Vancouver, British Columbia, a city unaccustomed to widespread crime, is facing a rise in gang-related violence stemming from drug dealing and local turf wars between young people of Indian descent, “They are Indo-Canadians killing Indo-Canadians,” said Kash Heed, commanding officer of the Third Police District in Vancouver. “Seventy-six murders mainly within one ethnic group. The cycle of violence, we’ve not cracked it yet.”

Immigrant community leaders blame inaction on the part of Vancouver police for the rise in gang violence. “Out here, it’s a slap on the hand,” said Amar Randhawa, co-founder of the Unified Network of Indo-Canadians for Togetherness and Education Through Discussion (UNITED). “Law enforcement can’t crack the lower hierarchy, let alone get to the top.”

But police officials said the cycle of murder and revenge has hampered their efforts. “One day suspect, and the next day victim,” said Heed. “One day you are the shooter. The next day you’re lying in your coffin.”

According to police, gangs deal in the potent variety of marijuana called B.C. bud, which is grown in the province. “It is often exchanged for cocaine, cash, or firearms. It is a deal between two criminal gangs, one on the south side of the border and one on the north side, guns for marijuana,” said constable Alex Borden of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. “If there is violence in our streets and firearms are involved, we are concerned the firearms come from across the border.”

According to Joe Giuliano, assistant chief at the local U.S. Border Patrol office in Blaine, Wash., 23 Canadian smugglers have been arrested on the U.S. side of the border so far this year. “Virtually all marijuana smuggling in the past fiscal year is either directly or indirectly tied back to the Indo-Canadian community,” he said.

According to officials, gang members are generally from upscale families. “Unlike in other countries, people involved in the gang activity here are not the poor or disadvantaged,” said Wallace Oppal, a justice of the Court of Appeal of British Columbia. “For the most part, kids involved here are people who come from middle-class and upper-class homes. They get involved for the glamour.”

Heed added that parents should get more involved in discouraging their children from joining gangs. “We’ve gone to notify people their son was killed and they have been in such denial they slammed the door in the police officer’s face,” Heed said. “They don’t want to believe their child is involved. They will ask the question to their dying day after their son is murdered why they didn’t do something.”

Ben Mitchell argues that drugs should not be legalised.

In the UK, the social and economic costs of drug misuse account for between £10 billion and £18 billion a year. Around 250000 problematic drug users’ contribute to 99% of these costs.1 These addicts spend around £16,500 a year each to feed their habits, with most of this coming from the proceeds of crime2. Hard drug users, who indulge in heroin, crack cocaine and powder cocaine, are responsible for 50% of all crimes3.

On the one side, them are proponents of ‘harm reduction’. In the case of heroin, they want to see persistent users prescribed heroin under the NHS.

Opponents compare the Dutch and Swedish approach to drugs over the last 25 years, and point out that drug use in the Netherlands, which has adopted a policy of ‘harm reduction, has seen use of cannabis amongst the young more than double, with use of ecstasy and cocaine by l5 year olds rising significantly.

By contrast, in Sweden, the goal has been to create a ‘drugs free society,’ with everyone from the police to schools working towards such a strategy. As a result, overall lifetime prevalence of drug abuse, amongst 15-16 year-olds. is 8% in Sweden, compared to 29% in the Netherlands. In 1998, only 496kg of cannabis were seized in Sweden, compared to 118 in the Netherlands, now described as the drugs capital of Western Europe5 . This is because in Sweden drug use is seen as inimical to a civilised, tolerant society, whereas in the Netherlands drugs have been accepted as a ‘way of life’ and have contributed hugely to crime.

The UK’s approach to drugs is deeply flawed. with the government sending out confusing and misleading messages. Cannabis has been downgraded from a class B to class C drug; yet many people widely believe that cannabis has been decriminalised.

The ‘Lambeth Experiment’, which led the way to reclassification, caused an explosion in the number of drug dealers preying upon the area6. The experiment has to all intents and purposes ‘allowed’ people to smoke cannabis publicly. But, the moral and ethical question still remains: is it acceptable to tolerate something which is proven to damage both the health and judgement of individuals, and can also affect relationships with families, friends and the wider society?

There are now several experiments being conducted across Europe in an effort to contain heroin addiction. In Switzerland, since 1994, 1,000 of the country’s 33 heroin addicts have been prescribed pure heroin. The aim is to stabilise the health of addicts and prevent them from using heroin in public, thus taking their habit away from the black market.

Swiss officials claim that the experiment is working because crime is down, However, addicts are now becoming dependent on prescription heroin and hopes of weaning them off the substance have quickly faded.

The Police Federation disputes that legalisation would cut crime. This assumes that the powerful international drug cartels would simply fade away into the night. More likely scenarios are that they would fight to maintain their lucrative street trading.

Notes
1. The Government Reply to the Third Report from the Home Affairs Committee Session 2001-02: The Government Drug Policy: Is it working?, p.5
2. Home Affairs Third Report: The Government Drug Policy. Is it working?, Illegal Drugs, Drugs-related property crime. no.36 3.The Government Reply to the Third Report from the Home Affairs Committee session 2001-02: The Government Drug Policy. Is it working?, p.5
4 .Home Affairs Select Committee Report: The Government Drug Policy. Is it Working? Memoranda of Evidence – no.16 (submitted by the Criminal Justice Association)
5. Risk of Legalising Cannabis Underestimated: A Comparison of Dutch and Swedish Drug Policy. Criminal Justice Association, February 2002
6. The Dealers Think They’re Untouchable Now’, The Observer, 24 February 2002 and ‘London’s Drug Crime Hotspots Revealed. Evening Standard. 28 May 2003
7. Better Ways’. The Economist, 26 July 2001
8. Quoted in Home Affairs Select Committee Third Report: The Government ‘s Drugs Policy. Is Working’., no.60

Source: CIVITAS; Institute for the Study of Civil Society
The Mezzanine, Elizabeth House, 39 York Road, London SEI 7NQ
Phone; +44 (0)20 7401 5470 Fax: +44(0)201401 5471
Email; info@civitas.org.uk

The transmission of drug-resistant HIV among intravenous drug users (IDUs) who participate in high-risk behaviors is high, according to a new study. In addition, such drug users were often prescribed less effective and not recommended HIV drugs.

Evidence of increasing rates of drug resistance among those recently infected with HIV “indicates a growing public health concern and warrants an examination of the problems from a prevention perspective write the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes.

The researchers examined predictors of unprotected sex and needle sharing among 638 HIV-infected drug users who completed 2731 visits between 1996 and 2000 in an ongoing study in Baltimore, Maryland.

“After taking account other factors, HIV-infected individuals were significantly more likely to engage in unprotected sex if their sexual partners were also HIV-infected,” Dr. Sethi said in an interview with Reuters Health. “Also, HIV-infected women were twice as likely as men to report unprotected sex.”

Among IDUs who had injected recently, there was an independent association between sharing needles and homelessness, daily injection, and trading sex for drugs. “IDUs were at higher risk of HIV and drug-resistant HIV transmission at 19 percent and 6 percent of all visits, respectively,” the investigators write. Among subjects who were at high risk of HIV transmission, significant drug-resistant HIV was found at 14 percent of visits.

“Although highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) was widely available during the study period, less effective and not recommended regimens were prescribed to nearly half of IDUs who were potential transmitters of drug-resistant HIV,” Dr. Sethi told Reuters Health. “Transmission of resistance is one consequence of continued wide-use of non-HAART regimens.”

