NEWS: Early alert plan for dangerous new drugs

[Psychadelic_Paisly]

Early alert plan for dangerous new drugs
By Farrah Tomazin
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/11/23/1100972392516.html?feed=rss&oneclick=true
November 24, 2004


Doctors and paramedics would be given closely guarded information about new illicit drugs that come on to the dance party scene under an early-warning strategy being considered by the State Government.

In response to growing fears about ecstasy, Health Minister Bronwyn Pike told The Age that state and territory governments were considering a national alert system under which selected health professionals could be warned about new drugs and their contents.

Detailed information on illicit substances is generally used only by police responsible for testing pills after raids on clandestine drug operations. But Ms Pike said broader sharing of that information could better equip medical staff to help patients on ecstasy and other drugs.

"We do want to look at a mechanism whereby we can provide warning alerts to health and medical staff and to law enforcement agencies about particular drugs that are coming on the marketplace," she said.

"If doctors and others know exactly what the chemical composition is of these drugs then they're much more equipped to contribute to public information about how dangerous they are and tell kids they shouldn't take them."

The proposal revealed by Ms Pike was discussed by state and territory health ministers a few weeks ago. If agreed to, it could be developed in full by the middle of next year.

But with Melbourne's summer dance party season about to start, the Government has ruled out allowing ecstasy users to test their tablets at places such as party venues, despite suggestions by health professionals that knowing what is in tablets might prevent some people taking them.

Royal Adelaide Hospital research fellow Dr David Caldicott said it was unfortunate the Government opposed ecstasy testing given that a study he conducted had shown that more than 80 per cent of users who tested pills did not take them once they learned they contained chemicals such as horse tranquilliser instead of MDMA, the main ingredient in ecstasy.

But Ms Pike said allowing testing by party-goers would send out the wrong message that "somehow there's a safe way to take party drugs".

VicHealth chief executive Rob Moodie supported the proposals to share drug information among health professionals, saying this would help them "know exactly what they're dealing with, rather than just wander around in the dark. One of the problems with illegal drugs is that there's absolutely no quality control - no one knows what's in them."

Illicit drug use is set to be a contentious topic over the next few months of parties.

About 10,000 people are expected at the Earthcore festival on the Goulburn River, near Shepparton, this weekend.

Melbourne's biggest dance party, Summadayze on New Year's Day, is likely to attract about 20,000.

 

[TheYellowDart]

Well if this comes through then it's another step closer towards releasing this sort of information to the public. Something is happening!

 

[eccitude]

I'm not sure if this has been suggested before, but it would be good if people could include in the title of the post which state the news report is from. Some news reports aren't directly relevant to all states, or should be read in context of which state it is published.

Cheers.

 

[marko1]

I hope the govt starts giving pill ratings too......

 

[sonicnature]

^^ ROFL.

 

[johnboy]

the age is a melbourne paper.

this is a lame move. it isn't an early warning system, it is a too late system. the information needs to be given to the users so they can avoid having to see the doctors in the first place. nice try, but fail.

 

[BigTrancer]

^ Right. But it could be a step in the right direction, increasing the knowledge of Doctors (in general) about the substances and doses people are using recreationally at the moment. I don't mean to pretend that there is a huge social gap between medical professionals and recreational drug users across the board, but I suspect that everyone can benefit from more factual information being made available all the time.

BigTrancer

 

[drplatypus]

I agree with Johnboy. Some of the more sophisticated states ( ) already share deidentified forensic and toxicological data- so it's hardly an innovative breakthrough... I offered the SA model as an adjunct to a pill-testing program, not as a substitute. The work done out of SA, and soon to be published in Forensic Science International clearly shows that simple police busts cannot be relied upon to give accurate information about up-to-date product

 

[backindauk]

Police busts - if substantial enough would be reducing (ever so slightly) the amount of drug X Y or Z that is on the 'street'.

I think that Governments need to go that one step further and make testing legal, so people can submit pills and the data be published electronically or physically in weekly publications. You have no chance of getting that in NSW, Bob Carr and his cronies are still posessed with the realms of teenage binge drinking. Oh yes, you can buy this new drink "Passion Pop" for only 3.90. Or we (NSW Government) could just lower the maximum alcoholic content of all the "Chick Drinks" "Candy Drinks" and other drinks which "Kids" drink. What about the tax you guys make from that? Not bloody likely.
I seem to have gone off a little bit there.

Im all for anything that gets real world, ideal testing environments up and running - legally. This saves lives.

We wouldnt want any more of the new designer drug "Orange CK" or "Red Mitsubishi" to get out on the streets, would we...8)

 

[chrisisparanoid]

police working WITH doctors?!? surely not.

