• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

Sky News; PLANS FOR LEGAL ECSTASY TESTING AT A DANCE PARTY

Well we are considering a target for a letter writing campaign, not sure who yet tho. We need to find a key person to apply pressure to, just not sure if the ANCD is where they are at yet. I very much liked your other letter so if you feel like coming up with a form letter of our own that we can print on slips for people to mail/email to our target it would be appreciated.
 
sure thing... Would you want the focus to be on drug policy in general? Or perhaps on the scientific aspects e.g. increasingly sparse evidence for brain damage in regular users. or epidemiological stuff like statistics?

here's a good one for you. about 20% of 20-29 yr olds use ecstasy in any given year. that works out (on 1996 census figures) at about 570,000 people.

The population has increased some 40% since then.

That's a LOT of people

In any event, its hard to find the right person to target. No-one in parliament will listen to you.. like the new federal secretary for health. Talk about hell bent on prohibition. Did it not occur to him that amphetamines are used safely, all the time, in a huge child/adolescent population? =\ Ditto for the opiates, except not with children :p

That's the tradeoff I guess. The higher you go the more entrenched the views are. You go lower and people start to listen reasonably, but they've got fuck all power.

What you really need to in NSW is get that guy from St Vincents who always comments on side. Or Paul Dillon from NDARC, though I find that unlikely. I think now is the opportune time to apply pressure, especially in the wake of those "red mitsubishis" that are going around. I read some article today in re schoolies how "some drugs such as red mitsubishi work particularly slowly and are therefore dangerous". People don't seem to grasp the concept of logos.

But yeah, you really need to get health onside... Hospitals? Uni researchers?

The best way to present a case would be a combined scientific + epidemiological approach. Demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that pill testing saves lives, and that MDMA isn't the demon drug that its made out to be. Hell if 600k+ people are using it each year in Aus, where's the death toll like that from alcohol...
 
er keep it extremely narrow. pilltesting is a good idea. thats it. and you'd be suprised about paul dillon, trust me. but he has no real power. as you pointed out it isnt that type of person we are after. don't worry about putting together support from health people etc, we got that covered. what iwas asking for here was a short, snappy letter that we can use for people to send in to someone in authority. it doesnt have to have a lot of data backing it up it just has to send the message that pilltesting is supported by the community.
 
fantastic! thanks VelocideX!
14.gif
14.gif
 
With the media (Sky News, 5-11-04) spouting comments such as "...test your pill before a doctor says it's OK to take...." and other such crap, I think it's important to outline exactly what a typical on-site test involves; especially the information given out with the result.


Most of the authority comments seem to hinge on the wrong assumption that an MDMA result is accompanied by a message which says it's safe to take.

VelocideX, It's the moral view which must be changed, and I'm sorry to say it, but I think you've got buckly's of changing opinions on testing based on science and social studies. It's a bit like trying to discuss electron tunnelling with a lawyer who only studied thermodynamics ;)

But the morally sound reasoning behind on-site testing - and what's really advised - is easy to understand. This is of course to simply aid in weeding out the worst while giving the user an indication of what may or may not be in the pill. Whatever the outcome of a test, a deterrent message is always given out with a result.

Many of the people these messages are disseminated to would not normally take note of any HR advice, but here they are actively taking measures to reduce or limit the dangers. Most users (i hope) willingly accept the take home note on the dangers of illicit drugs including MDMA.

These are the points which need to be emphasized IMO. The media has successfully diverted attention away from looking at the real intent of Testing groups. Perhaps when seen in another light, Pill Testing people might be removed from the almost villianous profile portrayed recently by those of lesser scruples i.e. nearly all Aus media :p


JB, I hate to load you with ideas which could lead to more public ridicule, but perhaps it's time to do another demonstration on air, maybe even going as far as to set up a mock stall.

Of course the aspirin tested will give a doubtful result and so the appropriate warnings will then be emphasised when discussing the result with the user. Perhaps drplatypus or another team member could then present the accompanying information for that result, together with his/her own tactful comments. Just an idea.....but the clock's a tickin'.
 
phase_dancer said:
VelocideX, It's the moral view which must be changed, and I'm sorry to say it, but I think you've got buckly's of changing opinions on testing based on science and social studies. It's a bit like trying to discuss electron tunnelling with a lawyer who only studied thermodynamics ;)

I agree, but as far as I can see the only way you're going to effect any sort of moral change in parliamentarian is with irrefutable scientific evidence. Morality tends to become more immutable with age, and I think its fair to say that all the people in parliament are there because they have very strong convicitions in their beliefs.

Getting someone to change their mind on drug policy is a monumental task. No MP is going to just go "oh, sorry, me AND all my colleagues are wrong on this, sure thing go ahead and test pills". This is especially so given the political climate -- any move which erodes the current hard-line stance is likely to be extremely poorly received by the community.

You need quantifiable evidence either way: to convince the MPs, to engender some sort of understanding within the community so there isn't a large backlash, and (conversely) so the MPs have something to justify the change with --- so they aren't left hanging in a political vacuum without anything to lean on. If they can hold up studies or other people's opinion, they're absolving themselves of responsibility, and politicians like that :D
 
If it was part of a state approved research project I can't see any way of stopping that federally.

