Latest News
Release Helpline saved – for the moment!
Friday, 18 March 2011
Release would like to thank everyone for their support during this difficult time. We are pleased to say that the funding crisis facing our national helpline has abated for the moment and we are able to continue to provide this service for the next few months, this is largely due to a grant from the Department of Health, Financial Assistance Fund. However we still need your support to ensure the helpline continues into the future. If you would like to set up a regular donation please visit our Donate pages.
If you have any fundraising ideas please contact keith@release.org.uk. Please remember all support goes to helping some of the most marginalised and disenfranchised people in our communities.
Why did Nick Clegg cross the road? Because he pledged not to do so…
Thursday, 16 December 2010
It is a peculiar feature of modern politicians how the desire to make a change can be totally reversed once the power to make that change is granted. There has been much written today on just such an example. Bob Ainsworth has followed in the footsteps of former Minister Mo Mowlam by calling for the legalisation of certain drugs.
Perhaps it is too harsh to suggest that these two politicians compromised their personal views when in a position to suggest a change. Perhaps it would be better to applaud their bravery for voicing their opinions on what is after all a controversial subject. This is not a purely British trend either. Earlier this week the former President of Poland Aleksander Kwasniewski called for the liberalization of drugs policy Poland.
The main basis for the arguments is the realization that our current framework empowers the wrong people. In Mr. Ainsworth’s own words “We must take the trade away from organized criminals and hand it to the control of doctors and pharmacists”. It must be remembered that Mr. Ainsworth has formed this view in the context of his experience as a Minister responsible for drugs policy. A man who has seen the drug wars in Afghanistan and the impact the black market trading has on local communities.
It would be insulting to think that politicians do not see the benefits and the basic logic behind an evidenced based framework. What is equally patronising is the view that the public would not also see the benefits of such an approach. We can but hope that someone will be brave enough to disregard the internal political pressure and have faith that speaking their mind will not constitute political suicide.
This is of course all very promising for those campaigning for a more compassionate, evidence based legal framework for the regulation for drugs. But it is at the same time frustrating that those in the position to make changes cower away from making such bold statements. It is hard not to look at the current drugs minister James Brokenshire MP without wondering what he’s really thinking…
Drug strategy could put more people at risk
Wednesday, 08 December 2010
Those of us in the drug policy field, and others with an interest in fair and effective social policy, are currently digesting the contents of the government's new drug strategy, released today.
The 26 page document, as well as the 22-page impact assessment contains a lot of information, but the cynics among us may be tempted to discern all that one needs from the title alone: "Drug Strategy 2010 Reducing Demand, Restricting Supply, Building Recovery: Supporting People to Live a Drug Free Life".
Which begs the question, what will the support be for people who don't lead a drug-free life?
The government openly states that it is not interested in harm reduction;
"A fundamental difference between this strategy and those that have gone before is that instead of focusing primarily on reducing the harms caused by drug misuse, our approach will be to go much further and offer every support for people to choose recovery as an achievable way out of dependency."
The implication being that if you do not, or cannot choose recovery, you will not meet the criteria. But there are other choices that individuals can take, which benefit them and their community, such as moving from injecting to inhaling drugs. If drug services receive 'funding on results' however, as is proposed, these individuals are less likely to come forward for help. Colin Stewart who runs the Release drugs helpline notes that, "the absence of measures to encourage reducing the harms that drugs cause will inevitably lead to a rise in the number of people contacting Release for help instead. With the drugs helpline already under serious threat from closure through lack of funds, this is even more worrying."
It is of course important that those who feel able to come off drugs completely and maintain an abstinent lifestyle receive quality support; and much more funding is required for this to be achieved. However, the 'one-size fits all' approach to drug use that informs this government strategy, is likely to result in more people being exposed to greater risks and not receiving the support that they actually need.
This time the Helpline needs you
Tuesday, 30 November 2010
Iconic. Essential. Comforting. Unique. Indispensable. It doesn't really matter what word you associate with the Release Helpline.
The fact is, as all good helplines should, it helps thousands of people every year with their drug related problems. From expert legal advice to in-depth information on opiates, the Release helpline has been a fundamental source of assistance and advice to generations of people since it began in 1967.
As a confidential service, the majority of our callers remain anonymous to us - we don't even ask for their name - but every so often we do get to hear how our work is appreciated and the results it achieves. A recent email from a caller comments,
"It is just so good to find people who know what they are talking about...so I really want to thank you for such terrific help which produced instant results-results which my friend had been unable to get in the past 3 months."
But all good services come at a price and without new funding the Helpline cannot continue. We are looking everywhere for new support and have set up a facebook cause to help Save the Helpline. It is really important to us that Release is able to maintain the Helpline service that has defined it for generations.
Join the cause, or donate directly to Release if you feel you can.
Foil finally gets the OK
Thursday, 18 November 2010
The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) has delivered its report to the Home Office on the distribution of foil as an intervention to reduce the harms of injecting heroin.
The provision of foil has numerous benefits for injecting drug users, but its distribution by drug intervention agencies is technically an illegal activity. In its report the ACMD recognises that there is no evidence of harmful effects of the provision of foil and the potential benefits include; a decrease in blood borne viruses, increase in contact with drug service workers and lowering the risk of overdose.
In his letter to the Home Secretary Theresa May MP, and to the Health Secretary Andrew Lansley MP, Professor Les Iversen Interim Chair of the ACMD concludes that, 'the balance of benefit favours exempting foil from Section 9A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.'
The government ought now to accept the recommendations of its advisory body and make the necessary amendments to the Misuse of Drugs Act as soon as possible.