“It is likely that reducing high-risk behaviors by HIV-infected individuals would reduce the transmission of HIV, including drug-resistant HIV, to uninfected individuals,” Dr. Sethi said. “Clinicians can play an important role by counseling HIV-infected patients about the importance of reducing high-risk behaviors.”

The federal government recently announced that the growing potency of America’s most popular illegal drug, marijuana, and the number of kids seeking help to get off the drug (one in five users) worried them so much that they were soliciting new marijuana-research proposals and urging local law enforcement to crack down on those who sell the drug.

The pro-marijuana lobby was furious and immediately charged the feds with fear-mongering and clamoring to protect their (not so glamorous, actually) jobs in Washington. Their cries rested on claims that more potent marijuana is not tantamount to more dangerous marijuana and that the rise in the number of treatment beds for marijuana users is due to criminal justice referrals, not the drug’s harmfulness.

But the evidence shows the government may indeed have it right. The pro-drug movement, fuelled with the motivation to legalize harmful substances and angry at the attack on its values of “drug use for all,” is putting kids at risk by downplaying the known dangers of marijuana.

Although not as destructive as shooting heroin or smoking crack, marijuana use is unquestionably damaging. Today’s more powerful marijuana probably leads to greater health consequences than the marijuana of the 1960s: Astonishingly, pot admissions to emergency rooms now exceed those of heroin. Visits to hospital emergency departments because of marijuana use have risen steadily, from an estimated 16,251 in 1991 to more than 119,472 in 2002. That has accompanied a rise in potency from 3.26 percent to 7.19 percent, according to the Potency Monitoring Project at the University of Mississippi.

More potent marijuana is also seen as more lucrative on the market. Customs reports claim that a dealer coming north with a pound of cocaine can make an even trade with a dealer traveling south with a pound of high-potency marijuana. It makes sense that people pay more for stronger pot because the high is better.

A flurry of very recent research studies – concerning withdrawal, schizophrenia and lung obstruction, for example – have also shown marijuana’s unfortunate consequences. These conclusions were not being reached in the ’70s and ’80s (legalizers often point to the Nixon-commissioned Shafer report, which said nice things about the drug as evidence of marijuana’s harmlessness), because marijuana from that era was weaker and less dangerous than today’s drug. The May 5 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that the number of marijuana users over the past 10 years stayed the same while the number dependent on the drug rose 20 percent – from 2.2 million to 3 million.

And although a majority of kids in treatment for marijuana are referred there by the criminal justice system, it still remains only a slight majority – about 54 percent. The rest is self-, school or doctor referral.To paint the picture that the reason marijuana dependence looks higher is because of the criminal justice system is disingenuous (especially because most people who use only marijuana never interact with law enforcement as a result of that use).

Some still argue that it’s wrong to arrest kids and force them into treatment. It seems like the government can never win: If it arrests and locks people up, legalizers kick and scream that we’re not giving users “alternatives to incarceration.” If it arrest kids as a way to get them help, and not as a punishment mechanism, all of a sudden the government is giving in to George Orwell.

It’s too bad that pot apologists don’t see what most parents do see: Marijuana is a harmful drug with serious consequences, and mechanisms – even a brush with the law to help a user realize that what he’s doing is harmful – to help stop the progression of use should be seen as a good thing. That’s not government propaganda. That’s common sense.And it may save a few lives.

Source: Kevin A. Sabet recently stepped down as senior speechwriter to America’s drug czar, John P. Walters. A Marshall Scholar, he is writing a book on drug policy and is also a Ph.D. candidate at Oxford University.

If state legislators wrote a bill outlawing a critical remedy to help kids avoid a disease like tuberculosis, there would probably be a major effort to boot every single one of them out of office. Recently, the state Senate did something just as asinine — except the condition in question was drug use by kids, far more prevalent than TB. Bowing to pro-drug interest groups, a bill is making its way to the governor’s desk that would stymie efforts by local schools to test students for drugs. Unlike lawmakers in other states, Sacramento bureaucrats would like to control the way schools drug-test students, making such testing voluntary and placing restrictions on how it is administered.

Drug testing sounds costly, unnecessary, uncompassionate, even unconstitutional. Those who want to legalize and legitimize drug use caricature drug testing as a draconian policy designed to catch kids using drugs and throw them into jail.

It’s time to set the record straight. At a time when drug abuse in California plagues many students, it makes sense to drug-test students as a part a comprehensive drug-prevention program (which includes after-school programs). Since addiction is spread from peer to peer, drug testing gives a student another more credible reason to say “no” when offered drugs by his or her friend.

Unfortunately, the sponsors of Senate Bill 1386 miss the point of random drug testing when they assume that the practice is unnecessary because it is already easy to detect drug use: “You come into class, your eyes are red, you’re falling asleep, and yesterday you weren’t like that,” argues Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, D-Los Angeles, who coauthored the bill with Sen. John Vasconcellos, D-Santa Clara.

But drug testing is not meant to catch the kid who “everyone knows” is using drugs. The purpose of testing is to get those kids who have yet to show symptoms of their drug use the help they need before their “recreational fun” turns into dependence or addiction. It’s meant to prevent the scenario described above so that the student and his or her peers don’t have to live with the consequences of their classmate coming to school on drugs.

Drug testing is also not intended to detect drug use for punitive purposes — in fact, the U.S. Supreme Court prohibited that in its recent landmark ruling defending random drug tests for kids involved in activities at school. No student goes to jail as a result of a positive drug test. Instead, the family’s privacy is respected and the child is referred to get help to stop his or her use. Consequences entail being denied involvement in sports or other extra curricular activities during the treatment period and until the child tests negative for drugs.

Employing this carrot-and-stick method works. For example: After two years of a drug testing program, Hunterdon Central High School in New Jersey saw significant reductions in 20 of 28 drug use categories, including a drop in cocaine use by seniors from 13 percent to 4 percent. The U.S. military saw drug-use rates drop from 27 percent in 1981 to 3 percent today, thanks to the introduction of random drug testing. Schools like St. Patrick’s High in Chicago are seeing a total change in the culture of education at their school as a result of drug testing.

Compared to other health interventions, drug testing is cheap. It costs roughly $10 to $50 per student, per year. Most parents would gladly pay that small fee in exchange for knowing that their child was safe. In addition, the federal government has proposed $25 million to help school districts offset the costs.

Unfortunately, opponents of random drug tests (many of whom carry mission statements dedicated to legalizing drugs) can claim some victories in our state. Already, schools such as Bret Harte Union High School in Angels Camp (Calaveras County) have said that they will pull their effective drug testing program if SB1386 passes.

Principals, teachers and parents who employ an effective drug-testing program at school realize it is a valuable tool to deter kids from delving into drug use in the first place and to refer troubled teens to help. Our elected officials should not make that tool harder to use with this misguided legislation.

Source: Kevin A. Sabet. Former chief speechwriter for the Bush administration’s drug czar. A Marshall scholar at Oxford University, Sabet and is writing on book on drug use.

Nation’s Youth Turning Away from Marijuana, as Perceptions of Risk Rise; Most Adults with Substance Abuse Problems Are Employed

Secretary Tommy G. Thompson announced today that there is a five percent decline in the number of American youth between the ages of 12 and 17 who have ever used marijuana. Current use of marijuana plummeted nearly 30 percent among 12 and 13 year olds. The findings were included in the 2003 National Survey on Drug Use and Health released today at the annual Recovery Month press conference.