This was exactly what happened to what was almost 'the Australian heroin trial'. Researchers in Canberra worked for years on the research proposal, which basically was to supply legal heroin to heroin addicts who had tried methadone and other available treatments, and were still in trouble. John Howard vetoed it ... well, it obviously sends 'the wrong message'. I think the only message it sends is that we aren't prepared to look at all the available treatment options for a group of disadvantaged Australian citizens.

See here for a good review of what happened to the heroin trials...

The only way you're going to effect any sort of moral change in parliamentarian is with irrefutable scientific evidence.

One of my former supervisors from Perth, Simon Lenton, has been personally involved in trying to bring about sensible progressions in drug policy around cannabis laws in West Australia. He dealt directly with politicians, who (behind close doors) admitted freely that they would only ever use 'scientific evidence' when it suited their preconceived policies.

I'm in the health research sector myself, and it's a bummer to hear those sorts of stories, as you really do hold hopes that the research will be used to influence policy. Simon's research did eventually change policy quite dramatically (cannabis decriminalisation). But he says the secret to his success was about 'windows of opportunity'. That is, timing is incredibly important. Being ready, waiting, for the right moment to present your evidence is crucial.

So the message is not to lose hope, but to keep buiding strong arguments, and being there when the right opportunity comes up to air them. 2004 saw pill testing in the news more than ever, we just have to be armed and ready for the next opportunity to get the message out there...
 
one small step for mdma kind

Well the ball is rolling, lets all help push it along ;)
 
The harm mininisation movement just doesn't have the numbers.

The science and moral reasoning behind its stance are sound and practical. We even have precedant with the successful of the European countries to trumpet.

Yet at every turn we fail to convince the decision makers with the sound nature of our proposal?

I don't know know the motivation and personal circumstances of those politicans however I can hazde a guest that they see any ground given to the harm minisation movement as pandering to a bunch of drug fucked scum, which i am sure is what the majority of non-drug taking "howard battlers" think as well. Its easy for these politicans to pander to herd mentality when its shoved down their throat day in (the battlers that is) day out that drugs are bad. How can you blame them when our poster kids are the smacked out junkies lying on street or breaking into peoples houses to feed their habit.

Another way to look at is that Alcholol only became legal because the majority demanded it. Sure people died, huge amounts of crime was created and other social problems yet it wasn't until the majority of the population turned around and demanded it become legal again.

Hence drugs like MDMA won't become legal until we become a majority. Give it another 50 years and i think we'll be within striking distance.

Probably the same reason why the greens can't get power. Not enough numbers and their image is that of a feral trying to wear a suit, people see the obvious contradictions and refuse to accept the feral has reformed itself.
 
johnboy said:
It all depends on how you judge success. In the eyes the opponents of harm reduction it is impossible for it to succeed as their only measure of success would be people not doing drugs. But, as harm reduction takes as its very basis the acceptance that some people will always take drugs, it can never achieve this goal. This is absurd, I know, but it is essentially their arguement. Even if we move past this you still have to ask how do yoiu measure success?

Australian drug policy has three branches; supply reduction, demand reduction and harm reduction. Supply rediction is stopping the drugs getting into the country or preventing them from being manufactured here. Since Australian Customs admits that on a good day they will sieze less than 20% of drugs coming into the country this means this area of policy has at least an 80% failure rate. And that's with a budget in the multi-millions.

Demand reduction is stopping people from wanting to take drugs. How does the government do this? By spending milions on slick TV ads. And how effective are they? Well you tell me.

Harm reduction, however, has a fracton of the budget but has areas of success you can actually measur, ie reductions in rates of IV users with transmittable diseases, reductions in adulterants. But it is the only area where any initiative put forward can be dismissed because "it doesn't work". even tho no data will be supplied to show that. The simple fact that people are still taking drugs is proof enough that harm reduction has failed.

Never mind that the USA, a country which has wholehearted dismissed harm reduction and kept a hard line of "Just Say NO" for the last 40 years, has endemic drug use. Never mind hard facts, this is faith we talking about. If they keep repeating that "harm minimisation has failed" then it will eventually be believed.


This is a great post. I can't believe I missed it the 1st time. Word up JB
 
ta. :)

I was going to be using this as part of my rant.. er i mean speech to the Club health Australia conference but that seems to have been pushed back to October. Might be time to whip up a little controversy sooner than later then...
 
I have a video clip of a pill testing positive for ketamine only, done by Enlighten, at an SA event, along with their harm minimisation monologue. I've encorporated it into a 5 minute film on the Rave environment which I was going to show to SA Parliament in early March. If it's of any use to the Enlighten people, I can forward it on.
What about a post-card campaign, like the refugee people are running? I'm told it's been very effective....
 
Of course its of use, ya wally. Send it to us and it can go on our website where it can be seen by a lot more people.
 
The video would be great for people to download for educating them on the correct process. The Rave Environment film sounds interesting too - are the SA parliament going to do an inquiry like the Vic parliament?

What's the post-card campaign all about?
 
The postcard campaign had a picture of a 2 week old baby born in Baxter, with a message on the back addressed to the local memeber of Parliament. Electoral offices in SA were flooded with them and as a result high level questions were asked.
Wally, eh, Johnboy? If I were as wise as you, and I had been doing the pill-testing as long as you have, I might already have thought of taking a video;).
The List is alive and well and will resume function once Cameron is back from India.
 
Well there was the one we did for Four Corners, and the one for Today Tonight... Videos we have. Recent videos of us doing a ketamine test that also hopefully catch the punters reaction, and can be titled "As shown in the SA Parliament", this we don't have.
 
Top