Tuesday, May 09, 2006
Alcohol More Deadly Than Ecstacy, Brit Report Says
A new English report says that alcohol is more dangerous to people than the pop drug ecstasy. How many drugs are like this? A lot. It seems to be economic: governments, at least in England and the US, make money from certain mind-altering substances, like tobacco and alcohol. In the case of illicit drugs, there are governmental agencies that make lots of money prosecuting those who use such things.
The big hoo-haw around the US, and particularly in Oregon, is about “meth.” It’s been around for decades, but it’s only recently been demonized to the extent it is today. Crank, speed, crystal—I don’t know what other names it has. It doesn’t seem to be a particularly pleasant drug; I used it at various times up until the late 1980s, and while I had some good times on it, the come-down was awful. I didn’t get strung out on it, though...it was a recreational drug that was a low-cost replacement for cocaine. The cost has gone up now, of course. And people have become severely addicted to it. The authorities blame the addiction on the drug, something we’ve heard before, about heroin, opium, marijuana, and LSD: use it once and you’re finished!
Nobody ever says that about alcohol, however. The message is “Use it and have fun!”
Alcohol is deadlier than ecstasy, says Government's drugs adviser
By Sophie Goodchild, Chief Reporter
Published: 07 May 2006
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article362535.ece
Alcohol is more harmful and causes more deaths than the drug ecstasy, a leading scientist who advises the Government on drug safety is warning.
Professor David Nutt, a senior member of the drugs panel which recommended the downgrading of cannabis, is calling for the current system of drugs classification to be widened, to reflect the dangers posed by excessive drinking.
The addiction expert says only 10 premature deaths a year in the UK can be blamed on ecstasy, compared with at least 22,000 attributable to drinking. He highlights the fact that alcohol is exempt from an official system of harm rating despite being the cause of 10,000 assaults a year, unlike ecstasy, which is not linked with violence.
Professor Nutt says in the latest edition of the journal Psychopharmacology that the Tory leader, David Cameron, is "correct in his logic" in suggesting that E, currently a class A drug, should be in a lower category than drugs such as heroin and cocaine.
The scientist, who chairs the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) technical committee, writes: "Why is ecstasy illegal when alcohol, a considerably more harmful drug, is not? When we consider that the possession of a drug that is much less dangerous than alcohol can lead to a seven-year prison sentence, whereas alcohol use is actively promoted, perhaps David Cameron did not go far enough."
But Professor Nutt's comments have enraged drugs prevention charities, who say he is wrong to compare the harm caused by drugs such as ecstasy with the effect on health from excessive drinking.
"Ecstasy kills at random and there is a lot of cumulative harm," said David Raynes from the National Drugs Prevention Alliance. "Although there is a lot of harm from alcohol, very few people just die from drinking alcohol, but they do die from taking E. If the Government does downgrade E, then it sends a signal that it's less harmful than it was before."
Alcohol is more harmful and causes more deaths than the drug ecstasy, a leading scientist who advises the Government on drug safety is warning.
Professor David Nutt, a senior member of the drugs panel which recommended the downgrading of cannabis, is calling for the current system of drugs classification to be widened, to reflect the dangers posed by excessive drinking.
The addiction expert says only 10 premature deaths a year in the UK can be blamed on ecstasy, compared with at least 22,000 attributable to drinking. He highlights the fact that alcohol is exempt from an official system of harm rating despite being the cause of 10,000 assaults a year, unlike ecstasy, which is not linked with violence.
Professor Nutt says in the latest edition of the journal Psychopharmacology that the Tory leader, David Cameron, is "correct in his logic" in suggesting that E, currently a class A drug, should be in a lower category than drugs such as heroin and cocaine.
The scientist, who chairs the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) technical committee, writes: "Why is ecstasy illegal when alcohol, a considerably more harmful drug, is not? When we consider that the possession of a drug that is much less dangerous than alcohol can lead to a seven-year prison sentence, whereas alcohol use is actively promoted, perhaps David Cameron did not go far enough."
But Professor Nutt's comments have enraged drugs prevention charities, who say he is wrong to compare the harm caused by drugs such as ecstasy with the effect on health from excessive drinking.