The findings, released by HHS’ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), show that while overall, the change in the category “current use of any illicit drug” was not statistically significant, the use of some drugs decreased sharply. For youth, 12-17, past year use of Ecstasy and LSD dropped precipitously, by 41 percent for Ecstasy and 54 percent for LSD. Overall, 19.5 million Americans ages 12 and older, 8 percent of this population, currently use illicit drugs. The data indicate that of the 16.7 million adult users (18 and older) of illicit drugs in 2003, about 74 percent were employed either full time or part time.

SAMHSA Administrator Charles Curie said: “Employers who think alcohol and drug abuse will never be a problem in their workplace need to consider that more than three quarters of adults who have serious drug and or alcohol problems are employed. Encouraging employees to find help when they need it can result in fewer accidents and fewer workers absent on Monday morning. It may even save an employee’s life, family, or job. Creating a drug-free workplace program or enhancing an existing program can lead to a healthier, more productive work force and be an important part of solving one of our nation’s most persistent problems.”
The survey found that of the 19.4 million adults (age 18 and over) characterized with abuse of or dependence on alcohol or drugs (19.4 million) in 2003, 14.9 million (77 percent) were employed either full or part time. This amounts to over ten percent of full-time workers as well as over ten percent of part-time workers.

Marijuana continues to be the most commonly used illicit drug, with 14.6 million current users (6.2 percent of the population). The study shows that there were an estimated 2.6 million new marijuana users in 2002. About two thirds of these new users were under age 18, and about half were female.

An important positive change detected by the survey was an increase in the perception of risk in using marijuana once a month or more frequently. Both youth and young adults reported a significant increase in their awareness of the risks of smoking marijuana. Particularly striking was the 20 percent decline between 2002 and 2003 in the number of youth that were “heavy users” of marijuana (those smoking either daily or 20 or more days per month). Perceived availability of the drug also declined significantly among youth.

The results of this year’s survey demonstrate that anti-drug messages inside and outside of school, participation in religious and other activities, parental disapproval of substance use and positive attitudes about school are linked to lower rates of youth marijuana use. For example, those exposed to anti-drug messages outside of school had rates of current marijuana use that were 25 percent lower than those not reporting such exposure (7.5 percent vs. 10.0 percent). Youth who believe that their parents would “strongly disapprove” of marijuana had use rates fully 80 percent lower than those who reported that their parents would not “strongly disapprove” (5.4 percent vs. 28.7 percent).

The numbers of binge and heavy drinkers did not change between 2002 and 2003. About 54 million Americans ages 12 and older participated in binge drinking at least once in the 30 days prior to being surveyed. These people had five or more drinks on one or more occasion in the past month. There were 16.1 million heavy drinkers, who had five or more drinks on five or more occasions in the past month. The highest prevalence of binge and heavy drinking in 2003 was among young adults ages 18-25, with both binge and heavy drinking at their peak at age 21.

There were 10.9 million drinkers under legal age (ages 12-20) in the month prior to the survey interview in 2003. This is 29 percent of this age group. Of these, nearly 7.2 million (19.2 percent) were binge drinkers and 2.3 million (6.1 percent) were heavy drinkers.

Drunk driving declined from the 2002 survey, but drugged driving remained similar to that reported in the 2002 survey. An estimated 13.6 percent of persons aged 12 or older drove under the influence of alcohol at least once in the 12 months prior to their interviews (32.3 million people) in 2003, a decrease from 14.2 percent (33.5 million) in 2002. An estimated 10.9 million persons reported driving under the influence of an illicit drug during the past year. This is 4.6 percent of the population ages 12 and older.

Against the backdrop of generally good news, the non-medical lifetime use of prescription pain relievers showed a five percent increase for the population 12 and older, with young adults (18-25) experiencing a 15 percent increase in lifetime, as well as current use. Over all, current use of prescription pain relievers non-medically remained stable from 2002-2003. There was a statistically significant increase in lifetime non-medical use of Vicodin, Lortab, or Lorcet from 13.1 million to 15.7 million. Percocet, Percodan, or Tylox misuse in a lifetime increased from 13.1 million to 15.7 million people. Hydrocodone lifetime non-medical use increased from 4.5 million people to 5.7 million; OxyContin lifetime misuse increased from 1.9 million people to 2.8 million; non-medical methadone use increased from 0.9 million to 1.2 million; and non-medical use of Tramadol increased from 52,000 to 186,000 from 2002 to 2003.

Estimates for persons who currently used psychotherapeutic drugs taken non-medically are similar in 2003 to estimates for 2002. There were 6.3 million persons currently using prescription medications non-medically in 2003, about 2.7 percent of the population ages 12 or older. Of these, an estimated 4.7 million used prescription pain relievers; 1.8 million used tranquilizers; 1.2 million used stimulants, including methamphetamine; and 0.3 million used sedatives.

There were an estimated 2.3 million persons who currently used cocaine in 2003, 604,000 of whom used crack. One million persons used hallucinogens, including LSD, PCP, Ecstasy and other substances, and 119,000 people were estimated to currently use heroin. These projections are all similar to estimates for these drugs in 2002. But, past month inhalant use among youth ages 16 or 17 increased from 0.6 percent in 2002 to 1.0 percent in 2003. Methamphetamine use did not change significantly between 2002 and 2003, with 600,000 past month users each year.

The survey reported 21.6 million Americans in 2003 classified with dependence on drugs, alcohol, or both (9.1 percent of the population ages 12 and older). Over 20 million persons needed but did not receive treatment for an alcohol or drug problem in 2002 and 2003, but the number receiving specialized substance abuse treatment declined from 2.3 million in 2002 to 1.9 million in 2003. Of the 20 million people in need of treatment in 2003 who did not receive it, about 1 million recognized that need. Only 273,000 tried to obtain treatment and were unable to access it. The other 764,000 made no effort to get treatment.

The report found a major correlation between serious mental illness and substance dependence and abuse. In 2003, an estimated 4.2 million adults suffered from serious mental illness and substance dependence or abuse in the past year. Adults who used illicit drugs were more than twice as likely to have serious mental illness, compared to adults who did not use an illicit drug. In 2003, 18.1 percent of adult past-year users of illicit drugs had serious mental illness that year, while the rate was 7.8 percent among adults who had not used an illicit drug. Among adults with substance dependence or abuse, 21.6 percent had serious mental illness, compared to 8.0 percent among those who did not have dependence or abuse.

Among adults with serious mental illness in 2003, 21.3 percent (4.2 million people) were dependent on or abused alcohol or illicit drugs. The rate among adults without serious mental illness was only 7.9 percent.

Tobacco use rates in the past month remained essentially the same from 2002 to 2003, with 70.8 million people reporting current use of a tobacco product. Of these, 60.4 million smoked cigarettes in the past month, 12.8 million smoked cigars, 7.7 million used smokeless tobacco and 1.6 million smoked tobacco in pipes. There were significant declines in past year and lifetime cigarette use among youths ages 12 to 17 between 2002 and 2003, and a decline in the rate of cigarette smoking among young females.

The 2003 survey is based on interviews with 67,784 respondents ages 12 and older who were interviewed in their homes. This includes persons residing in dormitories or homeless shelters. Not included in the survey are persons on active military duty, in prisons, or other institutionalized populations or people who are homeless but not in shelters. Lifetime use is defined as ever used a substance in one’s lifetime. Past year use is having used the substance at least once in the past 12 months. Current use is use in the past 30 days.

A St. Louis study finds that drug courts and addiction treatment are far more cost-effective than probation over the long run, Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly reported March 8.

The study by the Institute of Applied Research focused on the city’s adult felony drug court. Researchers concluded that drug court costs about $1,449 per offender more up front than probation, but end up saving taxpayers $7,707 within four years of discharge.

