UK: Council advises ecstasy downgrade

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by edesignuk, Feb 11, 2009.

  1. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #1
    BBC.

    I've never touched it and don't especially want to, but why oh why do the government continually completely ignore and in fact do the opposite of what their knowledgeable advisory councils suggest???
     
  2. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #2
    What they need to do is invest in better drug education (both of rave attendees and rave organisers) rather than prohibition. The son of a friend of ours almost died a few months back from organ failure after taking some e(!) at a rave, and would have, had his friends not insisted that an ambulance be called rather than just let him sit it out, as the nurse in attendance suggested. As in the case of skunk(!), the danger to a small subset of users is acute, the same as with many other drugs both legal and illegal, and rather than ban everything outright the authorities need to inform. Penicillin isn't banned because a few people are intolerant, is it?
     
  3. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #3
    Because the government are more worried about the frothing at the mouth headlines that will vomit out of Associated Newspaper's HQ than they are about genuine evidence and reasoning.
     
  4. edesignuk thread starter Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #4
    It was really more of a rhetorical question :p but thank you for spelling it out! :D
     
  5. arkitect macrumors 601

    arkitect

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Location:
    Bath, United Kingdom
    #5
    Mad, bad and dangerous to know.
    ;) :p
     
  6. JG271 macrumors 6502a

    JG271

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    Yep just like the government ignored the surgeon general's advice on upgrading weed from class C to B. Forget what the trained doctor said, it made a nice article in the tabloids for Gordon Brown.

    I think our county's entire drug legislation is wrong. Go after the drugs and drug dealers that cause the most harm to people, either directly or indirectly (by way of people committing crime to fund a drug habit etc)

    The government listens to nothing but their own agenda.
     
  7. és: macrumors 6502a

    és:

    #7
    This is one of those situations where joe public doesn't know best but is still being played up to. I think most people in the street will say they want drugs banned and higher punishment for use but have no real knowledge of the situation.

    The government should do what is best, not what the uneducated public want. It's a tyranny, I tells ya.
     
  8. SLC Flyfishing Suspended

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #8
    In the US, Ecstasy is a schedule 1 drug (which I gather is the same idea as class A) but oddly enough, Cocaine and Meth-amphetamine are schedule 2 drugs and under certain situations may be prescribed by a properly licensed physician.

    I though that was quite odd.


    SLC
     
  9. GorillaPaws macrumors 6502a

    GorillaPaws

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    #9
    It is my understanding that Ecstasy(MDMA) was originally prescribed to couples by marriage councilors in the early 80's or something along those lines.
     
  10. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #10
    It was certainly used in a variety of therapeutic settings in the late seventies and I'm sure some of the more radical relationship councillors made use of it. The military were experimenting with it and similar substances from the late fifties onwards.
     
  11. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #11
    Does that mean it would have gotten worse penalties?:confused:

    If so, what legitamite reason could the surgeon general have for upgrading it? And where does alchohal and tobacco fall on this list?
     
  12. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #12
    Didn't they recently upgrade weed to Class B despite it being significantly less dangerous than cigarettes or alcohol?

    Tossers.
     
  13. GorillaPaws macrumors 6502a

    GorillaPaws

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    #13
    I thought weed was more carcinogenic/damaging to the body than a filtered cigarette? It's certainly less dangerous than alcohol though, unless you count the people who eat themselves to death from the munchies...
     
  14. FreeState macrumors 68000

    FreeState

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #14
    I agree with this 100%. I do not attend Raves or Dance clubs anymore - I did in my 20's - many people suffered needlessly because the lack of education and a safe place to go to get help. Very basic things like drink water and go to a quiet supervised place and rest if your having a bad reaction can save lives.

    And just an FYI - E effects everyone differently - that being said if you have any anxiety disorders I highly recommend you stay away from it.
     
  15. MOFS macrumors 65816

    MOFS

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    Durham, UK
    #15
    While your question is rhetorical, the issue is that pure MDMA is relatively safe, but often it will be mixed with [insert random white powder here].;) That, and the hyrocephalus caused by ingesting ecstasy with large quantities of water (not an uncommon occurrence - its what actually killed Leah Betts) make MDMA dangerous.

    Part of the issue here is the classification system. I'm more in favour of a system in which all illegal drugs hold the same punishment, with worsening punishments for dealing etc. This would be a far simpler solution. The truth is that an unregulated system requires definitive and clear punishments.
     
  16. Mord macrumors G4

    Mord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #16
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126954.500-ecstasys-legacy-so-far-so-good.html


    Interesting new research and papers seem to be popping up all over the place, I highly doubt the drug will be reclassified though, unfortunately politics come before common sense.

    I go to raves regularly and am quite fond of the substance I've taken it for years on/off about every month or so and it's never done me any considerable harm. it certainly has it's dangers much like anything fun. I don't drink or smoke and I'm generally in good health.

    I agree with skunk in that education should be aimed at reducing harm. I was taught at school that ecstasy could randomly kill me, not much further explanation was given other than the fact that it causes one to overheat. All this served to do was disillusion me when I got older and did a little research of my own. There are quite real dangers, the drugs propoganda just seem to focus on the sensationalist ones without providing enough information to be useful.

    Personally I find the dangers of dancing all night not on the substance to be about as dangerous in that regard, clubs are often hot and stuff places. Any sports person knows the importance of maintaining levels of salt and the importance of avoiding heat stroke the same applies to going out clubbing. Why this can't be taught as a simple good sense if you intend to dance all night I don't know. When do you ever see clubs selling isotonic sports drinks?