When is a consultation not a consultation?
Tuesday, 05 October 2010
With a brand new government comes a brand new drug strategy; an opportunity to seek the views of the public, listen to expert advice and formulate new policies based on extensive consultation. Or so one would hope. But the 'consultation process' launched by the coalition government was narrow in scope, thin on policy and short on timing. Never ones to be disheartened, Release submitted its comprehensive response to the government's half-hearted attempt at a strategy consultation.
While Release welcomed the proposal to take a ‘holistic approach with drug issues being assessed and tackled alongside other issues', this was clearly undermined by the government's insistence that recovery focus on abstinence-based treatment at the expense of harm-reduction. (Tellingly the term 'harm-reduction' failed to appear even once in their document.)
Equally disappointing was that consideration of other major factors linked to drug policy, such as the criminalisation of young people and the violence of the illegal market, was also absent from the government's consultation. It seems that there is no desire on their part to encourage a public debate of these issues, despite the appetite for it strengthening.
Release's response to the drug strategy consultation urges the government to avoid tinkering with a failing approach and to look instead at how wide-ranging reforms may be able to genuinely improve drug policy for the benefit of individuals and communities worldwide.
Legal Highs- Government launches the ‘Crazy Chemist’
Friday, 17 September 2010
The government today launched its new campaign to spread awareness of the risks associated with ‘legal highs’, a topic that has occupied considerable news coverage over the last year. Ministers have also announced plans to introduce legal measures centred on a new ‘temporary banning power’ in the current session of parliament, which will entail the amendment of the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act.
The information campaign, which comprises posters, cards and materials on the government’s Frank website, features an individual of shaven head and psychotic appearance, identified as ‘The Crazy Chemist’, who is said to be in need of ‘human lab rats.’ The figure is intended as a humorous yet informative way of representing the risks associated with the purchase and consumption of so-called ‘legal highs’. It has not, however, been well-received by the Royal Society of Chemistry, which spoke of the ‘appalling image’ of the Crazy Chemist, lambasting it as a ‘lazy stereotype of the chemist as unhinged scientist.’
Like all stereotypes, the figure is indeed ‘lazy’ in the sense that reduces complexity to one simple, easy-to-grasp idea. This stereotype is a development of the figure of the ‘mad scientist’, combining it with notions of the drug dealer as ruthless capitalist. The campaign sets out to convey the message that ‘legal highs’ are in fact untested chemicals which can have harmful consequences, and may very well include in their make-up chemicals which are already illegal. As previously reported by Release, this is indeed the case.
What remains highly questionable, however, is whether this campaign will prove at all successful in preventing their use. Young consumers of drugs, legal or otherwise, are often much more sophisticated in their understanding of the issues of risk and health than governments credit. As a consequence, the appeal to a campaign which is frankly infantile in its messaging is unlikely to be effective. One can quite readily imagine the ‘Crazy Chemist’ figure being turned into an icon along the lines of the film ‘Reefer Madness’ or the infamous ‘Heroin Screws You Up’ imagery of the 1980s.
During last week’s parliamentary debate on ‘legal highs’, labour MP Alan Campbell raised the subject of people using drugs even when they possess information regarding risk. James Brokenshire MP, for the government, replied that he did not believe people do know the risks, and there lay the problem. Repeated reference was made to the government ‘message’ regarding the illegality and harmfulness of drug use. While of course Release supports the provision of accurate information regarding drugs and their use, the messaging found in today’s campaign is very unsophisticated, and reminiscent of propaganda rather than education. The fact is that ‘legal highs’ are an opportunistic move made on an unregulated market composed largely of people who do wish to take drugs, many of them being educated consumers who negotiate risk as part of their lifestyle. The real problem facing 21st century governments is how to introduce some genuinely effective means of regulating that market. Today’s events show few signs that they are as yet prepared to face this difficult fact.
New research shows Drug Consumption Rooms help people into treatment
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
Results from research carried out by the British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, based at St Paul’s Hospital in Vancouver, Canada, have shown that supervised injection facilities help people enter into addiction treatment and assist in the subsequent stopping of injecting. The study monitored 1090 clients who visited the city’s Insite clinic over a three-year period. Critics of these facilities, where drug users can inject drugs bought on the street in a safer, medically supervised setting, have argued that such measures could delay entry into drug treatment by assisting the continuation of illicit drug use. The research, however, indicates that this is not the case.
Of the clients who had used the Insite facility over the last three years, 73% accessed addiction services, a figure higher than that amongst the general population of injection drug users. While methadone and other substitution treatments are known to be associated with the cessation of drug use, additional factors identified by the study as contributing to cessation included regular attendance at the supervised injection facility (usually known as Drug Consumption Rooms in the UK), and contact with counselling services based at the facility.
Dr Julio Montaner, who is Director the Centre of Excellence and President of the International AIDS Society, stated that, “Many people benefit from supervised injection facilities, which have been shown to increase addiction treatment, reduce rates of crime and incidence of HIV, prevent drug overdoses, and now help people who use drugs quit injecting.”
While Drug Consumption Rooms remain controversial in the UK, they provide a range of benefits to drug users, including reduction of overdose, monitoring of general health, provision of counselling and advice services, in addition to contributing to community life by reducing the crime and nuisance often associated with street drug use. Access to treatment services is another objective, which, as the new Canadian study shows, the facilities are able to realize. Several EU countries offer Drug Consumption Rooms to what is often a highly marginalized group of clients, including Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands. There are currently approximately 60 such facilities in 36 European cities.