“The drug-court client pays for his drug-court experience within about 3.5 years by avoiding costs [such as reinvolvement with the criminal-justice system] and paying taxes,” said Jeffrey N. Kushner, the city’s drug-court administrator.

The complete report is available on the Institute of Applied Research website.

Marijuana indicators continued upward trends that began in the early 1990s. In 2002, however, marijuana ED mentions stabilized, after rising from almost 600 to 1,200 from 1999 to 2001. When found as the sole drug in a hospital ED situation, patients typically present with symptoms of a panic or anxiety attack.

As in past years, marijuana precipitated more admissions into addiction treatment programs than any other illicit drug in the Twin Cities in 2003. Overall, one out of five (22.8 percent) people entering addiction treatment programs reported marijuana as the primary substance problem, compared with only 8 percent in 1991. Most (77.3 percent) were males, and 68.3 percent were white. For many, it was the first treatment experience (44.2 percent), which can reflect a relatively short abuse history. The average age of first marijuana use was 13.7 years.

Marijuana was overwhelmingly the primary drug among adolescents and young adults in treatment. Among treatment admissions under age 18, a whopping 73.2 percent reported marijuana as the primary substance problem, and among youth age 18 – 25, 34.8 percent. In contrast, among patients age 26 to 34, 14.6 percent reported marijuana as the primary substance problem, and among patients 35 and older, only 4.5 percent.

In 2003 in Minneapolis, 48.3 percent of adult male arrestees tested positive for marijuana. Nationwide, it ranged from a high of 54.9 percent in Oklahoma City, to a low of 30.9 percent in Honolulu and 31.9 percent in Salt Lake City.  The median across all cities was 44.1 percent.

Marijuana, readily available according to multiple sources, sold for $5 per joint, and could be purchased by any metropolitan area middle school student. Standard, commercial grade marijuana sold for $50 per quarter ounce, $150–$175 per ounce, and $600–$900 per pound. Higher potency “BC Bud” from British Columbia was increasingly available and sold for $100 per quarter ounce and up to $600 per ounce.

Marijuana joints that are dipped in formaldehyde, which is often mixed with phencyclidine (PCP), are known as “wets,” “wet sticks,” “water,” or “wet daddies.” Marijuana joints containing crack cocaine are known as “primos.”

Recently, the British Prime Minister Mr. Tony Blair gave an interview to the News of the World newspaper. In a paper more noted for salacious stories it was a sober affair. Reflecting on 6 years in power , he said “I’ve had lumps kicked out of me ….but I’m tougher than ever”. In the wide ranging interview, Mr. Blair introduced his newest plan -random drug testing in schools.

Mr. Blair’s government does not seem to know what to do about the drugs problem. They ignore evidence from other countries on what works to lower the incidence of drug use and rely instead upon advice from so-called experts – many of whom have been advocating the relaxation of drug laws for years.

Re-classifying Cannabis has sent out totally the wrong message to our youth who mostly now believe that cannabis is (a) legal and (b) harmless. The government rushes in to Spend £1 million on a campaign to tell people that cannabis is (a) not legal and (b) harmful.

More money is being spent on treatment – and with this we have no argument. People who have problems from drug use need all the help and treatment they can get to become drug free and contributory members of society again. Treatment is always expensive – and there is the ‘revolving door’ syndrome where users enter treatment for a few weeks or months, return to society and often begin using again – once the use results in a more chaotic lifestyle again the user returns to treatment. Relapse is common and costs money.

Mr. Blair’s new idea – random drug testing – has resulted in the inevitable dichotomy between those who approve of the plan and those who regard it as a great infringement of personal liberty. Some organizations who want drug laws relaxed are scaremongering by suggesting that pupils know that cannabis stays in the body for longer than many other drugs and so would stop using cannabis and instead turn to Ecstasy or Heroin. This is very unlikely since the majority of young people who do use cannabis whilst at school do so because they believe it is harmless – they do not use so-called ‘hard’ drugs because they know they are harmful. Understandably the teaching profession have expressed great concern about the time, costs and legal ramifications of testing. A large majority of parents think it is an excellent idea – and, surprisingly to some, most young people agree with it.

The NDPA have seen evidence of the success of drug testing in America and Australia and work closely with a Belgian colleage who has made a study of drug testing. One of our colleagues has also worked in Restorative Justice and this could be tied in with drug testing. Many companies in the USA and the UK have introduced random drug tests amongst their work force and this has cut down accident and absence rates and staff turnover . Therefore, our belief is that there is mileage in using random drug tests in schools – provided they are handled sensitively. It would need all schools and colleges to ‘opt in’ to be a total success – and schools would need financial help to cover the inevitable costs. And schools need to consider that random drug testing should not belinked to punishing or excluding pupils who test positive.

The Observer notes growing concern over the impact of cigarette smoking in films. Anti-smoking campaigners, backed by Britain’s largest cancer charity, claim the age classification of films should be as sensitive to smoking as to offensive language and obscenities.

‘We are not arguing for a total ban on smoking in films,’ said Deborah Arnott, director of ASH. ‘But there is strong evidence of a causal link between stars’ smoking behaviour and teenage smoking.’

Some of Hollywood’s biggest names, including Zeta-Jones, Nicole Kidman and Pierce Brosnan, have been criticised after recent research showed that smoking on screen is at its most prevalent for 50 years.

Nearly 80 per cent of Hollywood films given a 12 rating feature some form of tobacco use while half of all children’s and PG-rated films depict smoking, according to a survey of 775 Hollywood films.

British Board of Film Classification guidelines now say films with a PG rating must not contain references to illegal drugs or drug use. It also forbids films with a 15 classification from depicting ‘imitable techniques’ such as emphasising fighting or easily accessible lethal weapons, like knives.

However, the guidelines contain no references to cigarettes, which kill 120,000 people each year in the UK.

‘There is surely a strong case for upgrading the age classification of a film to at least 15 if it features smoking by aspirational role models for young people, as this is clearly imitable and dangerous behaviour,’ said Arnott.

Harm reduction advocates claim that needle exchange programs reduce HIV risk by allowing injection drug users to continue to abuse drugs with clean needles, rather than sharing needles that may be infected with HIV. A new study finds that drug abuse may actually increase HIV infection risk by compromising the immune system, and thereby making it easier for HIV and other infectious disease to take hold. This new data potentially explains why drug abusers have higher rates of infection than other at risk groups and why areas with long-standing and high volume needle exchanges– such as Vancouver, British Columbia and Baltimore, Maryland– have failed to curtail the spread of HIV and hepatitis among the injection drug using population. Prevention and treatment for drug abuse, therefore, remain the only proven and scientifically sound prevention strategies against HIV and the other health risks associated with drug abuse. Needle exchange merely allows addicts to continue the very behavior that comprises their immune system and makes them more susceptible to HIV infection.

The article “Study: Jobs Don’t Prevent New Drug Offenses After Prison” is somewhat misleading and does not mention our most important findings. The former prisoners in our study were followed for only a few months after coming home to Baltimore, insufficient time to conclude that employment doesn’t prevent recidivism. Our more important, policy-relevant findings have to do with how released prisoners obtain jobs and stay off drugs.

The study documented that men and women who participated in work release programs while in prison were more likely to be employed after their release — despite poor job records, limited education, and few vocational skills — suggesting that much can be done to improve their employment prospects.

We also learned that those who made use of in-prison substance abuse treatment were less likely to take drugs after returning to Baltimore. In addition, former prisoners who received valuable housing, financial assistance, and emotional support from their families were more likely to get a job and stay off drugs.

