Posts Tagged ‘Drugs’

Peter Reynolds and the MPs who Weren’t

Friday, January 20th, 2012

The response to my earlier blogposts on Peter Reynolds has been spectacular, really. Over 400 unique people have read the homophobia article, and 450 unique people have read about the Home Affairs Committee Inquiry that doesn’t exist. The response has been mainly positive, but there has been a persistent, and frankly, deluded trail of commenters who keep telling me and others that pointing out that Peter Reynolds is homophobic is a “distraction”, and “isn’t relevant”, that we need to “stay focussed” on the campaign and that Peter is “a damn good campaigner”.

6730168047 47b20bbae9 Peter Reynolds and the MPs who Werent

(more…)

Related Posts:

Peter Reynolds and the Home Affairs Inquiry that Doesn’t Exist

Friday, January 13th, 2012

I would like to apologise to all of my readers for prefacing and suffixing my blogpost with so much material, but I hope you will agree it was justified.

Peter Reynolds has now announced an intention to sue both myself and Darryl Bickler of the Drug Equality Alliance regarding statements made around his report, “An Unaffordable Prejudice”. As you may know, I took down this article briefly while I established the legal situation. Having now done this, I am leaving this article up until I receive a take-down notice from a lawyer detailing what is actionable about it.

I would, however, like to make a few clarifications. I stand foremost accused of having claimed that there was no Home Affairs Committee in 1983, and this appears to be the point over which Peter Reynolds has stated he intends to take legal action against me. I would note that I have never said such a thing, and that I did, in fact, include a screencap below from the House of Commons specifically noting that the Committee has been in existence since 1979.

My point has been, all along, that I was sent an email, from the House of Commons itself, that states that there was no committee inquiry into cannabis laws in 1983, as the document appears to state. I think this raises questions, questions which Peter Reynolds did not, for some reason, wish to answer until he started to threaten legal action. Questions are legitimate things to pose.

I have acted in good faith – if the HAC subsequently unearths an inquiry to Peter Reynolds that it previously denied existing to me, then obviously I will update this article. I have NOT accused Peter Reynolds of forging the document in question, I merely reported that I have been sent various messages suggesting this, and specifically adding an addendum that I myself had yet to find any of these messages convincing. I personally find it far more likely that Peter Reynolds did in fact write a 30 page document about cannabis laws in 1983, than that he made the entire thing up over the summer of 2011, when the report first appeared. However, neither supposition is yet demonstrable, and I have made no claim either way.

I will also note that Mr. Reynolds has made a point of linking to this file on the UKCIA website as some kind of rebuttal – a document which was written after 1985, and contains no references to any inquiry in 1983, only mentioning the same 1985 report into the Misuse of Hard Drugs that my email from the Home Affairs Committee mentions in the screencap below. I am not too sure what exactly Mr. Reynolds is seeking to demonstrate to me here.

I have also had my own Freedom of Information Request pending with the House of Commons since early January to determine whether this report was ever submitted to the Home Affairs Committee at any time, and I imagine it will report back sooner than Mr. Reynolds’ FOI – when it does I will course publish the results here, whether it was submitted or whether it was not.

Sarah

UPDATE: Darryl Bickler has also published this statement:

For the record, I have not, and do not accuse Mr Reynolds of forgery. My comments concerned the point that the article by Sarah McCulloch raised questions as to the authenticity of a Report allegedly submitted to an Inquiry in 1983. I noted that Mr Reynolds had not addressed the salient questions, nor has yet to explain why he submitted this report when the closet drug related inquiry was seemingly on hard drugs in 1985. I sought to tease out these questions so that he might answer those directly and settle the matter. At this time I was strongly in favour of fairness in the conduct of Mr Reynolds’ many critics who in my view were ‘over-cooking’ some allegations. I do not extend this criticism to Ms McCulloch who in my view was only asking questions, legitimate questions even if cynically posed. My position was, and still is, wait and see if a definitive answer can be found.

I have in fact referred to the lack of any conclusive evidence for either contention, and insist on fairness of treatment to any person undergoing criticism or allegations. I strongly resist any accusation or inference that I have at any time acted improperly or short of the standards expected from a solicitor. Any legal action against me will be forcefully defended, and any complaint made against me to the professional standards body will also be contested in the strongest terms. Both of these threats are ill-conceived on legal grounds, and are also ill-befitting of an aspiring politician or a campaigner for greater liberty for cannabis users.

Mr Reynolds has in my view demonstrated his unsuitability for public office through his anti-Jewish remarks when he conflated the actions of the state of Israel with those of the Nazis, and cursed the ‘evil Jews’ rather than address the legitimate concern correctly. I endured these remarks as perhaps a mistake in his terminology as I did with his homophobic remarks concerning gay fashion designers perverting normal heterosexual standards. However for me he has ultimately crossed the line with his response to Sarah’s critical investigative journalism (which in itself was doubtless spurned by anger at the article mentioned above in which he inferred that homosexuality was a perversion) by making personal comments that equate homosexuality with genetic ‘confusion’ as this sows the seeds of a very insidious politic, and is in my view entirely inconsistent with the possibility of enrolling the public into a more tolerant view about personal choice to use cannabis, or any claim to greater respect for the individual.