The Abstract for the new Canadian research is available at the following link:
Hillary Clinton speaks of 'insurgency' in Mexico
Thursday, 09 September 2010
American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has spoken of the present drug wars in Mexico as representing an escalation into ‘insurgency’, and drawn parallels between it and the Colombian conflict of two decades ago. That resulted in the deployment of the notorious ‘Plan Colombia’, with US troops stationed in the country and working in tandem with the Colombian armed forces. The intervention has not been well received in Mexican political circles, sparking fears that the US has plans to use equivalent measures—a ‘Plan Mexico’—in the troubled country across its southern border.
The US involvement so far is complex and multi-faceted. The cocaine traffic from the Andean region goes north across Mexico to feed the considerable appetite of consumers in American cities. Meanwhile, the weapons that fire the Mexican gang-conflicts head south across the border from those same US cities. It is estimated that 250-300 illegal firearms cross the border every day from the US, arming the Mexican organised crime groups fighting for control of the drug trade. Senator Clinton has, to her credit, previously acknowledged these examples of American complicity in the causes of the problem. Nonetheless, financial support from her government goes overwhelmingly to the Mexican armed forces, amongst whom regard for human rights is scant and a culture of impunity prevails, as reported by Human Rights Watch [1]. President Calderon’s war with the cocaine trade, which has cost some 28,000 lives since it began in 2006 (the figure has risen by an appalling 5,000 since Release News reported in May this year), has been massively militarized with the encouragement and funding of its Superpower southern neighbour.
Yet the Mexicans draw the line at the involvement of US forces on Mexican soil. Many see their country as the site of a war that is armed and funded by the US, and stimulated by its insatiable demand for drugs. It is an acute case of what happens when trade in an immensely valuable consumer product is not regulated; while legal controls appeal to many people’s sense of what is right, the problem is that when these ‘controls’ are ineffective (owing to the existence of a widespread and enduring demand), the state effectively abdicates control and hands it over to gangsters. This is what is happening in Mexico; not an insurgency, with political objectives, but gang wars in which the state is caught up. Gangsters will always make use of insurgency, but possess no political goals of their own beyond the making of large profits. There is a growing appetite for legislative change in Mexico and in south and central America; the US too should reconsider its commitment to a war that is now further from reaching its objectives than when first declared, a long and bloody century ago.
Alcohol, culture and regulation
Thursday, 09 September 2010
The recent publication of the results of a survey commissioned by the charity Drinkaware has fuelled an already intense debate over the binge drinking amongst Britain’s youth and the regulation of alcohol. The survey, carried out by market researchers ICM, questioned 2,000 people between the ages of 18 and 24. It found that 36% of young adults go out with the express intention of getting drunk, 75% ‘regret their behaviour’, which includes being unaware of how they got home (27%), having a one night stand ((18%) and ‘ending up’ in hospital (3%). There is little methodological information available about this research, but it feeds into growing anxiety over drinking practices of UK citizens.
Drinkaware is a charity established in 2007, and sets out to enable individuals to make informed decision regarding their alcohol intake, and ‘challenge the acceptability of drunkenness’. It is supported chiefly by the drinks industry itself. The charity’s campaign includes the placing of ‘signage’ in pubs, clubs and restaurants in the form of posters, beer mats etc. Its website contains bite-sized chunks of information, much of which is practical and useful so far as it goes: eat a meal before drinking, pace your consumption, look after your mates, etc.
According to academic research, educational approaches aimed at individuals are less effective than supply-side measures. The coalition government, indeed, is currently looking at options for regulating supply: it is planning legislation to stop supermarkets selling below-cost alcohol, undertaking a review of taxing and prices, and contemplating tougher licensing for premises. Critics maintain that it remains, however, too close to the industry, and unwilling to take effective measures.
A little historical context shows that alcohol use has risen steadily since the 1940s, with the growth of the consumer society. It is deeply ingrained in British culture, and though the nation consumes less than some other EU states, it is the binge mode of consumption that is seen as causing the problems. While consumption fell last year, this is likely to be only as a result of the recession. The Scottish National Party wants to bite the proverbial bullet, and set a minimum price of 45p per unit; perhaps predictably, the move has garnered no political support, though it has plenty from charities, academics and clinicians. While regulation by pricing is likely to be effective, it would require a fine balance to avoid stimulating the type of illicit market that already supplies other, presently illicit intoxicants.
In the long run, Drinkaware is surely right that changes in the culture of alcohol use are going to be necessary in order to modify people’s style of use of these substances. But it is up against some powerful forces. At present, the alcohol trade spends around £800 million per year on advertising its products. Academic research [i] has revealed that the industry targets young people as potential recruits to alcohol, rather than merely trying to get them to change brands as it claims. Sophisticated marketing on TV and the WWW uses notions of sexual attractiveness, masculinity, femininity, and group ‘belonging’ to influence its young targets, despite the fact that these themes are explicitly forbidden by the voluntary code to which they are signed up.
Despite the government’s expressions of intent, then, and Drinkaware’s educational efforts, the powerful and politically well-connected alcohol lobby defends its position, and its revenue contributes substantially to the treasury. This intimate relationship [ii] does not bode well for the kind of regulatory change that would really make an impact on the present situation.
[i] http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.b5650.full
[ii] http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.b5659.full
Rise in UK drug-related deaths
Thursday, 26 August 2010
A recently released report by the National Programme on Substance Abuse Deaths (np-SAD) shows a worrying increase in the number of drug-related deaths in the UK. The figures show that deaths in the UK have risen by 12% to 2182 with heroin and morphine accounting for 52.9% of the deaths, up from 45.3% in 2008. Furthermore, the report singles out accidental overdoses as the main cause of mortality with 4 out of 5 of the deaths being attributed to this.
