Amphetamines found in legal highs

poledriver

Bluelighter
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
11,543
Amphetamines found in legal highs

Amphetamines have been discovered in products sold as legal highs, says a Nelson addiction specialist.

Dr Mike Haskew, of Addiction Services Nelson, said his staff had sent products sold as synthetic cannabinoids to be laboratory tested after hearing about users failing drug tests despite switching to legal highs. The results confirmed that the products tested contained amphetamines.

"It's likely that the legal highs may have illegal substances in them, and people are unaware of that."

He said the drugs' explosion in popularity among young people was because health services had to "play catch-up" with the manufacturers and the degree of uncertainty around the chemical composition of legal highs could prove dangerous.

"Addiction services and drug intervention strategists are always going to be one step behind the marketing departments of these manufacturers.

"At the moment, we just don't know much about the long-term effects of taking these drugs. People are kind of experimenting on themselves by taking it."

Dr Haskew said the walk-in clinic in Tahunanui saw only about one adult each day seeking help regarding legal highs, but he estimated legal highs and their associated issues made up about 50 per cent of the workload for youth workers in Blenheim.

Nelson youth workers spent about one-third of their time battling legal highs, he said.

The Psychoactive Substances Bill came into effect on July 17. It is not a ban on legal highs, but seeks to control the sale of legal highs and party pills by banning sales from dairies, grocery stores, petrol stations or anywhere alcohol is sold; stopping sales to children under 18; curbing advertising except for at the point of sale, and introducing strict labelling requirements.

Senior addictions clinician Rudy Garrow, of St Marks Adult Drug and Alcohol Treatment Centre in Blenheim, said the bill addressed only some of his concerns.

The makers of legal highs regularly modified their products to get around restrictions, he said.

"The problem with [legal highs] is that [they] continue to be modified," he said. "The effects have an extremely rapid onset and they're unpredictable."

Although most legal highs marketed themselves as containing "synthetic cannabinoids", their effects were not closely comparable to those of cannabis.

The outcome for each user depended on their individual health and how well they metabolised the drug, but Mr Garrow described legal highs as having more of a stimulant effect than cannabis, which is classified as a sedative.

He could not say whether the effects of legal highs were more serious than those of illegal drugs, because he felt it would be irresponsible to speculate. "However, what we are beginning to find out is not reassuring."

The use of legal highs put a strain on medical services in New Zealand, he said.

About 2 per cent of St Marks' patients were users of legal highs, but the drugs were typically taken by younger people than those who normally visited the facility.

The Nelson Marlborough District Health Board does not have statistics available on how many patients present for treatment after using legal highs, because they are recorded under the type of treatment they receive, rather than the drug involved, for patients commonly take more than one drug at a time.

Mr Garrow said the accident and emergency department at Nelson Hospital tended to dictate the treatment schedule for users of legal highs who came to St Marks.

"When [legal high use] starts to become a problem, people tend to get off them fairly quickly, but I do believe there is a fairly significant withdrawal."

He predicted that the next synthetic drug to find favour with New Zealand's young people would be "bath salts", a family of amphetamine-like designer drugs popular in Britain and the United States. He said he had yet not seen much use of these drugs so far in New Zealand.

- © Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/9034862/Amphetamines-found-in-highs
 
Again, the intrinsic problem with selective application of policy. Note the self-contradictory language, typical of such ludicrous logic: "...ban legal highs..." Hmmm. So subject X is arrested under the suspicion of drug intoxication. His legal defense: He ingested a legal substance. LEGAL. Whereupon he is convicted for taking said substance, because as clearly indicated in the legalese, "...any and all legal intoxicants as defined by ... are hereby and herein rendered illegal..." lol. A dramatization to be sure, but it does illustrate where the problem lies. What lawmakers are in fact wanting to regulate is BEHAVIOR, not HEALTH. But because to admit that would be to admit that it is impossible to establish a universal standard for a given chemical's effect on a human body, whereupon it no longer makes sense to abolish ANY substance, the red herring of harm prevention is proffered to the unthinking public. Oh wait - you're gonna say OTHER people's health is what needs protecting from the intoxicated individual, so the right to become intoxicated is thereby overridden. Ohhh. Okay. Yeah I see where that gels with alcohol being perfectly legal. What? You mean there are certain CONDITIONS under which one may ingest alcohol legally, but in other, specifically outlined conditions, one may NOT? So as to curtail foolish or uneducated or publicly damaging incidents whilst drunk? Oh. So we CAN find a way to moderate and regulate the BEHAVIOR one engages in whilst drinking without rendering the intoxicant itself illegal. But these bath salts and so on are MORE HARMFUL? The effects are MORE ACUTE...so forth. Hmm. And if I downed a smallish bottle of Clorox bleach? Would THAT hurt me? Or what about sniffed some of the adhesives and paints and so on? Might that render me a danger to others? No matter, this is all ignored because the big pharmaceuticals have purchased exclusive rights to chemically induce a biological effect in a human. Well, them and the ATF. Bunch of shit.
 
Top