 

[phase_dancer]

^^ Take the crime out of using drugs, and I don't see why police and doctors couldn't work together. Mind you, I think the doctors may need to have a say in who from the force is selected.

Perhaps the Police line up technique could be used. Doctors would stand behind the 1 way glass and the "candidates" would line up before being asked to step up to the line and give meanings for "not so tricky" medical terms. I say not too tricky 'cause you'd want at least one to pass

Police could then stand over testing crews, baton in hand and ready to respond to a bad test result by helping the devastated user locate the dealer and extract a refund...


Seriously though, if cops have to be there, I'm sure there would be many on the force who could do a proper job. It would just take convincing users they wouldn't be grabbed around the next corner.

 

[drplatypus]

You'd be surprised at the number of police who privately approve of the work we do. The last thing they want is a system like they have in the US where they are crucifying themselves chasing people with personal amounts of hash...
Police tolerance, rather than endorsement is what we are after, very similar to what is happening in Europe, where some leeway is given in the name of harm minimisation

 

[chugs]

Drplatpus since you're so close to the action so to speak I was wondering whether you would be willing to share your views on what you believe are the motivating factors for those who continue to support "the war on drugs", draconian regime?

For example the conspiracy theory suggests that those in control of the drug trade utilise their considerable power to either intimidate, bribe, or if all else fails kill those, in a position of power, who would otherwise decriminalize drugs. Such a move would subsequent would remove the need for drug dealers. Something to consider would, be John Newman the MP for cabramatta who was assassinated. Although he wasn't a pro-harm minimisation type at least his death illustrates the power of gangs who use violence to achieve their aims.

Or is it that their truly are politicians who believe that drugs are bad and that no quarter can be given in exploring or enacting policies would provide significant benefits to society?

 

[drplatypus]

You ought to know better than to ask me questions like that!

I think that there are a number of groups arrayed against the Harm Minimisation lobby. You can broadly divide them into those who are creating/inventing the prohibitionist message, those who passively tolerate it, and those who genuinely believe it. Each of these require a different approach to deal with their stance

1) I think that the most important one is the lower socioeconomic, battling, Virginia Waters mainstream Liberal voting mass, slightly xenophobic about new ideas, and under the spell of the message that all drugs are bad. A subgroup of this, which overlaps with the group below, is the religious right and the Family First / Assembly of God bunch. This group does not generally consider alcohol or cigarettes as drugs. To change policy in Australia absolutely requires their involvement, and I am not convinced that a hard core intellectual approach will get much mileage here. In this group we need to persuade them that they have been lied to, and that harm from recreational drugs does not just happen to other peoples children. I favour the more emotive approach with this group, a kind of Anti- Current Affair, if you like. I am hopeful about changing the mindset in this group.

2) I think there is a group that associates drug use as an inappropriate expression of freedom, a reflection of other potential hazards such as free speech. These are a sinister bunch of bastards, who really don't care too much about drug use, but use it regularly to distract the masses. It can also be use to show how weak your political opponents are, and was used against the Greens to devastating effect in the last election. I don't think that these people have an opinion to change, but they can be silenced.

3) The people who get on my tits the most are the intellectual and academic cowards who know that the literature supports pill-testing, and are sitting on the fence because they aren't quite sure as to how all of this will pan out. It is true that Group 2 has threatened to cut their funding and budgets, but instead of skulking about this, they should be screaming to the press about political interference in research. Notable exceptions to this are Cameron Duff and Prof Margaret Hamilton , who you should all write to and applaud for their balls. The formal drugs research community in Australia lives in a symbiotic relationship with the current government, and if you want to sort out the mice from the men, just review who has and hasn't come out publically in favour of pill-testing.

4) There are certainly some members of law enforcement who belong to group 2, but most have kids and are sympathetic to the cause. Having said that, their job is to uphold the law, even if it is a bad law. I am often asked at lectures etc that if so many people are using drugs in Australia, why aren't they organising into pressure groups like in Europe and America. I think that there are a number of reasons. I don't think most young people in Australia would have the faintest idea where to start; it's just not part of the culture.

5) Seperate to the first group, but similar in opinion are a far more well to do group of neo-con supporters who benefit from the current governments economic strength, and will tag along with its more reprehensible policies as long as they stay alright. Many of these people use drugs themselves (think cocaine scene) but will crap on in the most hypocritical fashion so that the boat remains unrocked.

6) Specifically addressing your question about conspiracy, I have met a fair share of cooks and dealers in my time, and I know that a lot of their money is certainly laundered through group 5. I think that idf there is a conspiracy it is an informal one. Alot of my work is aimed at dissing their product, and when we first started our field work, I took some precautions to deal with trouble if it arose (you know wat I mean, guv'nor?!) So far, no blades fron the shadows...