The report compiled by information gathered from coroners across the UK showed that drug related deaths in England last year totalled 1524, up from 1374 in 2008. The figures from Scotland and Wales also show an increase in the number of drug related deaths, with the 102 deaths in Wales, up from 65 in 2008. The figures from Scotland stayed broadly the same, with a slight increase to 479 from 477. A breakdown of the report also shows that more than 3 / 4 of the deaths were of men, while almost 2 /3 of the deaths were of people aged 25-44. The report also highlighted a drop in the number of deaths from cocaine, ecstasy and amphetamines, attributing this drop to the increasing use of “legal highs”.
This rise is undoubtedly worrying and highlights that there is still too little effective treatment and adequate services allocated to the drug user community. This continued increase in the levels of drug related deaths can be avoided with increased investment with the necessary emphasis placed on drug treatment and drug rehabilitation and is something the current government should be actively pursuing in light of this report. Release is concerned that the much heralded push towards accelerated abstinence while well intentioned may drive up heroin fatalities further. (Morphine overdoses are, for the great majority heroin fatalities as the drug is identified post mortem as morphine, heroin’s main metabolite.)
British Crime Survey highlights latest drug use trends
Wednesday, 28 July 2010
The Home Office has published the results of its latest research into
The new report estimates that, in 2009/10, some 8.6% of the population aged 16-59 (nearly 3 million people) used illicit drugs in the past year. About 3.1% of these, meanwhile, or around 1 million people in the same age range, used Class A drugs in this timeframe. Approximately 2.2 million adults used cannabis in past year, and 0.8 million used cocaine. The two drugs were the most widely used illegal substances. These overall figures show a considerable decline since the BCS began to measure drug use, falling to 8.6% from a figure of 11.1% in 1996. The drop in the figures centres on the reduction in cannabis use that has taken place over the past 5 years. However, it should be noted that Class A drug use is at similar levels—down to 2.4% from 2.7% in 1996. This small difference is not statistically significant (that is, it falls within the margins of error of the survey.)
This general stability in Class A usage covers some notable detailed trends: the decline in the fashionability and use of Ecstasy and (especially) LSD seems to have been matched by the rise of cocaine, the use of which climbed from 1.4% for those reporting past-year use of the drug in 1996 to an equivalent figure of 5.6% in 2009/10 (falling from a peak of 6.6% last year).
These trends must be viewed with caution for a number of reasons. While politicians understandably like to interpret falls as the result of their own policies, the fashions and styles of global and local youth culture are probably much more significant in the changing rates and forms of usage. Perhaps more importantly, the methodology of the survey that collects the information itself biases the results in certain ways, mainly because it is collected by visits to household residents, a process that excludes many of those people most involved in drug use and drug cultures: the homeless, and those engaged intensively in getting and taking drugs and who are unlikely to be easily located by research personnel. Finally, it depends upon the obtaining of honest answers about an illegal activity subject to strong state disapproval. This again tends to exclude those most involved with drugs; the overall results are therefore likely to powerfully underestimate drug use.
Naphyrone controlled as Class B drug
Friday, 23 July 2010
As of the 23rd July 2010 Naphyrone or NRG-1 will be classified as a Class B controlled drug. This means it will be subject to the same restrictions as all other Class B drugs, such as cannabis.
It is now illegal to possess, produce, supply or intend to supply Naphyrone. These offences can carry punishments including long custodial sentences and substantial fines. The type of sentence imposed will vary if the offence is being prosecuted in the Magistrate’s court (summary) or in the Crown Court (indictment). A full break down of the range of punishments can be found here.
These changes are given force by a Statutory Instrument (1833/2010) which amends the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 by adding the chemical make up of Naphyrone to the list of compounds that are regulated.
If you have any queries or concerns relating to this change in the law please contact our helpline on 0845 4500 215 or email ask@release.org.uk
Chairman of the Bar highlights evidence for decriminalisation of drug use
Friday, 16 July 2010
Nick Green QC is chairman of the Bar Council, the professional organisation of barristers in the UK. Writing in the organisation’s magazine this month, Green highlighted that a growing body of evidence supports the proposition that decriminalisation can have a number of positive consequences for drugs users and society. He lists the freeing up of police resources, the reduction of crime and the revolving door of imprisonment as peace dividends of ending the drug war, alongside improved public health. Noting that much of the mass media are given to moralising gestures and the whipping up of panic when it comes to drugs, he argues that the Bar Council, made up of lawyers and counting most judges amongst its ex-members, is in a good position to provide a rational argument, being familiar with both sides of the drug policy argument.
Mr Green’s intervention represents another profession speaking out in support of a rational approach to drug law reform at a time when the tide appears to be turning away from the prohibitionist model that was tried throughout the twentieth century, failed to suppress the flow of illegal drugs and added its own side-effects (including an entrenched criminal market and a global epidemic of injection-driven HIV) to those of the drug problems it was supposed to prevent.
International AIDS Conference stimulates call for drug law reform
Thursday, 15 July 2010
The International AIDS conference is held next week (18-23 July) in Vienna, and has focussed attention around the world on the linkages between HIV prevalence and drug policy. While infection rates have fallen recently in the UK, in some parts of the world, such as Russia and the Ukraine, HIV epidemics are spreading rapidly through the population, high rates of transmission being driven by injection drug use. It is no coincidence that these are countries where drugs are spoken of in the strident rhetoric of the “War on Drugs”, and strategies for managing drug problems are dominated by law enforcement and repression. Clean needles and syringes are not legally available, and the provision of substitution treatment for heroin addiction—therapy involving the use of alternative drugs such as methadone and buprenorphine —is either against the law or made practically impossible by harsh police tactics.