The report’s implications are clear: expanding employment, substance abuse, and family reunification programs, both behind the prison walls and in the community, can make a difference. We encourage readers to view the full report, Baltimore Prisoners’ Experiences Returning Home.

College students who smoke contend that they are just as healthy as nonsmokers and aren’t particularly worried about the health effects of smoking, according to a University of Texas study.

The Health Behavior News Service reported July 29 that researcher Alexander V. Prokhorov, M.D., and colleagues found that many college students felt invulnerable to the health impact of smoking. “Unfortunately, most smokers commonly deny personal risk, believing that others are more likely to experience negative consequences,” he said.

For example, 94 percent of smokers reported at least one respiratory problem, such as morning cough or shortness of breath. But 90 percent also believed they had no symptoms or illness related to smoking.

However, young smokers who were contemplating quitting reported more smoking-related symptoms, and were more aware of the health risks of smoking.

The study looked at 1,283 community-college students in Texas.

Distributing nearly 3 million needles a year to drug addicts, Vancouver, Canada boasts the largest needle exchange program in North America. The program was established in 1988– 16 years ago– to prevent the spread of HIV and hepatitis C (HCV). A new study finds that co-infection with these two deadly viruses is “shocking” with 16% of study participants co-infected at the beginning of the study and 15% more becoming co-infected over the course of the study. The researchers note it took a median of 3 years for seroconversion to secondary infection.

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Jun 28 – Coinfection with Hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HIV is prevalent in a “shocking” number of young injection drug users, according to Canadian researchers.

In the June 1st issue of the Journal of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndromes, Dr. Carl L. Miller of the University of British Columbia, Vancouver and colleagues note that they sought to determine the incidence of such coinfections and to compare the socioeconomic characteristics of those infected.

The researchers used data from the Vancouver Injection Drug Users Study to identify 479 subjects aged 29 years or less. At baseline, 78 (16%) were coinfected and a further 45 (15%) became so over the course of the study.

Baseline infection was independently associated with factors including being female, being of aboriginal ancestry, being older and with the number of years of injecting.

Borrowing needles and injecting cocaine more than once a day were both among the factors associated with the time to secondary infection seroconversion. Having recently attended a methadone maintenance program was protective.

Across the categories of coinfected, monoinfected and HIV and HCV negative injection drug users, say the investigators, there were “clear trends for increasing proportions” of women, aboriginals, daily cocaine users and inhabitants of Vancouver’s 10-block injection drug use epicenter.

The researchers, who note that it took a median of 3 years for seroconversion to secondary infection, conclude that “appropriate public health interventions should be implemented immediately.”

Cocaine abusers are more likely than nonusers to suffer from HIV, hepatitis, sexually transmitted diseases, and other infections. Most of this increased incidence is the result of conditions and behaviors–for example, injecting drugs, poor nutrition, and unsafe sex–that are often are associated with drug abuse. Now, NIDA-supported investigators at the McLean Hospital Alcohol and Drug Abuse Research Center in Belmont, Massachusetts, have found that cocaine itself has a direct biological effect that may decrease an abuser’s ability to fight off infections.

Dr. John H. Halpern, along with colleagues at McLean Hospital and Harvard Medical School, found that a key immune system component, a protein called interleukin-6 (IL-6), responded less robustly to an immunological challenge in male and female abusers injected with cocaine than in those who received placebo. “When your body detects a foreign object, IL-6 helps trigger the release of a cascade of other immune system components that isolate and neutralize the threat,” explains Dr. Halpern. “If the balance of this response is

disrupted, your body cannot fight infection as effectively as it should.”
The study involved 30 participants (16 women, 14 men, ages 21-35) with a history of cocaine abuse, including at least one drug administration within the past month. The investigators placed an intravenous catheter in one arm of each participant and measured IL-6 levels. The catheter is detected as foreign by the body’s immune system and triggers an immune response. After 30 minutes, the researchers injected cocaine or saline solution (0.4 mg/kg) into each participant’s other arm; 4 hours later, they measured IL-6 levels again. In participants given saline, IL-6 levels had more than quintupled in response to the presence of the catheter, increasing from an average of less than 2 trillionths of a gram (picograms, or pg) per milliliter of blood to an average of more than 11 pg/ml. In men and women who received cocaine, however, IL-6 levels barely doubled–from less than 2 pg/ml to an average of 3.8 pg/ml.

“The findings in this study show that in people with a history of cocaine abuse, exposure to the drug establishes conditions that can lead to immediate harm,” Dr. Halpern says. “In such subjects, we found that cocaine impairs the body’s defense system for at least 4 hours. We can’t rule out the possibility that IL-6 response returns to normal shortly after that time. But even if the blunted immune response lasts only a few hours, it makes it more likely that an infection like HIV or just a common cold can take hold,” Dr. Halpern says.

“This research suggests a link between cocaine use and compromised immune response and could help explain the high incidence of infectious disease among drug abusers,” observes Dr. Steven Grant of NIDA’s Division of Treatment Research and Development. “It reminds us that the health consequences of drug abuse reach far beyond disruption of the brain systems involved in abuse and addiction.”

The findings also have significance in another context, Dr. Grant adds. “The IL-6 findings are a small but possibly significant part of a much larger study designed to gather a wide range of information on the acute and chronic effects of abused drugs on the brain, endocrine system, and immune function. This kind of discovery-based research can yield unexpected, sometimes important, insights.”

This report from The Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth (CAMY) discusses features found on alcohol web sites believed to be attractive and appealing to underage youth, as well as an assessment of how easily these sites can be accessed. In addition, this report provides public analysis of underage traffic to alcohol Web sites. Click here for an executive summary of the report and an online gallery of alcoho web sites.

Available as a PDF document. (PDF file is 4.95 MB and requires the free Adobe Acrobat Reader.)

A report by Columbia University’s Earth Institute blamed cigarettes, cheap food, and city living for contributing to millions of premature deaths from heart disease in the developing world.

“The tobacco scourge, now at epidemic levels in less-developed countries, exacts its toll in many ways, but cardiovascular deaths are its principal mode of mortality,” the report said.

The report further found that unlike the United States, few developing countries are helping people to quit smoking.

The study examined the death rates in Brazil, South Africa, China, Tatarstan, and India.

Individuals who are addicted to the nicotine in smokeless tobacco can find help on a new website called Chewfree.com, the East Carolinian reported Sept. 2.

Created by the Oregon Research Institute (ORI) and funded by the National Institute of Health, the website provides smokeless-tobacco users with information and resources. Visitors looking for help can submit an e-mail to Chewfree.com and an ORI representative will e-mail back a password that provides access to the site’s many resources.

“The neat thing about Chewfree.com is that it’s available 24 hours a day, seven days a week,” said Herb Severson, a member of the ORI.

The website provides quit plans, information on smokeless tobacco, and access to chats with other users trying to quit.

The website is also part of a study into whether the Internet can be used as a smoking-cessation tool; it hosts smokeless tobacco programs that have been effective in other formats.

The term “blunts” is street slang for a marijuana and tobacco cigar. It comes from the users’ cigar of choice, the Phillies Blunt. Tobacco is removed from the cigar and replaced with marijuana. It holds more marijuana than a typical hand-rolled joint, looks legal and burns slower. Phillies Blunts are now making flavored ones. The sweet-flavoured wraps are obviously aimed at kids and even though you have to be 18 to buy them, kids manage to get them

Patterns of HIV transmission among different classes of injection drug users have been characterized.