Whilst Peter has brought much energy and creativity into his work, I cannot allow the good points to balance the bad ones as the latter in my view fundamentally interfere with the credibility of Clear. One cannot be a spokesperson for a party or cannabis users whilst concurrently expressing such vehemently held views in my opinion. I have determined to end all communication with Mr Reynolds as a result of his demeanour, threats and offensive communication towards persons who ask critical questions or who find themselves opposed to his views. I consider that he should at the very least stand down from Clear and then put himself forwards for re-election if he is so minded to do so.

I wrote my previous article about Peter Reynolds and homophobia largely because I noticed a link to an article that one of my Facebook friends had posted, and I was shocked that anyone, let alone party political figures could be calling gay people perverts in 2012.

Since then, I have been watching the mounting screencaps piling up about unverifiable claims that Peter has made about himself and the sudden flurry of “Yay Peter’s hed iz exploding yays” articles and reports pouring forth to cover the rising criticism. I am a massive data geek if nothing else, especially about drug policy, and when learning that in July 2011 Peter Reynolds posted on his blog that he had written a 30 page cannabis report for the Home Affairs Committee in 1983 (when he was aged just 26), I thought that was really interesting. Here is the screencap of his blog, saying that he had written it in 1983, not 1978 as he had apparently previously told people.

6689436725 6c0694a8aa Peter Reynolds and the Home Affairs Inquiry that Doesnt Exist

(more…)

Related Posts:

Perverts in the Fashion Industry and Cannabis Law Reform

Wednesday, January 4th, 2012

There is currently something of a storm erupting in the cannabis law reform community. Peter Reynolds, the leader of Clear, the cannabis law reform party, is known publishing right wing and controversial opinions on his personal blog, and somewhat more dubiously, on his Facebook profile which he uses for both personal and public commentary. Fair enough, we have freedom of speech and he gets as good as he gives, generally.

Two and a half years ago, Peter Reynolds published an article on the fashion industry, in which he accused gay people of causing bulimia, “infecting” the fashion industry, and told them to leave it to people “with far better taste”.

6633937967 a5c4d3a63e Perverts in the Fashion Industry and Cannabis Law Reform

(more…)

Related Posts:

Cool Charities to Give to in 2011

Monday, July 18th, 2011

Every year I try to donate a portion of my income to charity. This year its been a bit lower because I wasn’t getting lots of money from the Student Loans Company. I used to try to find a single charity to donate to, such as the Iranian Queer Railroad, to whom I donated in memory of my friend Jeff, but this year, as last year, I donated to several different charities and write about them here. However this year, I have also added charities you can volunteer for if you don’t have any money to give.



Lama Foundation

general intro8 Cool Charities to Give to in 2011

The Lama Foundation is one of the few intentional communities left over from the 1960s. It’s a non-denominational spiritual community that is, quite frankly, AMAZING, and everyone should go visit it. There are statues of Quan Yin by the kitchen, Sacred Hearts over the door, water goddesses by the spring, and hindu gods in alcoves all over the places, random images of gurus and teachers scattered on every wall and in every room (which were all built by hand over decades of work). And most importantly, people everywhere giving their time and love to maintain a community where you can just be yourself and everyone likes you for it. It is awesome.

I have never felt so happy about giving large amounts of money to the Lama Foundation. When you turn up, their cars are battered beyond recognition, the building are home-made from straw and mud, and they don’t have indoor toilets. Every dollar you donate goes on feeding people who come to visit, to putting on programmes, to supporting the stuff that needs to be done instead of making things look good. Really, go check them out. They want to build a new roof for the main dome complex that will last the next fifty years, go donate!



The Albert Kennedy Trust

1f2eb2c3 8ffe 40c6 ba4b 3a158964ebf4 Cool Charities to Give to in 2011

The Albert Kennedy Trust was founded in 1989 to provide LGBT young people in crisis with accommodation and support. It was named after Albert Kennedy, a 16 year old Mancunian who fell to his death from a car park while trying to flee homophobic bullying.

They regularly have to turn away homeless LGBT teenagers, because they don’t have room to take care of them all. I am not, unfortunately, able to offer foster care because of that whole being-a-student-and-moving-every-year thing, but if you have the time, they’d appreciate that a lot more than money. Although money is also useful…



Re:Vision Drug Policy Network

logo Cool Charities to Give to in 2011

Yep, I’ve donated money to the drugs charity that I helped found. Always be suspicious of the person who won’t put their money where their mouth is, or expect other people to pay for their charitable endeavours.

The Re:Vision Drug Policy Network is a national charity aiming to empower young people to campaign against the war on drugs. The aforementioned “war” is often used to destroy the lives of young people under the bizarre illusion that this will somehow protect them. It’s therefore important that we as young people stand up and say “nuh uh.” We stand for the control and regulation of all drugs – it’s a little ambitious, but we’re confident we can make an impact. We started up in March and are looking to start doing some serious stuff from September. If you don’t have any money, we’ll take your time instead. :)

Subscribe to SarahMcCulloch.com via Email! (or via RSS!)

Related Posts:

Who are Re:Vision Drug Policy Manchester?

Tuesday, April 5th, 2011

Originally published in Student Direct.

Re:Vision Drug Policy Manchester is a student society that is now in its third year – we were previously known as Manchester Students for Sensible Drug Policy, but are now affiliated to the Re:Vision Drug Policy Network. We campaign for effective drug policy based in human rights and scientific evidence, rather than moralism and political expediency.

5579631730 2ce0c3415b Who are Re:Vision Drug Policy Manchester?

Re:Vision march for the alternative.