In states where harm reduction measures are practised, on the other hand, HIV levels are low and reducing. The close relationship between drug policies and HIV prevalence is becoming increasingly obvious, and is now widely recognized by the scientific community. Amongst academics and clinicians, there is a growing willingness to speak out about this relationship, and about the public health case for drug law reform, in a way that would have been unthinkable a decade ago. This new mood is signalled by a series of recent articles in top-drawer scientific journals such as the British Medical Journal and the Lancet. The Vienna Declaration, which is the official declaration of next week’s AIDS conference, calls for drug policies to be based on scientific evidence, includes an unambiguous acknowledgement that decades of massively funded law enforcement interventions have failed to stem the availability of drugs. The system of prohibitive repression has caused enormous social and health problems in its own right. The Declaration calls for a “full policy reorientation”, including the decriminalisation of drug use.
There is every indication that after decades of failure, an awareness is moving through the global community that an alternative approach is not only necessary but essential in order to deal with the problems associated with drug use in a more humane and effective way.
Nice People Take Drugs movie marks World Anti-Drug day
Thursday, 01 July 2010
A powerful new film appears on the Release website to mark the UN’s World Anti-Drugs Day by reminding us all that drugs are very much a part of our culture in the 21st century globalised world. June 26th is used by states such as
People from all sections of society use drugs, but the outcome of that use can vary enormously. Many world leaders have acknowledged using drugs in their youth, but have been protected by social status or just good fortune from being branded with a criminal record. Some, like Barack Obama and David Cameron, have gone on to hold high political office. Others have ended up in prison, or even in front of an execution squad.
The hypocrisy surrounding drug use is what the Nice People campaign sets out to challenge.
Watch the film here.
Ken Clarke: Policies and Prisons
Thursday, 01 July 2010
The Justice Secretary Ken Clarke spoke out this week against the culture of incarceration that has taken hold in the
For many of those caught up in the machinery of the law by virtue of addictions and the need to fund them through crime, Clarke’s point has powerful resonance. He pointed out that it costs some £38,000 to lock someone up in prison for a year—more than the expense of putting a child through
Release looks forward to seeing this theme become a reality in the coming years.
Government drops welfare reform plans for drug users
Thursday, 17 June 2010
The Government has dropped the provisions of the Welfare Reform Act 2009 relating to drug users. Drug recovery pilot programmes due to be launched in October 2010 have now been abandoned – the programmes would have introduced drug testing for claimants; information sharing between the police and Jobcentre plus; and mandatory attendance on a drug awareness course – failure to attend would have resulted in sanctions. Furthermore, mandatory referrals of problem drug users by Jobcentre Plus staff to treatment providers in non pilot areas has also been dropped.
The driver behind this decision was the report from the Social Security Advisory Committee (SSAC), which following public consultation, found that the pilot programmes were ‘unlikely to be effective, contain a number of significant flaws and won’t produce robust results’. The report was critical of the overall scheme, stating that ‘it would drive people further away from the labour market’. The report also pointed to a number of arguments Release made in its consultation response to the SSAC opposing most aspects of the scheme.
Release is delighted that these provisions have been dropped. The organisation campaigned tirelessly on this issue throughout 2009.
'Legal High’ contained illegal substance
Wednesday, 16 June 2010
In the past 18 months the numbers of people using research chemicals as recreational drugs has skyrocketed. Now widely available on the internet, the research chemical market for recreational drug use has boomed, the market now being a multi-million pound industry. The surge in the popularity of mephedrone, the poor quality of already established banned substances and a lack of legal coherence concerning the status of these research chemicals are all contributing factors to their increased use. However, since the re-classification of mephedrone, curious recreational users have been increasingly using a variety of other research chemicals with relatively unknown consequences.
The amendment of the Misuse of Drugs Act in April made the majority of derivatives of Cathinone into class B controlled substances. Since then, a number of other branded products have emerged. Of the research chemicals that are still widely available online, one which has been much discussed is NRG1. Recent analysis of a batch of NRG1 bought from an internet vendor by the drugs information site www.drugs-forum.com produced troubling results. The batch tested using the usual pill-testing reagents found no NRG1 present, but did identify MDPV, which is an illegal substance under present
Those involved in the testing, development and use of research chemicals were traditionally very knowledgeable about the substances they were using. However, the arrival of mephedrone on the scene, the lack of availability of good quality traditionally popular recreational drugs, and the media hype surrounding mephedrone meant people were buying and using research chemicals with almost no understanding of what they were taking. As the opportunity for profit became more apparent, new, unresearched and untested chemicals have been marketed in the same fashion as mephedrone. The lack of consistency in the batches analysed suggest users must be extremely careful about what research chemicals they are taking, and resist using substances from unknown and unverified distributors.
For a more detailed account, visit Talking Drugs.
Botulism infection among drug users on the rise
Wednesday, 02 June 2010
In the last week there have been reports of a case of botulism in a heroin user from north-west
This latest case highlights the increase in the number of infections of Botulism through contaminated heroin, with 22 confirmed cases in 2009, up from only 4 in 2008 and 3 in 2007. This increase in the number of cases reflects the levels seen in 2006 and 2005 where 22 and 28 cases were reported. These infection cases have steadily increased since the 1990’s among intravenous drug users and those injecting into the skin rather than the veins.