    There are very very few cases of MDMA directly causing death, usually it's in combination with harder drugs and alcohol.

    Tobacco is massively physically addictive, weed is not.
     
  17. MOFS macrumors 65816

    MOFS

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    Durham, UK
    #17
    All three are dangerous. Ideally all 3 would be illegal, as all are modern vices, but it would be logistically impossible to ban alcohol and cigarettes.
     
  18. Mord macrumors G4

    Mord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #18
    While on a personal level I dislike all three of those drugs I have to ask why do you think these things should be banned? Why not just ban fun.

    I'm not equating fun to drugs, I'm merely equating many fun entirely legal things to drugs in terms of danger.I certainly think that addictive drugs that have serious health risks certainly shouldn't be freely available though.
     
  19. MOFS macrumors 65816

    MOFS

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    Durham, UK
    #19
    The issue I have is the social consequences of these as well as the personal. It is difficult to see how smoking is "fun" - the appealing aspect of it is the social (ie group smoking and habitual) appeal of it. Alcohol's effects are similarly social - people have fun with it with other people, not as a direct consequence of the drug. Alcohol is a depressant. Drink driving, passive smoking, COPD, alcoholic liver disease, cirrhosis and lung cancer are some of the blights of the modern society, and yet alcohol is seen as this harmless benign liquid with a culture supported in this country. The positive effects of these are dubious (1 glass of wine [125 ml of 8%] a day reduces the risk of heart disease, but the percentage of the population who follows this is miniscule) and while these are fun, no other forms of commercially available "fun" are so widely abused and available. The truth of the matter is that if alcohol and cigarettes were invented now, they'd be illegal too.
    [​IMG]
     
  20. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #20
    Because the Government likes to think that they own your ass from birth to death. Self-determination is largely a myth.

    Look no further than the stone-walling on physician-assisted suicide, for terminal patients with NO quality of life.
     
  21. Mord macrumors G4

    Mord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #21
    As I said, I dislike those intoxicants intensely for pretty much identical reasons to those you stated. Ironically my use of MDMA put me off them most, when I go out clubbing I don't become obnoxious or annoying to others, I don't get angsty like drunk people do, I don't smell like smokers do and I don't sit about doing nothing stoned. I spent the night in an entirely positive blissed out mindset with my friends. I don't feel bad the next day either, or experience any significant mid week low. The cost to society as you put it is non-existent in my case and the case of most clubbers.

    The LD50 is about 6.5 grams of pure MDMA, It takes but 1/4g to have one in such a state for ~8 hours. It's not addictive, in fact it's self regulating in that regard as if you take it too often it simply stops working. The substance is class A because it's incredibly enjoyable not because it's incredibly dangerous and I know for a fact that it's classing causes clubbers to think that other substances are harmless, they often think that cocaine is as safe as ecstasy, amphetamine is better for you as it's a class B and that ketamine is entirely safe and ok to take as much as you like.

    As a result I have friends who have lost kidneys not realising the danger the put themselves in by trying other drugs in the class, I'm somewhat passionate about the subject primarily for them.


    The statement from the home office just causes myself and others to lose even more respect for the drug laws. They do far more harm than good on a personal level and a societal level. Heroin was never a big problem in this country while it was legal and being prescribed to registered addicts, it's use only skyrocketed when this was stopped so as to appear "tough on drugs"

    *dreams of a self sufficient small holding in the middle of no where*
     
  22. és: macrumors 6502a

    és:

    #22
    Thanks for posting that image. I was going to contribute something about how skewed the classification structure has become but I didn't have the time.
     
  23. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #23
    Anyone willing to bet against Mephedrone being Class A before the year is out?
     
  24. Mord macrumors G4

    Mord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #24
    Tbh it doesn't look like a particularly appealing compound, it's too strong a stimulant to be safely freely available. unlike MDMA it's habit forming as the addictive stimulant effects are maintained after the serotonergic effects die off from tolerance, Somewhat like they do with Methamphetamine.

    Methylone a related substance seems to be a fairly basic analogue to MDMA just a bit weaker, it looks far less harmful than Mephedrone yet given MDMA's long established record of relative safety and the higher dose of mephedrone needed I don't personally see the point in it.

    "legal highs" in my experience generally are far worse for you than illegal ones.

    Allot of people seem to like them as they have slightly different methods of action therefor they don't share tolerance to varying degrees so they can abuse one then move on to another until that stops working and then move onto another yet. Personally I'd rather use one substance responsibly.
     
  25. MOFS macrumors 65816

    MOFS

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    Durham, UK
    #25
    The issue is that were it to be legalised, the number of people ingesting it would skyrocket and all the issues associated with it would multiply. MDMA is not associated with crime (its too cheap), and legalising it would bring a whole deal of medical problems associated with it. Seriously, how many people out of the general population would stop drinking to take ecstasy? You may be well aware of the problems caused by a combination of the two, but it would be a nightmare seeing every Friday and Saturday night seeing loads of people admitted for boozing and Eing.


    So whats wrong with Methadone? If a heroin addict seriously wants to give up the habit, then Methadone via a Drugs and Alcohol Team is the best way forward. Heroin is a massive problem - having worked in such a service I've seen the worse effects of it, and methadone is ideally the way forward. It changes the habit of injecting yourself, and is controlled by a reputable organisation. Evidently your views are based on your personal use and those of others - seeing those in clinic whose lives have been horrendously torn apart by illicit drug use is a real eye-opener.
     

Share This Page