Re:Vision Manchester activists believe that the current drug laws are harmful rather than helpful, that drugs should be treated as a health issue rather than a criminal justice matter, and that the drug war criminalises and penalises innocent people, and their communities. In a time of cuts to public services, it is outrageous that the UK spends £13billion a year on trying to prevent people from using drugs. This has had little effect – since heroin was banned in 1971, use has risen by 1000%. Hysterical media reports result in bad laws hastily enacted: mephedrone was banned in 2010 because of tenuous links to the deaths of two teenagers who had taken mephedrone while drinking heavily. The autopsy subsequently deemed that mephedrone had not been responsible for their deaths, and the price of mephedrone has since doubled and is now being primarily sold by criminal gangs instead of recreational users – resulting in another drug in the hands of organised crime whose impurities compromise the health of its users far more than the actual drug itself.

5512648689 0507e08b53 Who are Re:Vision Drug Policy Manchester?

Protesting against racism outside Moss Side Police Station.

As young people in whose name the drug war is often waged, and who are most often the targets of unfair, selectively enforced laws which do little to prevent harm from drugs, and in many cases increase it, it is vital that we speak out against this and do what we can to promote effective drug policies free from polical bias. A lot of the effort to bring about meaningful drug laws that are based in evidence rather than media headlines is to change the framework of the debate about drugs and how they should be treated. To this end, we raise awareness of our cause through protests, stalls, film showings, informative talks, social events and anything else we can think of – this term, we are producing a comedic film about drugs and attitudes to drugs, which will be released in September 2011. Because drug law reform can only be achieved nationally, we also support the national organisation by contributing to national projects, such as research, website development, and making publicity materials.

5513228666 d328b5c63a Who are Re:Vision Drug Policy Manchester?

Making a nice banner.

There are many different faces of drug law reform, and so we focus to a large extent on what our membership for that year wishes to do. Because we have a lot of people interested in music, we have held a stall at the last five Pangaeas, and will be at the one in June as well. We have people from virtually every course, including Physics, Theology, Philosophy, Neuroscience, Maths and History. There is no typical Re:Vision Manchester activist, we are men, women, gay, straight, humanities, eps, and everything in between and beyond. You can smoke weed every day or believe that taking drugs is wrong – the important thing is that you believe that our current drug laws harm, rather than help, people.

5500307173 05fda340df Who are Re:Vision Drug Policy Manchester?

Re:Vision Drug Policy Manchester activists.

There is virtually no group in Manchester that we cannot run a joint event with. We have done stuff with Openmedia, the Film Society, the LGBT Society, the Roscoe Occupation, the Disabled Action Network, Cool Runnings, the Drum and Bass Society, RAG, and Manchester Debating Union. If you don’t believe us, try us. :P

We meet every Thursday at 6pm in the union foyer and have an ace meeting to plan everything that we get up to. If you would like to get involved but aren’t a Manchester student, or shortly won’t be, no fear! Check out our informative website at revisiondrugs.org and contact us to see what you can do for drug law reform.

Subscribe to SarahMcCulloch.com via Email! (or via RSS!)

Related Posts:

Mephedrone 101 – Common Questions and Answers

Wednesday, November 17th, 2010

I get a reasonable amount of search engine traffic to my blog, and one of the most popular cluster of search terms that people search for is on mephedrone (the others being: cool charities, homosexuality and Bah’ai, homosexuality and Sikhism, Christopher Hitchens, and an endless variety of angsty questions about police raids.) None of the articles in which I have referred to mephedrone have really dealt with the issues that people were looking for, so I thought I would be quite helpful and post some of the more common questions with their common answers. :)

4mmc Mephedrone 101   Common Questions and Answers

Impounded illegal mephedrone

Can you still buy mephedrone online?

No, you cannot buy mephedrone online. The reason it used to be so easy to get hold of was because it was legal to manufacture, sell and possess. Mephedrone is illegal now in most Western countries, and consequently all websites that used to sell it openly have been shut down or are “down for maintenance”.

What shops sell mephedrone? Where can I buy mephedrone in Manchester or the UK?

No shop in the Western world will openly sell mephedrone. Mephedrone is now in the same class of illegal drugs as MDMA, cannabis, and ketamine, and is therefore obtained through the same channels.

How is mephedrone made? How was mephedrone produced?

The chemical details are here, but I suspect the latter question referred to the supply chain involved. Essentially factories in Asian countries, but particularly China, will produce any research chemical in industrial quantities on demand. As mephedrone was legal and had a phenomenal mark-up with no ramifications, certain entrepreneurial souls started up wholesaler websites and let people know they were around. And it went from there. You can read more about a dealer’s perspective here.

How much mephedrone should you take? What is the dosage of mephedrone? How can you increase the high of mephedrone?

Erowid has the answers to correct dosage and usage in its vault entry for mephedrone.

Is mephedrone MDMA? Can you turn mephedrone into MDMA? Can you buy mephedrone and get MDMA instead?

Mephedrone and MDMA are two closely related but completely different drugs. Mephedrone’s effects are less intense than that of MDMA, shorter-acting, and usage patterns tend to be similar to people who use ketamine or cannabis than LSD or heroin (i.e. smaller, more frequent hits that you can control, over drugs that once you take them, you are high until you come back down again). I am no chemist, but as far as I am aware, you cannot synthesise mephedrone into MDMA or vice versa. MDMA is in considerably higher demand than mephedrone and has a much higher profit margin, so the likelihood that you can buy mephedrone and actually be sold MDMA of any significant quality is pretty low.