These recent cases follow other reports of contaminated heroin in the past few months, particularly batches of heroin contaminated with anthrax reported in both
There are a number of key symptoms associated with botulism infections and they begin with blurred vision and problems swallowing and speaking, followed by further respiratory difficulties and paralysis. Certain measures can be taken to remove the dangers of infection. Smoking rather than injecting should be a main priority; however, those determined to inject should do so directly into the vein as the blood is far more effective at killing bacteria than skin or the muscle. Sharing of needles and syringes should be strongly resisted, and levels of citric acid kept to a minimum as this can damage the ability of the skin and muscle to fight the bacteria which causes the infection. Different drugs should be injected at different locations in the body, as certain drugs (like cocaine) can further the spread of bacteria.
UK heroin trial publishes results
Wednesday, 02 June 2010
The recent trial of heroin prescribing at the
While recognising the controversial nature of addiction therapies, Release hopes that the new government will act upon the substantial and growing evidence base in support of heroin assisted treatment and make this option more widely available for those in clinical need.
More information available here.
Death penalty for drug offences- New IHRA Report
Wednesday, 19 May 2010
The International Harm Reduction Association (IHRA) has this week published a report providing a global overview of the use of the death penalty in drugs offences. The publication makes alarming reading, finding that the total figure exceeds 1,000 judicial deaths per year. “Hundreds of people are executed for drug offences each year around the world, a figure that very likely exceeds 1,000 when taking into account those countries that keep their death penalty statistics secret,” state the authors, Patrick Gallahue and Rick Lines.
Some 32 states permit the use of the death penalty in drugs cases, mostly in relation to production and trafficking. Of these countries, 13 retain a mandatory death sentence for certain types of drug offences. The leading executors are
IHRA’s legal experts argue that recourse to the death penalty in drugs cases is contrary to international law, and that the measure should, pending full abolition, be limited to a discretionary option in cases of willful murder.
The report is available here.
Mephedrone Survey
Wednesday, 19 May 2010
If you have ever taken Mephedrone, the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs would like to hear from you. You can fill in their online survey here. It is completely anonymous and no personal data will be collected about you.
New US drug strategy
Wednesday, 12 May 2010
The new
The strategy can thus be said to build on the administration’s movement away from drug war rhetoric, its repeal of the ban on federal funding for needle exchange, and its acceptance of (or non-interference in) state-level medical cannabis provision. There are also encouraging signs that congress will, over the next year, end the mandatory minimum sentencing disparities between powder cocaine and crack, laws which are racist in effect if not intention.
At the same time, beneath the rhetoric of change there are large areas of continuity with the drug war, readily apparent in the fact that two thirds of the budget remains devoted to law enforcement. A more profound and significant break with the failures of the past would be demonstrated by a strategy aimed not so much at stopping or reducing drug use as such, but at minimising the harms associated with both drugs and drug policies. These harms are tightly interwoven with the mass incarceration of US citizens for non-violent drug offences. Nonetheless, such changes as there are should be welcomed, and it will be interesting to compare the performance of
Mexico: War without end?
Wednesday, 05 May 2010
Last weekend in
Plan
centred on the arrest of cartel bosses—have only exacerbated the violence, creating a power vacuum quickly filled by violent conflict. And, despite the army’s new
To add to the human rights deficit associated with the drug war,
‘Crack Babies’- the Final Solution?
Wednesday, 28 April 2010
The US-based charity ‘Project Prevention’ has this week arrived in the
What Project Prevention is practising is eugenics—the management of racial stock. Its arrival in the
In addition, the assumptions in play here need questioning: there are many drug using families who bring up their children successfully, and many non-drug using families who don’t. Such problems as do arise should be addressed by policies to end the criminalisation of drugs and the stigmatisation of users, to provide high quality treatment and support where it is needed—including heroin prescribing—and offering people meaningful employment and a real chance of building a better life.
Heroin prescribing on the NHS
Tuesday, 27 April 2010
The topic of prescribing heroin to addicts on the NHS was proposed for debate yesterday at the National Congress of the Royal College of Nursing. The subsequent discussion highlighted the promising preliminary results of the recent UK trial in which diamorphine, the clinical name for heroin, was prescribed at various locations in England to those for whom more conventional treatments, such as methadone, had been unsuccessful. The study found that crime was greatly reduced and that health and social functioning showed significant improvement. Some individuals said that the treatment had given them back their lives.
The debate recognised that this issue is an emotive one, a fact quickly confirmed by an inspection of the comments left by members of the public when the story appeared online in the popular tabloids. Amongst the most vicious, but by no means unrepresentative, is the following contribution: “How about letting them rot in the gutter where all drug user belong and start saving lives of the good by prescribing life-saving cancer drugs (sic).” The prevalence of such opinions only reinforces the urgent need to remove drug use from the criminal sphere and treat it as a public health issue, since the law as currently framed serves to legitimise prejudice against drug users.
The scientific evidence base for its effectiveness is growing stronger each year, and the prescribing of heroin must certainly be included in the range of treatment options available to those in need.
Update on Anthrax outbreak in Scotland
Tuesday, 20 April 2010
Further anthrax cases have been reported, including another fatality. The death was in Lanarkshire, Scotland, and represents the first case in that county. It also appears to indicate that the contaminated batch of heroin associated with the outbreak is still in circulation. Scotland, which has been at the epicentre of the outbreak, now has a total of 35 cases, with 12 deaths among them, according to information published last week by Health Protection Scotland. Release will continue to monitor the situation and to provide updates as necessary.
Mephedrone banned in the UK
Thursday, 15 April 2010
Mephedrone is banned under
Police have issued guidance urging users to destroy or hand in any supplies they may hold before the 16th April 2010. Please contact Release if you need further advice.