In a recent study from the United States, the “prevalence of HIV and associated risk behaviors were assessed among three groups of heroin users: long term injection drug users (LTIDUs), new injection drug users (NIDUs), and heroin sniffers (HSs) with no history of injection.”

“HIV seroprevalence was similar among NIDUs (13.3%) and HSs (12.7%),” while “LTIDUs had almost twice as high a level of HIV infection (24.7%),” reported D.D. Chitwood and coauthors at the University of Miami. “After including drug use and sex behavior variables in logistic regression models, both drug and sexual risk factors remained in the models.”

“Attributable risk percent (APR) from injection for HIV infection among injection drug users was estimated to be 55.7% for LTIDUs and 5.8% for NIDUs,” published data indicated. “High-risk sex behavior plays an important role in the prevalence of HIV among drug users and accounts for nearly all the infection among NIDUs.”

“Both injection and sexual risk behaviors need to be stressed in HIV prevention and intervention programs aimed at drug users,” the researchers concluded.

Chitwood and colleagues published their study in the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs (Prevalence and risk factors for HIV among sniffers, short-term injectors, and long-term injectors of heroin. J Psychoactive Drug, 2003;35(4):445-453).

But a new study published in the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs finds that sex “accounts for nearly all the infection among” new injection drug users. Likewise, nearly half of HIV infections among long term injection drug users, (44.3 percent) are not attributed to sharing dirty needles. New injection drug users, in fact, had a similar rate of HIV infection as non-injection drug users.

Studies have found that substance abuse is a significant factor for high risk sexual behavior and HIV acquisition. Needle exchange, therefore, does not eliminate the risks for HIV infection for drug abusers, but rather enables addicts to abuse the drugs that impair their judgment, thereby increasing risk for HIV infection. The debate over needle exchange distracts from the real HIV prevention issues for drug abusers, which is preventing substance abuse and treating addiction.

The number of admissions to substance abuse treatment for adolescents ages 12 to 17 increased again in 2002, continuing a ten-year trend. These data were released today in the “Treatment Episode Data Set: National Admissions to Substance Abuse Treatment Services 1992-2002” by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).

The new data show that the number of adolescents ages 12 to 17 admitted to substance abuse treatment increased 65 percent between 1992 and 2002. In 1992, adolescents represented 6 percent of all treatment admissions. By 2002, this proportion had grown to 9 percent. This report expands upon data published in May in the “Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS) Highlights 2002.”

The increase in substance abuse treatment admissions among 12 to 17 year olds was largely due to the increase in the number of admissions in this age group that reported marijuana as their primary drug of abuse. Between 1992 and 2002, the number of adolescent treatment admissions for primary marijuana abuse increased 350 percent. In 1992, 23 percent of all adolescent admissions were for primary marijuana abuse. By 2002, 63 percent of adolescent admissions reported marijuana as their primary drug.

“The youthfulness of people admitted for marijuana use shows that we need to work harder to get the message out that marijuana is a dangerous, addictive substance, SAMHSA Administrator Charles Curie said. All Americans must begin to confront drug use and drug users honestly and directly. We must discourage our youngsters from using drugs and provide those in need an opportunity for recovery by encouraging them to enter and remain in drug treatment.”

Forty-eight percent of all adolescent treatment admissions in 2002 involved the use of both alcohol and marijuana. Admissions involving these two substances increased by 86 percent between 1992 and 2002.

In 2002, more than half (53 percent) of adolescent admissions were referred to treatment through the criminal justice system. Seventeen percent were self- or individual referrals, and 11 percent were referred through schools.

The TEDS report provides detailed data on admissions to substance abuse treatment for all age groups. The 2002 data show that polydrug abuse (abuse of more than one substance) was more common among TEDS admissions than was the abuse of a single substance. Polydrug abuse was reported by 55 percent of all admissions for substance abuse treatment in 2002. Alcohol, marijuana and cocaine were the most commonly reported secondary substances. For marijuana and cocaine, more admissions reported these as secondary substances than as primary substances.

This new report provides information on the demographic and substance abuse characteristics of the 1.9 million annual admissions to treatment for abuse of alcohol and drugs in facilities that report to individual state administrative data systems. The report also includes data by state and state rates.

A short article on two Canadian surveys (self-reporting by users) showing that many epilepsy and multiple sclerosis patients self-medicate with marijuana. The author states that social and legal obstacles have hampered clinical advances in the study of cannabis sativa for medical treatment of a variety of neurological symptoms.

“Cannabis use may be occurring in these settings but there is little scientific evidence of its effectiveness for neurological symptoms. No controlled data lend support to its use for epilepsy. Small studies in multiple sclerosis have shown variable results against spasticity and no effect for tremor. A large [660 subjects] randomized trial comparing oral THC, oral cannabis extract, and placebo showed no effect on spasticity (measured by the Ashworth scale), despite participants reporting fewer spasms and less pain.

“Some of the many variables facing clinical investigators include different drug formulations (cannabis extracts, synthetic cannabinoids), uncertain dose, and multiple methods of delivery (some patients insist cannabis is effective only when smoked). Difficulties in trial design include a strong placebo effect and maintenance of double-blind status. A recurrent theme in multiple sclerosis trials is no effect on an objective primary outcome despite subjective improvement. Valid, reliable, and responsible objective measures are needed.

The Canadian survey data, Wingerchuk states, “suggest that people with recreational drug experiences are more likely to use cannabis for neurological symptom relief, and are at greater risk of becoming active or dependent users than the general population.”

Although Wingerchuk indicates that “hazards of regular cannabis use, such as persistent mood disorders and cognitive dysfunction, should be considered,” no mention is made of the many social, economic and criminal hazards associated with marijuana use.

It looks like marijuana but users say its effect is more like LSD. According  to the Drug Enforcement Agency it’s use is growing in popularity among young adults. It’s called Salvia Divinorum and when smoked or chewed, it can pack a psychedelic wallop.

An herb grown in Mexico, Salvia is easily accessible on the internet or at several head shops around the metro area. Jeannette Grafeman, a clerk at a store that sells Salvia says you can buy it in many different forms. “You can smoke it or chew it. Some people buy it in liquid form and drop it on their regular tobacco,” says Grafeman.

Salvia is on the DEA’s watch list. They call it a drug of concern. And they were more than just concerned in St. Peters.

“We were having some problems at the malls with some assaults and some other juvenile issues and some of those issues had to do with kids that were using salvia,” says St. Peters police captain Jeff Finkelstein.

Captain Finklestein says he can’t say for sure that the assaults were as a result of the Salvia, but “The word to us was that kids were hallucinating. Anytime that you have anybody hallucinating especially kids under 18, it was something that really concerned us,” says Finkelstein.

So the Police took the problem to city officials who wanted to make the sale of Salvia illegal in St. Peters.

“But our city attorney informed us that this product is on the DEA’s watch list but has not been banned as an illegal substance. So the only thing the city could do was restrict the age with which the product can be sold” says St. Peters Alderman Jerry Hollingsworth.

In January of last year St. Peters became the first city in the nation to place a restriction on Salvia. It cannot be sold to anyone under the age of 18.

“The vote was unanimous as it always is when it comes to dealing with protecting children,” says Hollingsworth.

Since Salvia is legal elsewhere, it’s hard to know if the ordinance in St. Peters is having an affect but St. Peters police tell us they’re getting fewer complaints about Salvia users. Jerry Hollingsworth doesn’t want to stop there. He wants action on the state level and then on the Federal level.