Is mephedrone safe? Does mephedrone harm you? What is mephedrone being cut with? How does mephedrone kill you? Haven’t people died using mephedrone?

Taking pure mephedrone won’t kill you if you use it sensibly, but I wouldn’t say it was “safe”, no. It’s kinda hard to tell what the long-term health effects of mephedrone actually are because the government went and banned it before anyone could do any substantive research on the drug, but from what I’ve read, it appears to be corrosive. One user told a Guardian journalist that he left a spoon in a bag of mephedrone for 72 hours and when he came back, the spoon had been partially dissolved. So if you take a lot over a long period of time, your sinuses, oesophagus and lungs will not be very happy.

However, mephedrone doesn’t kill you in itself – like all stimulants, if you have pre-existing heart conditions, take a massive dose, or don’t take care of yourself while high by monitoring your water intake and body temperature, then you may well end up with serious health problems, be they heart attacks, heatstroke, dehydration, or anything else. This is not the fault of the drug. Almost all deaths that have been linked to mephedrone have involved polydrug use: i.e. mephedrone and alcohol, mephedrone and cocaine, etc. If you ingest two separate drugs, they will interact in ways that may be be better or worse for you (for example, MDMA and LSD apparently produces a trip that is signicantly intenser and more euphoric than either drug on its own – but cocaine and alcohol combine in your stomach to create a different drug which is potentially lethal) – if you are going to use drugs, do your research first and stay safe.

What other legal highs are there after mephedrone? What drugs are similar to mephedrone? What about ivory wave and mephedrone?

A number of legal research chemicals have been available online since mephedrone was banned, notably NRG-1 and ivory wave, but none has really taken hold – when drugs are still predominantly being referred to by their chemical names rather than their street names, only the psychonauts and the adventurous are really using them.

Mephedrone is not the same as ivory wave, NRG-1, or MDAT. No-one really knows what ivory wave is at the moment, because it hasn’t become widely available enough yet to be subject to proper sampling. However, a lot of ivory wave seems to contain MDPV, a cathinone that is similar to mephedrone but not quite. Ivory wave is currently legal, but doesn’t sound very nice on the system.

Mephedrone is a cathinone, so chemically it is similar to methylone, methadrone, and MDPV, which hold varying legality across the world. But to be honest, if you’re looking for a stimulant that’s similar to mephedrone and has decades of research into its long-term effects and safer usage, MDMA is going to be much healthier for you than unknown research chemicals.

500px Map of european countries where mephedrone is illegal.svg Mephedrone 101   Common Questions and Answers

Map of Europe showing countries where mephedrone is illegal, correct as of August 2010

Random search terms:

uk mephedrone post ban
– You can still get it in Britain, it’s just now £20 a gram and not very safe.

mephedrone class uk law
- In the UK, mephedrone is currently a Class B drug. Personal possession of mephedrone could get you three months in prison or a £2500 fine, and supply is six months in prison or a £5000 fine.

structure of mephedrone
- The chemical structure and synthesis of mephedrone is available on Wikipedia here. Here is an image:

Mephedrone 2D skeletal Mephedrone 101   Common Questions and Answers

Chemical Structure of Mephedrone

mephedrone precursor
- The main precursor to mephedrone is 4-methylpropiophenone, which as far as I am aware is still legal.

what was mephedrone designed for
- The drug was actually first synthesised in 1929, but rediscovered in 2003 by chemists looking to manufacture a “designer drug” that could get round existing drugs legislation. I’m not sure where the “plant food” thing came from. If you put mephedrone on your plants, they will die.

where has all the mephedrone gone?
- The majority of mephedrone production was in China; when mephedrone became incredibly popular, the Chinese government cracked down on the production of one of the precursors of mephedrone, and consequently the industrial quantities of mephedrone that used to float around have now disappeared. Because mephedrone is now illegal in much of the Western world, its production and supply has gone the way of other illegal drugs and it is consequently not being openly waved around in bags at house parties anymore.

which is more harmful mephedrone or cocaine
- We cannot know that until a lot more research is done into mephedrone, its long-term effects and its social harms. Chemically, mephedrone is probably worse for your body, but mephedrone has never induced the levels of aggressiveness and violence that cocaine produces in its users. We await more data.

Subscribe to SarahMcCulloch.com via Email! (or via RSS!)

Related Posts:

What is the Purpose of Drug Policy? Some Data (and Some Analysis!)

Wednesday, October 20th, 2010

Last week, I was at Lancaster University to help give a talk on drug policy to a group of third year criminology students taught by Fiona Measham. One of the things that we did was to hand out pieces of paper and ask the lecture theatre if they could define the purpose of drug policy. The responses we got were broad and revealing, I feel.

There were two main responses, which were evenly matched in numbers. The first was “the purpose of drug policy is to prevent harm”, which is excellent. The whole raison d’etre of Re:Vision Drug Policy Network is of course to promote harm reduction as the main purpose of drug policy, so it is good to know that there’s a receptive audience already out there on campuses.