"Ecstasy kills at random and there is a lot of cumulative harm," said David Raynes from the National Drugs Prevention Alliance. "Although there is a lot of harm from alcohol, very few people just die from drinking alcohol, but they do die from taking E. If the Government does downgrade E, then it sends a signal that it's less harmful than it was before."
The big hoo-haw around the US, and particularly in Oregon, is about “meth.” It’s been around for decades, but it’s only recently been demonized to the extent it is today. Crank, speed, crystal—I don’t know what other names it has. It doesn’t seem to be a particularly pleasant drug; I used it at various times up until the late 1980s, and while I had some good times on it, the come-down was awful. I didn’t get strung out on it, though...it was a recreational drug that was a low-cost replacement for cocaine. The cost has gone up now, of course. And people have become severely addicted to it. The authorities blame the addiction on the drug, something we’ve heard before, about heroin, opium, marijuana, and LSD: use it once and you’re finished!
Nobody ever says that about alcohol, however. The message is “Use it and have fun!”
Alcohol is deadlier than ecstasy, says Government's drugs adviser
By Sophie Goodchild, Chief Reporter
Published: 07 May 2006
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article362535.ece
Alcohol is more harmful and causes more deaths than the drug ecstasy, a leading scientist who advises the Government on drug safety is warning.
Professor David Nutt, a senior member of the drugs panel which recommended the downgrading of cannabis, is calling for the current system of drugs classification to be widened, to reflect the dangers posed by excessive drinking.
The addiction expert says only 10 premature deaths a year in the UK can be blamed on ecstasy, compared with at least 22,000 attributable to drinking. He highlights the fact that alcohol is exempt from an official system of harm rating despite being the cause of 10,000 assaults a year, unlike ecstasy, which is not linked with violence.
Professor Nutt says in the latest edition of the journal Psychopharmacology that the Tory leader, David Cameron, is "correct in his logic" in suggesting that E, currently a class A drug, should be in a lower category than drugs such as heroin and cocaine.
The scientist, who chairs the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) technical committee, writes: "Why is ecstasy illegal when alcohol, a considerably more harmful drug, is not? When we consider that the possession of a drug that is much less dangerous than alcohol can lead to a seven-year prison sentence, whereas alcohol use is actively promoted, perhaps David Cameron did not go far enough."
But Professor Nutt's comments have enraged drugs prevention charities, who say he is wrong to compare the harm caused by drugs such as ecstasy with the effect on health from excessive drinking.
"Ecstasy kills at random and there is a lot of cumulative harm," said David Raynes from the National Drugs Prevention Alliance. "Although there is a lot of harm from alcohol, very few people just die from drinking alcohol, but they do die from taking E. If the Government does downgrade E, then it sends a signal that it's less harmful than it was before."
Alcohol is more harmful and causes more deaths than the drug ecstasy, a leading scientist who advises the Government on drug safety is warning.
Professor David Nutt, a senior member of the drugs panel which recommended the downgrading of cannabis, is calling for the current system of drugs classification to be widened, to reflect the dangers posed by excessive drinking.
The addiction expert says only 10 premature deaths a year in the UK can be blamed on ecstasy, compared with at least 22,000 attributable to drinking. He highlights the fact that alcohol is exempt from an official system of harm rating despite being the cause of 10,000 assaults a year, unlike ecstasy, which is not linked with violence.
Professor Nutt says in the latest edition of the journal Psychopharmacology that the Tory leader, David Cameron, is "correct in his logic" in suggesting that E, currently a class A drug, should be in a lower category than drugs such as heroin and cocaine.
The scientist, who chairs the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) technical committee, writes: "Why is ecstasy illegal when alcohol, a considerably more harmful drug, is not? When we consider that the possession of a drug that is much less dangerous than alcohol can lead to a seven-year prison sentence, whereas alcohol use is actively promoted, perhaps David Cameron did not go far enough."
But Professor Nutt's comments have enraged drugs prevention charities, who say he is wrong to compare the harm caused by drugs such as ecstasy with the effect on health from excessive drinking.
"Ecstasy kills at random and there is a lot of cumulative harm," said David Raynes from the National Drugs Prevention Alliance. "Although there is a lot of harm from alcohol, very few people just die from drinking alcohol, but they do die from taking E. If the Government does downgrade E, then it sends a signal that it's less harmful than it was before."
