ in truth no politician was going to risk in the run up to an election.)
But I’m disappointed so find Thus (in its new incarnation) has been taken over by The Daily Mail.
Thanks for a very thoughtful comment, Pete, though I’m disappointed that you think Thus resembles the Daily Mail in any shape or form.As I said in my piece, perhaps not sufficiently stongly, fxxx the Daily Mail AND double fxxx the Guardian. My point is that Methadrone is definitely more harmful than ecstasy, (as confirmed by the ACMD today when announcing the decision to ban the stuff) and my observation is neither based on idealised Libertinism, middle class angst or right wing teeth grinding, rather on fact. Kids tell me this stuff is highly addictive to a virtually unprecedented extent and thus ruins lives very quickly, as I suspect its makers intend it to do. I am pleased that legislation will be introduced to put the brakes on, and have absolutely no sympathy with the manufacturers, dealers and nightclub proprietors who will be inconvenienced as a result.
I am completely with you as far as several other types of recreational drugs are concerned, as I said in my piece. Apologies if I didn’t make myself clear. John
John
A few points:
Why do you think anyone “intends” to make the product “highly addictive” (any more than the makers of Roberstons jam want their customers to come back for more) or want it to “ruin lives very quickly”? Nobody wants that. To demonise in this way is very Mail-like moralizing. The people who make this stuff and import it just want to make money, like most people who run any business.
And in real life, nobody is going to be inconvenienced by criminalizing the stuff, except that it will get more expensive – which, as you know is something I advocate – and it will lead to deaths from contract enforcement within an illegal industry, which is clearly a bad thing.
Clubbers will still be able to get hold of the stuff, but they will have to go to dealers to get it, so they will be offered the temptation of getting other drugs, and they will run the bizarre risk of being imprisoned and given a criminal record (and thereby having their lives destroyed) for doing something that a million other people do and does no harm to anyone else.
Your argument seems to rest on the fact that Mephadrone is more addictive and more harmful than e. First, I understand that the main reason why people are leaving the ACMD is that there is no reliable research or evidence yet and they want the government to wait until there is. But more importantly, you say you take this line because it is worse than e. Are you saying that you would accept my suggestion for e, given what we know about it? that you would welcome an experiment where we say it is legal, subject to tax and sold to 18s and over in pharmacies (or off-licences)?
This is the central question and I would love to know your answer.
Regards
Dear Pete
To answer your points in order: yes, it’s hardly contentious to speculate that the makers of Methadrone intended to make it as addictive as possible. Unlike Robertson’s jam, however, this stuff quickly has a highly deleterious impact on the lifestyles of its users. And yes, of course they want to make as much money as possible from it – that’s why they make it as addictive as possible. No argument there.
Criminalising Methadrone will inconvenience those who sell it in Head Shops and make it much more expensive. I personally have no sympathy for injuries or inconvenience caused to those who get caught up in drug dealer wars and reject the assertion that this makes me a Daily Mail reader.
‘E’ is not the same drug, doesn’t come from the same family, hasn’t got the same Amphetamine-like effect or addictive possibilities so the argument doesn’t really follow. A better comparison is with Crystal Meth or Crack. Would you advocate selling these drugs over the counter?
My worry about Methadrone, as I have repeatedly stated, is based on the real evidence of people who use all sorts of drugs and who tell me it is bloody nasty and has comprehensively ruined the health and of at least a dozen kids in one department of one London University over 12 weeks. That’s my sample, unscientific as it may be.
PS. Smoking is legal. I do it. It kills and maims hundreds of thousands of people. That doesn’t make it right. Making it socially unacceptable and far more expensive HAS reduced the number of addicts by as much as 75% in the UK over the past 15 years.
Where is all your evidence coming from? Comparing it to crystal meth and crack is an absolute joke. It is little more than a bit of fun and anyone who does too much probably has a predisposition to do too much of what ever they happen to be on at any time … alcohol included! Like most drugs apart from heroin and crack if you find yourself doing too much just slow up or stop…. as they are more habitual than addictive. Those who can’t, are just losers spoiling it for the majority who can control themselves and are able to hold down careers, relationships and lead a normal existence.
p.s I work around students for my job and I can assure you an absolute ton of the stuff has been consumed over the last couple of years without problem. All will graduate and then move on with their chosen path in life without problem. THIS is why Prof Nutt and others felt the need to resign… the pure hypocrisy of our drug laws!
Any drug eventually leads to the same destination. Pain.
Me and my girlfriend used meathadrone heavily for over a year. We have had no adverse side effects. I completed my second year of university and got high grades, everything is totally fine. Now its illegal kids are being forced to do these new legal highs in its place, which is leading to serious serious problems. NRG1 was the initial replacement and that really fucked kids up in the short period of time it was available, moreso than methadrone did in the whole few years it was available. If it had been taxed and only made available to those over 18 it would make so much more sense….How hard is it for kids to buy alcohol??? HARD. How hard is it for kids to go to a dealer and buy methadrone thats now cut with god knows what??? EASY. Not to mention the amount of kids that will be arrested now because of this.
Also, it is only really addictive in the initial comedown stage…which lasts about an hour or so. Beyond that it isnt addiction which makes people go back, its just that its fun.
And finally, methadrone only become popular when certain chemicals used to make MDMA were banned from being exported from china. If these were never banned, there would have been little or no methadrone craze. If methadrone wasnt banned, there wouldnt be all these dangerous new legal highs creating problems.
One Trackback
[...] of Gordon Brown jerked its knees and banned the drug, causing the resignation of Professor Nutt (Thus passim) who appears to be a bit of a blowhard but who probably had a point about the government using [...]