The second main response, however, “the purpose of drug policy is to prevent harm, so they should be banned to keep people away from drugs.” Obviously I totally agree with the first part of that statement. But the corollary is what is assumed by mainstream public discourse to be the logical next step – and that just doesn’t follow. What is a law? It’s a socially accepted convention that we obey that regulates our community. Banning a drug doesn’t stop anyone taking them, any more than banning murder prevents people killing other people. However, we ban murder to prevent harm to others and we enforce these laws; supposedly we ban drugs to prevent harm to ourselves. It’s important to remember that just by saying something is illegal doesn’t stop people doing it – if they weren’t doing it there wouldn’t be a law against it (there’s no law against dragon-hunting, for example). But everybody’s crime is nobody’s crime: up to a third of the UK population have taken an illegal substance. Is it it really a workable law when so many people are taking drugs (up to one million people take MDMA every week) and are neither punished, nor harmed (so 52 million MDMA trips, 10 deaths – it really is safer for you than horse-riding)? One has therefore to consider what harms are done by drugs and whether those harms are reduced by the fact that drugs are criminalised or not. I won’t go into the details here, but The Transform Drug Policy Foundation has an extensive briefing vault demonstrating that the dangers of drugs are enhanced by prohibition rather than helped, through associated violence, health implications, and the fact that people in trouble won’t engage with public services because they’re afraid of being arrested. Drugs can be dangerous, but so can sky-diving. We don’t ban sky-diving, we regulate it. Maybe we should do the same with drugs.

Another big response was that the purpose of drug policy was “to inform people about drugs and enable them to make their own choices” and “to encourage people to use drugs sensibly, including alcohol”. Clearly a lot of people were very concerned about the government’s role in educating people about drugs. It’s an interesting point, because the government does run education campaigns now, but which are rarely focussed on giving people information about drugs instead of trying to scare people entirely (Talk to Frank being a good example of this). Given the success of some public information campaigns in the past (everyone knows about their five-a-day), it is clear that the government could play a much bigger role. An unanswered question that remains from this particular response, is if illegal drugs should remain criminalised if people are being left to make their own informed choices.

A significant number of people also wrote simply that the purpose of drug policy was “to control drugs”. That’s a pretty loaded statement: how do you control drugs? What drugs do you control (e.g. why is aspirin legal and LSD isn’t?) What are your criteria for controlling them? How do you enforce those decisions? Controlling drugs isn’t so much a purpose as such, more a method by which the purpose of drug policy can be carried out. You can control drugs by banning them completely, or making them available in Boots; legalisation is as much a method of controlling drugs as criminalising their use. People who wrote this should really think about what they meant by that.

There were some interesting individual responses as well. Many thanks to the person who told us that the purpose of drug policy was “hello”, but a non-alcoholic beverage to the student who wrote that the purpose of drug policy is “to keep us safe“. I couldn’t agree more. Another student in the same vein wrote that we should “prevent overdosing by illegalising more drugs”: it is sadly a fact that most overdoses are a direct result of drugs being prohibited, because criminals cut the drugs they sell with anything from talcum powder to concrete dust, and purity levels vary so widely it’s impossible to be sure what you’re taking and whether it is safe or not.

Someone also wrote that the purpose of drug policy is to “prevent criminal activity” – I’m not sure what was meant by that. If they meant “prevent people from taking drugs”, then given that heroin use has risen by 1000% since it was banned in 1971, I can only suggest that’s a futile hope. If by criminal activity, they meant all the gang activity, violence, homicide and trafficking that goes on, that’s easy to end: just control and regulate all drugs, legally. In the 1930s, America tried to ban alcohol, and the mafia was born. When alcohol was finally legalised twenty years later, the mafia lost much of their income and influence overnight. Regulation deals with criminal activity, full stop.

There were also some response that I can only describe as, “interesting”. One person wrote that by reducing illegal drug use, we could “stop unemployment”. I fear the student who wrote that the purpose of drug policy was “to control society’s view and attitude towards drugs” has a future as a spin-doctor ahead of them. An interesting perspective came from a student who called for alcohol to be banned entirely because of its association with violent crime; I suppose it is a consistent view at least. And finally, one student said that the purpose of drug policy was “to protect people and ensure that other services such as the NHS aren’t overcrowded unnecessarily.” A true citizen. :)

The session produced some interesting discussion afterwards and I really enjoyed it. I think that what has really come out of this though is that even with a class there is a massive range of opinions that simply aren’t being heard or considered by those in charge of actually writing and setting our drug policy. It really is time to have that discussion.

Further Reading

* Transform Drug Policy Foundation
* In 2001, Portugal decriminalised all drugs for personal use. The Cato Institute, an American think-tank, produced a report in 2007 that discovered that health problems in Portugal relating to drug use had actually fallen. Read it here.

Subscribe to SarahMcCulloch.com via Email! (or via RSS!)

Related Posts:

1784: The Year Prohibition Ended

Monday, October 11th, 2010

TeaCaddyMahogany1790s 1784: The Year Prohibition Ended

In the late seventeenth century, a new substance was brought back from the edges of the British empire. Sociable, pleasant and healthier than tobacco, it spread first among the aristocracy, but eventually became popular with the masses, to such an extent that, although the government tried to stamp out its consumption, a massive international smuggling operation grew up around it, importing several million pounds of the stuff to supply the demands of the great British public. Only in 1784, after criminal gangs had set up their bloody fiefdoms to run rings around the government, did Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger relent and institute a proper system of control and regulation that made supplies cheap, pure and accessible to all.

I refer, of course, to tea. Many of you were probably thinking of opium, but the major smuggling network of the eighteenth century in England was centred around tea. Why? Because it was difficult to get hold of legally. Starting from 1689, high taxes were imposed on tea, starting at 25 pence in the pound and eventually reaching 119 pence. It was a bad move for the government, not least because it led to the American Revolution (the Boston Tea Party being a revolt against the high taxation of tea). But it also led to a shrinking of the market in legal tea as vendors used the illicit tea trade to offset their losses by buying illegal tea and selling it on the legal market – because tea largely looks like tea, whether taxed or not.