Manifesto Macho
Wednesday, 14 April 2010
The major parties have this week published their manifestos for the general election, including proposals for drug policy. All three are light on detail, and political courage and imagination are not strongly in evidence; however, some are certainly worse than others.
The Labour Party's offering is entitled 'A Fairer Future for All', and discussion of drug policy is confined to one short paragraph appearing in a section named 'Crime and Immigration', a disturbing pairing of two policy areas not closely related except in the politics of prejudices. The content of the paragraph would not, indeed, appear out of place in such a context, being encapsulated in the following slogan: "Our message is clear: we will not tolerate illegal drugs." The general tone of Labour's short reference to drug policy appears calculated to bring it closer to the Conservatives.
The Conservative own proposals, contained in a section named 'Fight back against crime', once again links the motifs of drugs, crime and immigration. "Extremists, serious criminals and others find our borders far too easy to penetrate."The manifesto commits the Party to 'crack down' on drugs and build more prisons, and makes inroads into clinical territory normally regarded as the preserve of doctors and others with specialised training. In an obvious reference to the use of methadone and opiate substitution therapy (OST), we are told that "the treatment too many addicts receive just maintains their habits." The fact that OST is underpinned by an extensive scientific evidence base does not appear to matter. They go on to say that, "We will give courts the power to use abstinence-based Drug Rehabilitation Orders to help offenders to kick drugs once and for all." This represents a dangerous development, with politicians determining clinical health measures on ideological grounds.
The Liberal Democrats are the only Party to make an explicit promise to base drug policy on scientific evidence, and to ensure that the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs is genuinely independent of government. They are also committed to ensuring that police and court time and funds "are not wasted" on prosecuting and imprisoning drug users.
We leave it to our readers to decide which of these positions is least likely to result in a public health and social disaster.
Public Accounts Committee questions cost effectiveness of drug treatment in the UK
Thursday, 08 April 2010
The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee yesterday issued its Report on the government’s strategy for dealing with ‘Problem Drug Use’, a term referring to the estimated 330,000 users of heroin and crack cocaine. The Report quotes figures that problem drug use costs £15.3 billion, of which £13.9 billion is associated with acquisitive crimes to fund dependence. Government spending on the strategy is currently £1.2 billion per annum. The main conclusion picked up by
Release is disappointed, however, at the lack of any honest appraisal of the continued failure of present drug policies or serious discussion of alternative measures. There is no recognition, for example, of the degree to which ‘Problem drug use’ is rendered more problematic, not less, by criminalisation or coercive treatment. The question of supplying heroin addicts with heroin was raised, but the senior Home Office official retorted that this is “absolutely not” government policy; he called it a ‘counsel of despair’ and said such a course meant addicts could never live productively or pay taxes. In fact, people are quite capable of living and working productively while on opiates; while of course individuals vary, much of the despair associated with heroin addiction stems from trying to maintain a steady supply of a drug whose expense is inflated and quality degraded by the illicit market, and the criminal relationships this imposes on users. If the market is legally regulated and distributed, health, time and freedom of attention become available once again to the user. Many productive and fulfilling lives have been lived under these more benign conditions.
Government by Panic
Wednesday, 31 March 2010
In the wake of the CAT panic reported by Release News last week, Government spokesman David Hanson has announced that mephedrone could be banned and placed under the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act as early as April 16th. The Home Secretary Alan Johnson has apparently laid a draft order before parliament to this effect. With parliament likely to be dissolved in the next few weeks, prior to a probable general election on 6th May, we are concerned that the move will not receive adequate debate in the House of Commons.
After receiving the ACMD’s recommendation on 29th March 2010 that mephedrone should be a Class B drug, the Home Secretary announced an immediate ban on importation of substances containing mephedrone and other generic synthetic cathinones. Previously notorious for being a legal high, possession and supply of mephedrone will soon be illegal, with possession offences drawing a potential 5 year prison term, and up to 14 years for supply.
Under the Misuse of Drugs legislation, measures such as this require a period of research and review by the ACMD; the reclassification of cannabis, for example, involved over two years of consideration. In this latest case, with the government’s relations with its scientific advisors already under tremendous strain following the sacking of Professor David Nutt, followed by a raft of resignations, it seems clear that the advisory process has been observed merely as the barest of formalities, with the ACMD joining the Government in bowing to media pressure.
There is no doubt that the wild alarm sweeping through the media and politics has driven this process along at breakneck speed, riding roughshod over the procedural requirements imposed by the law. Release is concerned about the swift instigation of the ban, as it seems clear that concern for the health of individuals and society has been overridden by other imperatives derived from media hysteria. This is government by panic, and it does not bode well for democracy.
Cocaine in the UK
Thursday, 04 March 2010
In a report published today, the House of Commons Select Committee on Home Affairs claimed that cocaine use is growing in Britain, and has become a normal part of life for many people. It calls for increased efforts to be directed at both demand reduction and the international traffic that supplies the drug. The report has initiated a moral panic reminiscent of that which greeted the rise of the country’s first cocaine culture during the First World War and the early 1920s. The national alarm was a prominent factor in the passing of Britain’s first prohibitionist legislation.
In the Daily Mail, Conservative Home Affairs spokesman James Brokenshire (aptly named to carry the banner of ‘Broken Britain’) commented that it is “preposterous” that a line of cocaine is now supposedly cheaper than a coffee in London, while citing the ease with which Johnny Foreigner can slip across the UK’s “porous borders” as the reason for the prevalence of cocaine. He blames the labour government for this state of affairs, while neatly linking the issues of drugs and outsiders—in time-honoured fashion. The Times concentrates more on the role of celebrities in glamorising the drug by ‘getting away with’ its use.
