Recreational drug use | MildGreens's Backup Blog

Archive for the ‘Recreational drug use’ Category

On Drugs, Medicine and Some Harms

July 7, 2009

Part of the problem with Met’s Bill (and Nandor’s earlier) is that it occurred at all.
(comment as posted to the Daktory Forum)

While med pot is an important issue, the diamonds in the sky is D’classification of cannabis. It would matter diddly what med pot provisions were made (as per Sativex) there would still be injustice. The argument for med pot (even as a wedge issue towards full Class D implementation, the rules are all ready there ) fails to do justice to the issue. AND THAT IS WHY WE HAVE TO RAISE THE ROOF before the Law Commission (LC).

The LC is doing some very creative stuff around ‘privacy’ and the internet… using the internet to both air the issue contructively and gain insight into public concerns, suggestions and fulfill the responsibility of ‘consultation being seen to be done’.

This is the stuff of social capital. The ‘drug debate’ will be the better for it. One can (will be able to) even send a comment in via ones cellphone. Suddenly the debate (has the POTential to) become relevant to young people.

So donut worry to much about the vote in Parl. There was NO drug debate in the run up to the election, but the day after John Key was elected PrimeMonster we legally regulated psychoactive recreational drugs (it got Royal assent two days before the election, became law on the Sunday). Much more has been accomplished than either media or MP’s are prepared to

Image via Wikipedia

concede. We are the first country in the world to take a ground up approach to analyzing drug policy – including adherence to and relevance of the International Covenants and Conventions.

It really doesn’t get better than this. Although the anticipated in april/may ‘issues paper’ is yet to be released (so that the framework for the debate is clear – and thats a head start) it has been delayed somewhat due to [political] prioritisation of the Alcohol issue. The drug we drink, Alcohol (legal) and Drugs (illegal) will according to the Law Commission(er) ‘inform each other’. Again, no country has (IMHO) realy taken this holistic evaluation of ‘all drug policy’.

Consider fmr PrimeMunster Palmer on Drugs we Drink, “The exclusion of these substances from the terms of reference does not preclude the Commission from taking into account the relative harms of these and other substances.” and “Lessons learnt from the regulation of alcohol and tobacco will be taken on board in the course of this review.” (media release 2008[url]

We are turning full circle back to where our National Drug Policy (framework) pre 1996 HIGHLY reco

Image via Wikipedia

mmended an ‘all drugs’ framework rather than a drug by drug approach.
This serves reform VERY WELL.

Like Alcohol and the recent academically critiqued BERL report on Alcohol harms – the area of cost/benefit need to be explored thoroughly. Daktavists MUST ask for this, ‘where’s the the baseline?’ – and the more we do this, the greater weighting will be given to getting the likes of Prof Jeffery Miron (or the like) out here from Harvard to give this international credibility.

Be Empowered, Submit Unconditionaly.

/Blair Anderson,
http://mildgreens.blogspot.com

The Big Meth Con – Menace or Moral Panic?

May 16, 2009

Image via Wikipedia

This writer has consistently argued that the prevalence of “P” in NZ is a product of a policy that delivers many unintended consequences one of which is more “P”.

It is almost a given that Carla-Louise Wallace’s seminal thesis on methamphetamine and NZ media “Menace or Moral Panic?” will not feature at tonight’s “Holmes” celebrity roast fundraiser before 300+ rich folk ($325 seat) including the Minister of Social Development, Paula Bennet and Minister of Justice, Simon Power.

AUT Communications graduate Carla-Louise draws on extensive work by Prof Jock Young et al supporting the contention that the policy and its policing is creating the problem (deviancy amplification). http://aut.researchgateway.ac.nz/handle/10292/215

Abstract: [excerpt] This thesis, presented as a collection of articles, journalistic in its tone, is titled “Menace or Moral Panic? Methamphetamine and the New Zealand Press”. Within the collection, evidence and background information is presented that supports a claim that a moral panic fitting Stanley Cohen‘s classic model occurred between 1999 and 2004.This moral panic was also identified using Stuart Hall‘s definition of a moral panic outlined in his mugging study published in 1978 as well as the more contemporary model of Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994). Jock Young’s theory of The Deviance Amplification Spiral is also addressed and can be applied to this collection when considering the close ‘symbiotic’ relationship that our press here in New Zealand have with our police force. In looking at this particular subject it is vital that we look at how drugs and drug use play a role in the media. Also as part of the back grounding for this collection it was of critical importance to find whether a moral panic happened anywhere else in the world in relation to methamphetamine. Two previous moral panics about methamphetamine are featured in this collection as part of a case study presented in “Ancient Anecdotes meet Modernity: Drugs and the Rise of Methamphetamine” in which between the years of 1989 and 1996 America passed through two moral panics brought on to a considerable extent by a mixture of media hype and political opportunism. (snip)