The question of whether a clinically significant marijuana (cannabis) withdrawal syndrome exists remains controversial. In spite of the mounting clinical and preclinical evidence suggesting that such a syndrome exists (Beardsley et al., 1986; Budney et al., 2001; Holson et al., 1989; Huestis et al., 2001), the DSM-IV does not include marijuana withdrawal as a diagnostic category. The clinical syndrome has been characterized by restlessness, anorexia, irritability and insomnia that begin less than 24 hours after discontinuation of marijuana, peak in intensity on days 2 to 4, and last for seven to 10 days (Budney et al., 1999; Haney et al., 1999; Mendelson et al., 1984).

The question of whether this syndrome is clinically significant is important, not only because marijuana is the most commonly used illicit drug in the United States (Johnston et al., 2001), but also because marijuana has been shown to produce dependence at rates comparable to other drugs of abuse (Kandel et al., 1997; Kessler et al., 1994) and because relapse rates among individuals seeking treatment for marijuana dependence are similar to those with other drugs of abuse (Budney et al., 1998; Stephens et al., 1993). Furthermore, many violent crimes are committed by individuals undergoing withdrawal from drugs of abuse, including marijuana (Kouri et al., 1997; Peters and Kearns, 1992). If a clinically significant marijuana withdrawal syndrome does exist, the omission of this syndrome from the DSM-IV might contribute to the perception that behavioral or pharmacological treatment regimens for marijuana dependence are not necessary.

We conducted two studies in our laboratory to determine whether abstinence from marijuana after long-term use results in withdrawal symptoms, to identify those symptoms and to quantify their severity (Kouri and Pope, 2000; Kouri et al., 1999). The first study focused specifically on whether abrupt discontinuation of marijuana following chronic use results in changes in aggressive behavior (Kouri et al., 1999).

To measure aggressive behavior, we used the Point Subtraction Aggression Paradigm (PSAP). This computer test has been used to detect changes in aggressive responses following acute administration of a number of drugs, and its external validity has been demonstrated in a number of studies of male and female parolees with histories of violent behavior (Cherek and Lane, 1999; Cherek et al., 1996).

Subjects in our study were long-term heavy users of marijuana who reported a history of at least 5,000 separate episodes of marijuana use in their lifetime (the equivalent to smoking once per day for 13.7 years), were smoking at least once daily at the time of recruitment and met DSM-IV criteria for marijuana dependence without meeting criteria for a current Axis I disorder. Subjects were excluded if they reported that they had used another class of drugs more than 100 times in their lifetimes or had consumed more than five alcoholic drinks per day continuously for one month or more in their lifetimes. The controls were composed of two groups: 1) individuals who had not smoked marijuana more than 50 times in their lives and had not smoked more than once per month in the last year and 2) individuals who had formerly smoked marijuana on a daily basis but who had not smoked more than once per week during the last three months. The rationale for using infrequent or former smokers rather than marijuana-naive subjects as controls was to minimize possible confounding variables that might differentiate individuals who had never tried marijuana from those who had. We based this decision on data from our laboratory demonstrating that heavy marijuana users do not differ from occasional users in a wide range of demographic and psychiatric measures (Kouri et al., 1995).

During the study, subjects were required to abstain from smoking marijuana and using any other drugs for 28 consecutive days. To verify abstinence, subjects had to come to the laboratory every day to provide supervised urine samples that we analyzed quantitatively for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) metabolites. We measured aggressive responses with the PSAP on study days 0 (before abstinence), 1 (after 24 hours of abstinence), 3, 7 and 28.

Subjects were told they would be playing a computer game against an anonymous same-sex subject from the study. In fact, however, this second subject was actually a computer. During the course of each 20-minute computer session, subjects had the option of pressing one of two buttons on the PSAP response panel (labelled “A” or “B”). Pressing button A resulted in the accumulation of points that were exchanged for money at the end of the study. Pressing this button was defined as a non-aggressive response. By pressing button B, subjects could subtract points from the fictitious opponent. Points taken from the opponent, however, were not added to the subject’s counter, and pressing button B was defined as an aggressive response. Aggressive responding was provoked by random subtractions of the subject’s points, which were attributed to the fictitious opponent.

On study day 0 (before marijuana abstinence) and study day 1 (24 hours of marijuana abstinence), the current marijuana users did not differ from past heavy users or light users in the number of aggressive or non-aggressive responses they made. However, current marijuana users were significantly more aggressive on days 3 and 7 of marijuana abstinence compared to their pre-withdrawal levels of aggression and compared to the controls. By day 28, the number of aggressive responses from the current marijuana users was not different from their pre-withdrawal baseline levels or the controls (Figure). These data demonstrate that abstinence from marijuana after chronic use is associated with increases in aggressive responding following provocation. Specifically, during the first week of abstinence, current marijuana users displayed levels of aggression that were significantly higher than before abstinence and higher than the levels displayed by matched controls. Interestingly, the increases in aggressive responding followed a specific time course and then returned to pre-withdrawal levels after 28 days of abstinence. The transient nature of these changes is consistent with other reports of marijuana withdrawal.

The second study was designed to further characterize symptoms of marijuana withdrawal and to quantify their magnitude (Kouri and Pope, 2000). We used the same study entry criteria as in the first study and subjects were required to come to the laboratory every day to provide urine samples and to fill out a daily diary.

The items assessed in the daily diaries were: mood, appetite, sleep, anxiety, irritability, physical tension or agitation, physical symptoms, ability to concentrate, desire to use marijuana, and desire to resume using marijuana at the end of the study. The questions were presented on a 10-point Likert scale with the qualifiers “extremely low” at the zero end of the scale and “extremely high” at the 10-point end of the scale. We obtained pre-withdrawal baseline levels for all of the diary items via a personal interview with each subject before the beginning of the withdrawal period.

Thirty current marijuana users and 30 controls (16 former heavy users and 14 light users) participated in the study. Before the beginning of the abstinence period, the current marijuana users were not different from the former users or the light users on any of the items assessed in the diaries except for the ability to concentrate item. The current users reported a lower ability to concentrate than the controls. Interestingly, the former heavy users were not different from the light users on any of the diary scores during the course of the study. In contrast, the current users reported increases in irritability, anxiety, physical tension and physical symptoms, and decreases in mood and appetite starting on day 1 and peaking between days 7 and 10 of marijuana abstinence.

It is important to note that although, as a group, the current marijuana users experienced an increase in withdrawal symptoms compared to the controls, only 60% of the subjects in the current users group reported a change in symptoms of at least three points in magnitude. The fact that 40% of subjects who had used marijuana regularly for an average of 22 years did not report experiencing severe withdrawal symptoms during abstinence might suggest that physical dependence on marijuana is not as strong as that observed with other drugs of abuse. This may be due, at least in part, to the long half-life of THC. However, many subjects reported that when trying to remain abstinent in the past, the presence of withdrawal symptoms had played an important role in their relapse. Thus, alleviation of abstinence symptoms may contribute to the maintenance of daily marijuana use in chronic users.

Another significant finding is that after 28 days of marijuana abstinence, all of the symptoms returned to pre-withdrawal levels except for irritability and physical tension. It is possible that these two symptoms remained slightly elevated because they represented a premorbid characteristic of the current users and were not a result of marijuana withdrawal. If this is the case, the fact that the former users did not have elevated scores on these two items may reflect a characteristic that potentially differentiates individuals with a history of heavy marijuana use who have successfully stopped from individuals who continue to smoke regularly.

Taken together, the data from these two studies provide further evidence of the existence of a marijuana withdrawal syndrome. An important aspect of both of our studies is that we used two control groups: 1) former heavy marijuana users and 2) individuals who had rarely smoked marijuana during their lives.