In the Report itself, it’s interesting that Keith Vaz MP, Chair of the Committee, said: “There can be no relenting in the fight against cocaine trafficking. The international trade in cocaine causes untold human misery and social and environmental destruction.” He then lists the issues: the exploitation of drug mules, the destruction of rainforest and health problems for users. The first two of these can be laid squarely at the door, not of cocaine, but of the misguided (and, in the long run, quite disastrous) ways in which 20th century governments tried to deal with the problem of drugs. A regulated drugs market would solve both. As to the third point, again, prohibition has certainly exacerbated the health issues of cocaine use, since the adulterants mentioned by the Report (anaesthetics, animal worming agents and carcinogens) would not exist if legal quality controls were put in place. Despite the Report’s statements to the contrary, many people are fully aware that cocaine can and does cause health problems in its own right, and, if it is to be used at all, is best used sparingly. While fully acknowledging the risks involved with the drug, however, it is difficult to see how these are lessened by leaving its trade in the hands of gangsters.
What the Report does not do is to get to grips with the fundamental issue: cocaine and other drugs are a by-product of globalised consumerism, which works by providing people with goods and services that they want to buy. Drugs remain a curious anomaly in this system, inadequately controlled by an antiquated and discredited set of laws. While drug fashions move in historical cycles, drug use is certainly here to stay; and, like all industries and markets, requires effective forms of regulation to manage the conduct of the participants.
Check out the Guardian's Comment is Free for more Release analysis of the report: http://bit.ly/cfK9Uz
Students organise online vigil to remember those killed in Mexico's Drug War
Thursday, 11 February 2010
On Thursday 11 February 2010 student groups around the world will be engaged in acts of solidarity to remember victims of the Mexican Drug War.
On the 1st of February, 14 young people were murdered in the border city of
The open online vigil will encourage individuals to discuss their fears and hopes for young people globally who have become victims of a policy of prohibition.
Anyone interested in getting involved should join Students for Sensible Drug Policy
Release calls for Scottish Government to implement emergency public health plan
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
Release, and other leading drug organisations including IHRA and Transform, have sent a public letter to the Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon calling for an emergency public health plan to be initiated. In the past two weeks 7 people have died and 14 are in hospital after injecting heroin contaminated with anthrax spores. The advice issued by Health Protection Scotland is advising heroin users to stop or seek treatment. This advice is reckless considering the waiting times drug users in Scotland face when trying to access substitute prescriptions. To read The Herald's report click here.
Anthrax deaths in injecting drug users
Friday, 08 January 2010
Several anthrax infections in injecting heroin users came to light in Scotland during December 2009. The cases were centred on Glasgow, but have since spread to other Scottish cities; six people have now died as a result of the infection. Other cases are presently in hospital, and though the outbreak is so far confined to Scotland, police and health services in Cumbria have issued warnings to heroin users about a suspected batch of contaminated heroin, which is believed to be the source.
Anthrax is an illness that is caused by a bacterium called Bacillus anthracis; it usually enters the body through a wound or broken skin, and cannot be passed from person to person through airborne contact. In these cases it appears to have been picked up by injecting contaminated street heroin. Anthrax can be fatal if not treated. If it is caught in time, however, the disease can be successfully treated with antibiotics. Symptoms may consist of severe redness and/or swelling at an injection site, fever and an intense flu-like illness. It is vital to seek urgent medical attention (from a GP or an Accident and Emergency unit) if you suspect you may have contracted anthrax.
The batch of heroin in question was probably either made or stored near animals, soil or faeces containing the bacteria. The conditions of production and transport of street heroin are not regulated by any governmental agency, and there are consequently no public health or quality controls. One consequence of this lack of regulation is that dangerous chemicals or infections periodically get into illegal drugs and result in death and illness.
The Heath Protection Agency last night issued a bulletin about the outbreak, which is available here.
Chinese authorities execute Akmal Shaikh
Tuesday, 29 December 2009
On 29th December 2009, Akmal Shaikh, a British citizen, was executed by the Chinese authorities by means of lethal injection. Mr Shaikh had been in custody since 2007, when he was arrested for carrying 4 kilos of heroin into China. Despite last minute appeals for clemency by his family and the British government, and protests from around the world, China has stubbornly defended its actions and its independent right to punish as it sees fit.
There’s a colonial and imperial background to this: in China, the memory of the opium trade from British India, which was carried on against the express wish of the Chinese government, and against Chinese law, is still fresh, along with the “Treaty Ports” system that allowed the writ of European law to run in Chinese centres of maritime trading.
In this context, one might expect that intervention on the part of the United Nations would have been more effective. However, Professor Philip Alston, the UN Special Rapporteur on summary and extra-judicial executions, wrote to the Chinese asking them to explain the rationale behind Mr Shaikh’s sentence, pointing out that he suffered from a mental illness. His letter was ignored.
This intervention from the UN is welcome. However, the stream of rhetoric coming from the UN drugs agencies, as well as from British and other politicians around the world, helps to maintain the climate that is used to justify the execution. The Chinese embassy in London stated that, “The amount of heroin he brought into China was 4,030g, enough to cause 26,800 deaths, threatening numerous families.” The question of mental illness aside, China regularly executes people for drugs crimes, and the extreme and exaggerated account of the danger that drugs pose lies at the root of the reasoning involved. The ‘War on Drugs’ may be a rhetorical device, but the bodies are real.