Gunsgreen House   geograph.org.uk   212238 1784: The Year Prohibition Ended

Up until the 1760s, the main dealers in illegal tea were small-time vendors, supplying small amounts with help of sympathetic local residents. Britain did a rather nice line in smuggling, which was a significant industry in rural England for nearly 200 hundred years in order to evade the high excise taxes imposed by a government fighting highly expensive wars against, well, everyone. Tea was added to the list of products that everyone wanted, including wool, alcohol and tobacco, but which few were able to afford. The fact that tea had to be smuggled in from the coasts also meant that the more rural population of the UK was introduced to what had hitherto been a cosmopolitan aspiration.

It is interesting to note that for twenty years prior to the smuggling explosion, the existence of tax-free tea had little effect on the legal trade. It was only as customs imposed higher and higher taxes that people began to look elsewhere for their tea. One might consider that tobacco is in something of the same boat today.

Where there is a criminal element, there is violence. As early as 1747 the Hawkeshurst gang in Poole attacked a customs house killing the customs officials and taking back the tea that had been confiscated from them. By the 1770s, however, the trade had expanded dramatically, and less scrupulous “investors” had discovered the lucrative illegal tea trade. Heavily armed ships carrying tax-free tea and spirits began to appear off British coasts. Indeed, “the illicit tea trade had achieved a system unexampled in the checkered history of smuggling.” (Hoh-Cheung and Mui, pg 58.)

Smuggle1 1784: The Year Prohibition Ended

In 1784, the East India Company and the London tea traders, unable to compete with the black market, had had enough and petitioned Prime Minister Pitt to reduce the tax on tea. The Commutation Act 1784 was passed, reducing the tax on tea from 119% to just 12.5%. With legal tea suddenly much more affordable, and quality much higher, the smuggling trade was virtually stopped overnight.

I’m sure you can see what I am getting at here. What the effective Prohibition of tea in the eighteenth century can teach us today is that if people want to consume a drug, it will be supplied. Even if that drug is legal, but authorities seek to make it unavailable, resourceful citizens will find a way. One wonders what will happen if Manchester City Council has its way and introduces minimum alcohol pricing – because I’m willing to bet on enterprising syndicates, of both local neighbourhood and criminal gang types, getting together to avoid the charge.

However, the history of the illicit tea trade is not entirely ominous. Hoh-Cheung and Mui argue, “What appeared from the viewpoint of the law to be frauds, abuses, and evasions, might also be regarded as innovations promoting the international and domestic trade of the kingdom, which, in turn, contributed to the growth of the British economy in the latter part of the eighteenth century.” But how much of that growth did the taxman see? Eventually the government woke up to the fact that people wanted to drink tea but weren’t prepared to pay through the nose for it. In 1784, the Prohibition of tea ended – how much longer until the current government realises you can’t legislate drugs out of existence?

5010218990 893581d834 1784: The Year Prohibition Ended

For further reading on the illicit tea trade, try reading Smuggling and the British Tea Trade before 1784 by Hoh-Cheung and Lorna H. Mui.

Or visit the UK Tea Council, who have lots of interesting information on the history of tea.

Subscribe to SarahMcCulloch.com via Email! (or via RSS!)

Related Posts:

“The Chemists are Winning”: The Rise of Mephedrone and Legal Highs

Monday, October 4th, 2010

Originally written for Student Direct.

In April 2010, after a media storm, the British government passed legislation to classify mephedrone as a Class B drug. Mephedrone is a stimulant somewhat similar in effects to MDMA and cocaine, and is chemically based on cathinones found in the African stimulant Khat, but which was sufficiently chemically different to not have been previously included under the Misuse of Drugs Act, which regulated drugs in the UK. The drug was actually first synthesised in 1929, but rediscovered in 2003 by chemists looking to manufacture a “designer drug” that could get round existing drugs legislation.

Mephedrone 2D skeletal The Chemists are Winning: The Rise of Mephedrone and Legal Highs

Chemical Structure of Mephedrone

Mephedrone first started hitting the news in late 2009, but the scare-mongering grew and by early 2010, the papers were full of tales of people who had allegedly become addicted to the drug, with The Sun even publishing a story detailing how a man had ripped off his own scrotum under the influence of mephedrone (which later turned out to have been an internet hoax taken seriously). The General Secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers called for a ban after two teenagers in Scunthorpe died after allegedly taking the drug. After the ban, the coroners’ report for the two discovered that neither had taken mephedrone and they had, in fact, been out drinking alcohol the night they died, and subsequent studies have determined that, of the dozens of deaths “linked” to mephedrone worldwide, only two have ever been conclusively proven to have actually involved mephedrone as a cause of death – but the media wasn’t going to let facts get in the way of a campaign against this “deadly killer”.

What with all free publicity for mephedrone and so many stories reporting how fun and cheap it was, use soared. It suddenly became very hard to not buy mephedrone. One Students for Sensible Drug Policy activist visited a headshop in three different occasions in the first half of 2010 and was offered “Meow-meow” every time, whether she was looking for stimulants, psychedelics or even just rolling papers. Mephedrone was available at every house party and headshop and accessible from just about any house with an internet connection. You could buy anything up to 20 grammes at a time from online sellers, giving you a bulk buy price of £4 a gramme. Purity was high, and dosage cheap. However in April 2010, despite the misgivings of several advisors of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, including its former chair, Professor David Nutt, who protested that mephedrone and its effects were unresearched and a much longer timeframe was needed to investigate it, Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, made it illegal, claiming, “Mephedrone and its related substances have been shown to be dangerous and harmful”.