It is noteworthy that these control groups were indistinguishable from one another in diary scores or number of aggressive responses on the PSAP, whereas both were significantly distinguishable from the current marijuana users. This observation argues that the elevated diary scores and aggressive responses of the current marijuana users were attributable to marijuana withdrawal, rather than a mere history of marijuana use or some other aspect of subject selection or study design. Future studies should focus not on whether a marijuana withdrawal syndrome exists but rather on determining the clinical significance of this syndrome and the role withdrawal symptoms play in perpetuating marijuana use.

Acknowledgement
These studies were supported by NIDA grants DA10346, DA03994, DA00343. Dr. Kouri is assistant profesor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Mass.
References
Beardsley PM, Balster RL, Harris LS (1986), Dependence on tetrahydrocannabinol in rhesus monkeys. J Pharmacol Exp Ther

Today, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) released the Florida Medical Examiners Commission’s Report on Drugs Identified in Deceased Persons. The report contains information compiled from autopsies performed by medical examiners across the state in 2003. During that period there were approximately 170,000 deaths. According to the report, 6,767 individuals examined had drugs in the system.

Medical Examiners collected information on the following drugs: Ethyl Alcohol, Amphetamines, Methamphetamines, MDMA (Ecstasy), MDA, MDEA, Alprazolam, Diazepam, Flunitrazepam (Rohypnol), other Benzodiazepines, Cannabinoids, Carisoprodol/Meprobamate, Cocaine, GHB, Inhalants, Ketamine, Fentanyl, Heroin, Hydrocodone, Hydromorphone, Meperidine, Methadone, Morphine, Oxycodone, Propoxyphene, Tramadol, and Phencyclidine (PCP).

The report reveals a decrease in the incidences of Heroin in 2003 when compared with 2002. This decrease includes cases in which the drug levels found during the exams were both lethal and non-lethal. In addition, the report indicates the three most frequently occurring drugs found in decedents were Ethyl Alcohol (3,467), all Benzodiazepines (1,794), and Cocaine (1,614). The drugs that caused the most deaths were Cocaine, all Benzodiazepines, Methadone, Oxycodone, Ethyl Alcohol, Heroin, Alprazolam, and Morphine.

The three drugs that were the most lethal, meaning more than 50 percent of the deaths were caused by the drug when the drug was found, were Heroin (88 percent), Fentanyl (63 percent), and Methadone (60 percent). The report also reveals that excluding newly tracked prescription drugs, prescription drugs of Benzodiazepines, Hydrocodone, Methadone, and Oxycodone continued to be found more often than illicit drugs in both lethal (60 percent) and non-lethal (55 percent) levels during 2003.

“This report shows that with few exceptions, both illicit and prescription drugs persist in being a continuing and increasing danger to the citizens of the State of Florida,” said FDLE Commissioner Guy Tunnell. “While heroin deaths have decreased over the past year, most of the other illicit and prescription drug deaths remain at an alarming level for the year, although decreases are noted during the second half of the year.”

“The results from this report are evidence of the immense danger associated with drug abuse and more specifically prescription drug abuse,” said Jim McDonough, Director of the Florida Office of Drug Control. “Far too many Floridians are dying from prescription drugs. To address this problem Florida will continue to strengthen its efforts in the areas of prevention, treatment, and law enforcement in order to reduce the unacceptable amount of deaths that result from the abuse of prescription drugs.”

When it comes to new legislation, David Blunkett’s knee jerks so fast and often that his guide dog might need to wear a riot helmet.
Franz Kafka is alive and well and hiding somewhere in David Blunkett’s office 11 Aug 2004. It is a fair bet that if we had nailed some genuine al-Qaeda operatives, we would have heard about it.
Source: The Times; 13th August 2004

We all know that all medicines have their origins in plant, animal and mineral matter. Marijuana is an extremely potent plant with 483 compounds and not surprisingly, some of them have already been developed for therapeutic use. Once developed they are given specific names, like Dronabinol or Nabilone. No doubt there will be a new name for any compound in marijuana that is found to be useful for treating neuropathic pain. Maybe, scientists will ultimately find that there are 20 or 30 compounds in marijuana that can be isolated, replicated, and used to treat a variety of ailments. In the meantime, smoking a joint to address one symptom is like taking aspirin, guaifenisin, antibiotics, insulin, taxol and paxil all together to treat a headache.

Certain compounds in marijuana may help stifle an overactive immune-system response that can worsen multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative conditions without causing the drug’s high, preliminary study findings suggest. “These are the compounds of the plant that are very exciting,” said study author Dr. Cecilia Hillard, an associate professor of pharmacology at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee.

Hillard and colleagues studied rat microglia cells, which are immune cells in the brain. When the brain or spinal cord experiences an infection or sustains an injury, these cells flock to the affected area to mop up debris from dead tissue. However, they also can cause the death of nerve cells by prompting excessive inflammation. “Microglia are like a two-edged sword,” Hillard said. “When they’re overactive, they make a whole bunch of nasty things that wind up killing cells like neurons.” Doctors are seeking ways to curb this immune-system response, which can also worsen stroke, Alzheimer’s disease and AIDS-related dementia.

Marijuana is believed to help and some patients smoke it for this purpose. But the problem is that the drug has mind-altering effects and can weaken immunity, which could pose a risk to AIDS patients and others who already have impaired immune systems. Marijuana’s actions are widely credited to its most well-known ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). In the new study, the researchers found that THC and two other compounds, CBD and CBN, markedly inhibited the proliferation of rat microglia cells in the lab. But unlike THC, CBD and CBN do not bind to certain cellular receptors that are known to cause the unwanted side effects, Hillard reported Sunday at the annual Experimental Biology meeting. The findings raise the possibility that doctors may one day give patients these isolated compounds to help ease neurodegenerative conditions involving overactive microglia, but much more research is needed first, she said. “These chemicals would presumably slow down this overactive process, so if you could treat a person with this overactive system, you might be able to reduce the neurotoxicity,” Hillard said. “Doctors need to know that cannabinoids that come from marijuana are going to have effects on immune cells,” Hillard said. And they should warn patients with compromised immune systems that smoking marijuana for medicinal purposes may impair immune function, she said.

WA has one of Australia’s highest rates of illicit drug use. The most common drug was cannabis which was used reularly by 16.5 per cent of people aged 16-24. WA also had the biggest number of injecting drug users – almost 20,000 people. After cannabis the drugs most commonly used by young people were amphetamines (8 per cent) and ecstasy (7 per cent) – BUT THE USE OF HEROIN WAS NEGLIGIBLE! ( Two things here: So why would anyone want to set up a Heroin Clinic in WA ?  Prohibition works, albeit through natural drought, with the very hard work of our Federal Police. Illicit drugs were responsible for one per cent of deaths in WA in 2001 and drug-related visits to Perth hospital emergency departments more than doubled from 1993 to 1998.

The one per cent of deaths from illicit drugs is very serious because that means that, contrary to tobacco harm, 36 years of life is lost for each deceased person.

Drugs such as cannabis, heroin and amphetamines cost the State $610 million a year, according to a new WA Health Dept and Drug and Alcohol Office report. So how did we get to be in this shocking mess? I know that it is through an unholy inter-sectoral Partnership with all Health, Crime Research, Law Enforcement and Epidemiology. The evidence of deception and Public Health corruption lies within the 1997 NDS Evaluation by Single and Rohle. At a cost of over $20 million to Australian taxpayers nearly 32 million needles were distributed in “That’s not to say the problem is limited to the United States or North America,” he added. “It’s a problem found in a number of countries around the world.”