The last article in this collection investigates, using expert interviews, if there is enough evidence to support the claim that methamphetamine may be a menace to New Zealand society, but that the extent of that menace may be exaggerated by a moral panic brought on by our media and fuelled by our police force. (snip)

The police as amplifiers of deviancy [J Young – Drugs and Politics, 1977 – books.google.com ] examines the reasons for police action against the drugtaker and issues of moral disturbance, disproportionality, displacement and volatility.

A recent paper by MIT’s Urban Studies and Planning, Gary T Marx citing Young on the same subject reads like an instruction manual for how to work out what went wrong in Napier placing as it does responsibility for unintended consequences, contrary to the ruling paradigm, on Policing, not just Policy.

Image via Wikipedia

This evenings Sky City Stellar Trust Dinner “Roast” is just another such moral panic conveniently funding everything that has failed (Methcon, FADE, LIFE are the prime beneficiaries) and further entrenching everything that is broken. Paul Holme’s false assertion of <5% treatment success for “P” may be way off mark, but ‘the roast and its purpose’ speaks volumes. No good comes from putting labels on anyone. Least of all those on those who need help. (http://www.grownups.co.nz/read/directories/community_services_charities/stellar-trust )

The more dangerous a drug is, the more culpable a government for abrogating control to criminal networks, maximising social harm, misplacing resources and deluding themselves and everyone else. However, as this point is likely to fly over the heads of dead tree media it will be interesting to see what the Celebrity Roast’s Cellars and Bar-take is and how that might inform the real drug debate.

The MildGreens say the intersectoral social capital is in the ‘all drug’ approach as originally

Image via Wikipedia

mooted in the National Drug Policy consulative phase and accepted in principle in the final drafts. The first step, the homogulation of any and all psychoactive recreational drugs safer than alcohol and tobacco (nicotine) to be placed in the October 6th 2008 regulations for sale, storage, manufacture, labeling, advertising, premises, and age of consent for [“Soft” drugs needing] effective control and emperical research. Cannabis, LSD, MDMA, Ibogaine…all administered by the Ministry of Health.

The rules are already there, so with that legislative progress one could wonder why (Health Minister) Hon Tony Ryall is avoiding a “roasting” seat tonight?

Blair Anderson ‹(•¿•)›
ph (643) 389 4065 cell 027 265 7219

Sugar Addictive? Couldn’t be?

December 27, 2008

Image via Wikipedia Study Suggests Sugar May Be Addictive – “changes in the brain seen in people who abuse drugs such as cocaine and heroin”

“Our evidence from an animal model suggests that bingeing on sugar can act in the brain in ways very similar to drugs of abuse,” lead researcher Bart Hoebel, a professor of psychology at Princeton University, said. “Drinking large amounts of sugar water when hungry can cause behavioral changes and even neurochemical changes in the brain which resemble changes that are produced when animals or people take substances of abuse. These animals show signs of withdrawal and even long-lasting effects that might resemble craving,” he said. Dr. Louis Aronne, director of the Comprehensive Weight Control Program at New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center in New York City, added: “The big question has been whether it’s just a behavioral thing or is it a metabolic chemical thing, and evidence like this supports the idea that something chemical is going on.” The stages of addiction, as defined by the American Psychiatric Association, include bingeing, withdrawal and craving. / Monday, 15 December 2008, 5:17:18 a.m. Nomen

SO how would arrest, detention, inquisition, victimisation, labeling, public humiliation and punishment help? How can the latter argument be sustained for cannabis, a non-addictive health food additive where [any] binging, withdrawal and craving is a product of prohibitions set and setting?

Meanwhile unresolved is the tenuous ANZAC ‘herbals’ medicines act…

Class D for herbal psychoactive recreational drug use… is ‘Labours’ partial prohibition. Good move Helen.

[Doh!, Where does the bulk of NZ’s sugar come from?]

MildGreens's Backup Blog

Archive for the ‘Recreational drug use’ Category

The Big Meth Con – Menace or Moral Panic?

Sugar Addictive? Couldn’t be?

Pages

Archives

Categories