As to approaches about dealing with this diverse lot...
The first approach that we we use for all of these groups is education. We are happy to assume that many people are not aware of the overwhelming medical evidence that supports the policies of harm minimisation. Everyone is given one chance at being educated; even if I believe that their motivation is utterly cynical, I will contact anyone who appears to have not read enough books, and offer them the services of my research group, so that they can better themselves. At the same time, I warn them that if they decline this once only offer, they can consider themselvesopen to attack in any medium of my choice, be it the popular press to medical journals. The AMA has substantially changed its' public message since our exchange, and Christopher Pine is on notice.
I have always favoured a dual approach of evidence and emotion. Most of what is expressed by politicians is in the realms of opinion, which is lovely, but not important. I respect the Popes opinion, but I wouldn't consider him an authority on reproductive health! OPinions can be dismantled by facts, and emotive arguments can either be dismissed as such, or countered with similar. For every diatriabe on the intrinsic evils of drugs, I can counter with a story of a tragic young overdose who made the wrong decisions because they were not permitted access to the sort of information that may have prevented them from needing to attend hospital. I think there is a strong place for humour in countering the extremists. For the bad guys, I have a clean game and a dirty game. The clean game is intellectual humiliation, and the dirty game is a card swap of grubby laundry which you save for a rainy day when you think your opponents have over-stepped the mark of fair-play. Very few politicians get into power without some grubby behaviour, and their only protection is what they have one other people. Imagine the problems if all of that fell into the hands of someone outside the system, who had nothing at all to lose...mmmm
Enough of my ramblings- go outside and slap youself for distracting me chugs. Hope this provides some insight into the sort of battles that the movement faces on a daily basis

 

[dirtyb_au]

That, is possibly one of the best posts I've seen on Bluelight (in a long while, if not ever).

I've got to say thank you to drplatypus and all the others who are in there batting with rationality and logic, at the higher level of public awareness of drug use, rather than the generally sensationalist, inaccurate 'news' pushed by the popular media.

 

[chugs]

Well I’ll have to wait until you answer my other questions before I go out and slap myself (probably to death after this).

Nevertheless thank you for your very frank and open post. I cannot begin to even try to articulate how I feel that someone of standing is willing to give young people a chance (and the respect) to understand such a complex and confusing situation.

Perhaps that is what "the moment" really needs, a party which isn't as feral as the Greens, yet is fronted by people who hold formal titles and former positions with respected institutions. Furthermore this party must find a regular source of income, like the major parties have, to ensure their contiuned survival.

In any case, Dr Plats I am sure your tireless work eats away into alot of other parts of your life. I would be glad to provide my thanks to you in a financial form, in any shape of form, for this work your doing.

I've OD, seen people die & OD, and it makes me really teary to think that someone out there, who isn't a feral, actually gives a damn.

Please let me know the best way I can help "the movement”

 

[stacyrox]

drplatypus: I am consistently amazed and encouraged by the amount of work you put into this cause. Tho I was not aware how crafty your efforts were .

Its encouraging yet slightly laughable that all of a sudden testing the contents of drugs and making them available to the medical profession seems like a good idea to the government. The amusing part is that they think that this is some kind of breakthrough idea. Hopefully one day soon they'll have another crazy breakthrough idea that if the people taking the drugs were aware of what was/was not in them then they'd be less likely to need medical attention. You know, its so crazy it just might work!

stace.

 

[Special-T.B.K]

I think it would be fair for the government to legalise ***Some*** recreational drug use, Plus banning Ciggarettes, they should start cooking up their own MDMA, so that we don't get any adulterated crap and the public gets what they want for example!!!

Hi how are you today sir? Hi darl, could I just grab a packet of Blue Skies!

Yup no problem!

Thanx darl...

Thats $50 thank you!


The government could subcontract cooks and pay them a certain amount per pill and they could have strict testing to make sure that the bikkies were clean and not going to harm anyone... Afterall it is not the clean pills that kill anyone unless they OD, Also there would have to be a thing where you were allowed a maximum of 2 pills per every 4 weeks, or 5 for every 2 months and have a computer database that has your name on it... and they just look it up to see if You have had your monthly/fortnightly share!!!

The government would make shitloads and the residents would be happy!

Also ban ciggarettes and subcontract to the big companies to grow crops of Marijuana, and instead of smoking tobacco smoking marijuana contracting out to Winfield= Bushies PJ's= Bushies Stuyvesants= The KRONIC Purple Haze and Marlboro Red being the Cronic Crystalized shit!



Harm minimisation is the best and this is the easiest way and it would minimise the amount of drug related deaths caused by adulterated MDMA!