4mmc The Chemists are Winning: The Rise of Mephedrone and Legal Highs

Impounded illegal mephedrone

Neil Harvey, a community sergeant in Exeter, welcomed the ban, saying: “Use of the drug has been on the increase locally, as well as nationally, and we are aware of young people using it and the consequences of that. We are also aware of how easy it is to buy from shops and once the ban is formalised they must immediately stop selling it or we will prosecute as soon as it becomes law. … The law is going to prevent young people coming to harm and that can only be a good thing. We are always concerned that something might come along to replace it and we would need to be quick dealing with that if it happens. We have been very lucky so far in Exeter that no-one has been killed. But it has been luck. It is not designed for human consumption and anyone using it is taking a big risk with their health and safety.”

After mephedrone was banned, use did indeed drop among recreational drug users. One said, “Mephedrone was alright, but its advantage was that it was legal and you didn’t have any of the difficulties of supply and waiting around on dealers that you get with MDMA or ketamine. People just turned up with it at house parties and were very open about it. I know a lot of my friends who weren’t comfortable with taking illegal drugs were thrilled to get an MDMA-like experience that was cheap as well. Now it’s illegal, they’ve all stopped. I’ve largely stopped taking it as well. MDMA is far better when you can get hold of it.”

You can, of course, still buy mephedrone in Manchester, though the price has gone up to £20 a gram from £10 when it was legal. However, purity has dropped significantly since control of the supply has shifted from people buying it off wholesalers on the internet and into the hands of people who have a financial incentive to cut it with anything from talcum powder to concrete dust. So you can still take mephedrone if you have the cash, it’s just now more dangerous. James Jackson, Education Officer for Manchester Students for Sensible Drug Policy, a UMSU society, said, “Most recreational drug users don’t stop taking drugs because they’re illegal or because they are potentially harmful. We have to accept this. But they do try to take substances that they know are safe or that are safer than other drugs available. People want to get high, they don’t want to die or end up in hospital. That the government has made mephedrone illegal has actually endangered the health of drug users, because now no-one really knows whether the the stuff being sold as mephedrone is actually the drug they wanted.”

1400553827 ab0daaec7d The Chemists are Winning: The Rise of Mephedrone and Legal Highs

A leaf from a Sassafras tree.

People also forget why mephedrone suddenly became popular so quickly: more than the price, mephedrone’s perceived purity was much higher than other available street drugs and that appealed to users – no-one chooses to take worming powder, after all. Cocaine purity had fallen from 60% in 1999 to 22% in 2009; people were literally getting less bang for their buck. More significantly, 33 tonnes of sassafras oil, the precursor to MDMA and a vital ingredient, was seized in Cambodia in June 2008. It has been estimated that it could have been used to make 245 million doses of MDMA. Such tightening of controls on sassafras oil and other substances meant that purity tests in mid-2010 have revealed that virtually no pills seized by the police contain MDMA at all – and 20% of pills seized since 2009 contain mephedrone. Market forces drove people to mephedrone, and when the cost and the convenience became too high, people just moved onto something else.

Other drugs have been in the pipeline since the banning of mephedrone. NRG-1, or naphyrone, a stimulant chemically similar to mephedrone, was banned two months after mephedrone on the same grounds. “Ivory Wave” was the latest legal high to hit the headlines in August, though no-one’s really sure what it is. Producing intense euphoria but with a vicious comedown, some test samples have discovered MDPV, or methylenedioxypyrovalerone, a cathinone which was banned at the same time as mephedrone. Mephedrone itself was banned shortly after the well-publicised proscription of GBL, BZP and Spice last December. So with those out the way, we can just wait for the next legal high, and the next one, and the cycle of discovery-use-popularity-ban can continue.

 The Chemists are Winning: The Rise of Mephedrone and Legal Highs

The only drug that will kill you if you follow the instructions.

Of course, in the excitement of talking about the dangers of mephedrone and Ivory Wave and the next deadly designer drug that will come along, people forget about the most lethal legal highs, simply because they are embedded into our culture: alcohol and tobacco. Tim Hollis, the serving Chief Constable of Humberside Police and chair of the Association of Chief Police Officers’ drugs committee is currently the most senior police officer to call for the decriminalisation of possession of drugs for personal use. His greatest concern, however, was not illegal drugs. “My personal belief in terms of sheer scale of harm is that one of the most dangerous drugs in this country is alcohol. Alcohol is a lawful drug. Likewise, nicotine is a lawful drug, but cigarettes can kill,” he said. “There is a wider debate on the impacts to our community about all aspects of drugs, of which illicit drugs are one modest part.” The facts bear Hollis out: 25,000 people are killed a year by alcohol-related illnesses, and 106,000 people from smoking. By contrast 3000 people a year die as a result of all illegal drugs combined, including 10 from ecstasy every year, and precisely none whatsoever from mephedrone, LSD, or even cannabis, the most widely used illegal drug in the UK. Despite strictly regulating advertising, taxation, and labelling, however, no government has sought to ban either alcohol or tobacco.

Guinness Toucan ad The Chemists are Winning: The Rise of Mephedrone and Legal Highs

An advertising campaign for Guiness in the 1940s.

It seems likely that the endless government attempts to ban every drug that is sold for recreational use will continue to push users into more and more unknown, and therefore more dangerous, drugs. The research done on the more conventional street drugs, such as ecstasy and LSD, now fills whole libraries – more recent research is even starting to turn up medicinal uses for drugs that have previously been the exclusive remit of trippers. LSD, for example, was discovered in 2006 to be unexpectedly effective at curing cluster headaches, an condition where sufferers can have headaches painful and debilitating that some have committed suicide. It seems unlikely that LSD will be available on prescription anytime soon; however, through long study and, yes, usage, science has determined that LSD is safe and in some cases, useful. The same can not be said about mephedrone or any of the legal highs.

The race between amateur chemists to develop new designer drugs that exist just outside the law and the government to try to ban them without any understanding of their long-term effects and use has now been running for forty years – and the chemists are winning. But as recreational users are pushed more and more onto drugs about which we know less and less, a better question than “Who are the winners?” might be “Who are the losers?”

20drugs The Chemists are Winning: The Rise of Mephedrone and Legal Highs

A graph of relative harms of common drugs produced by Professor David Nutt.

News reports:

  • Cuts prompt police to call for debate on drugs and redirect resources
  • Ivory Wave: The new meow meow?
  • Banned mephedrone cleared of blame for two deaths
  • Ban on NRG-1 ‘legal high’ recommended by drug advisers
  • Subscribe to SarahMcCulloch.com via Email! (or via RSS!)

    Related Posts:

    Cool Charities to Give to in 2010

    Monday, September 6th, 2010

    Every year I try to donate a portion of my income to charity. I can’t say it’s tithing as such but it’s somewhere around that. I used to try to find a single charity to donate to, such as the Iranian Queer Railroad, to whom I donated in memory of my friend Jeff, but this year I donated to several different charities and thought I would do them an extra favour by writing about them here and encouraging you all to give to them as well. :)



    Rainbow World Fund

    logo Cool Charities to Give to in 2010

    When Haiti got struck by an earthquake in 2010, lots of my friends were making donations to various relief funds. I once worked for Save the Children on a magazine that was funded by money given for the Boxing Day Tsunami in 2004, so have always been wary of giving to popular disaster relief funds ever since. It’s pretty pointless donating to an organisation that thinks it can divert your donation to its fab new glossy self-promotion schemes.

    However, the Rainbow World Fund don’t do that. Instead they do something pretty nifty. Not only do they send volunteers out to disaster stricken areas, as well as running a large number of other projects (“RWF currently supports projects focusing on global HIV/AIDS, water development, landmine eradication, hunger, education, orphans and disaster relief in Africa, Asia, Central America, the Caribbean, and the United States.”), they also raise awareness of LGBT issues in the areas they work in. AND their admin costs total less than 3% of their total income as well, which is phenomenal. They got my cash, at any rate.

    http://www.rainbowfund.org/


    Erowid

    erowid banner7 Cool Charities to Give to in 2010

    “Erowid is a small non-commercial organization that operates in the controversial and politically challenging niche of trying to provide accurate, specific, and responsible information about how psychoactives are used in the United States and around the world. ”

    In other words, Erowid has lots and lots of information on drugs. What they do, where to find them, how to use them safely, how they combine with other drugs, and more. Erowid is primarily built through the “trip report”, or a written account of the author’s particular experience with a drug, including dosage, coming up times, and even body weight.

    This might seem like a stoner’s dream, but it has a very serious purpose. There will be people who will have lived because they got the information they needed to stay safe from Erowid, and no other organisation or website in the world can offer the level of experience, knowledge, and more importantly, impartiality that Erowid can.

    That’s the important part for me. For the little drug policy geek that lives in all of us, however, Erowid has also sought to archive every document and record relating to the development of recreational drugs and their usage throughout history. They currently store more than 50,000 documents recording the research of psychoactives – the entire notebook collection of Alexander Shulgin (the scientist who brought MDMA and the 2C family to the world) has been loaned to them for transcription and archiving.

    Basically, Erowid is amazing, and you should give them lots of money (or time, they need more volunteers!). Failing that, you can always write a trip report…

    http://www.erowid.org/


    Friends of Antara UK

    header.logo Cool Charities to Give to in 2010

    Friends of Antara UK is a support organisation for Antara, a mental health charity in North East India. Less than 1% of India’s health budget is spent on mental health, and there are only 2-3 psychiatrists per million people (the UK has 50), so the need is pressing. Antara provides 200 inpatient beds, communty care services and a rehabilitation centre, and treats over 1600 outpatients a week.

    Friends of Antara engages in fundraising and awareness activities over here, mostly through university societies (currently located at Leeds, Warwick and York). More importantly, a friend of mine sits on the General Committee and badgered me about how helpful FoA are until I finally sent them a cheque.

    http://friendsofantarauk.org/


    Roleystone Horse Sanctuary

     Cool Charities to Give to in 2010

    I will confess, I have little interest in horses. A friend on my Facebook, however, does, and when I put up a request for a charity to donate to, ranted at me about how horse sanctuaries needed extra cash for hay for the winter until I sent them a donation that was small but will probably cover a horse or two for a bit.

    I can’t say much about them, but to judge from their (hilariously mispelled) website, their expenditure on self-flattering publicity or expensive branding is precisely nil. If you do want to ensure any donation you give will go straight to its intended purpose, Roleystone is your place.

    http://roleystonehorsesanctury.com/

    Subscribe to SarahMcCulloch.com via Email! (or via RSS!)

    Related Posts: