Posts by Ross Bell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
"New Zealand ranking second only to the United States for cannabis use provides further evidence that our country is descending into the world's gutters," Mr Sabin said.
And you solution, Mr Sabin, is to copy USA's drug policy?
http://methcon.co.nz/press/28may08.pdf -
The media response to the drug survey has, ironically (considering tonight's Media 7 discussion), been very good. Stuff ran an NZPA summary with the headline “Kiwis second highest drug users – study”, so no brownie points for them. But all other interviews I’ve done today have been really good at putting the results into context. Indeed, all journos I’ve spoken to today where already very sceptical about the coke findings.
However, no surprise to guess who said this: “Latest international cannabis use figures prove that New Zealand is descending into 'the world's gutters'."
-
The media response to the drug survey has, ironically (considering tonight's Media 7 discussion), been very good. Stuff ran an NZPA summary with the headline “Kiwis second highest drug users – study”, so no brownie points for them. But all other interviews I’ve done today have been really good at putting the results into context. Indeed, all journos I’ve spoken to today where already very skepitcal about the coke findings.
However, no surprise to guess who said this: “Latest international cannabis use figures prove that New Zealand is descending into 'the world's gutters'."
-
It's great Mr Anderton joined the debate here, but I agree Craig, robust critique of the index doesn't equate indifference to drug harm.
This still leaves us with an index which is limited, and it would have been great if all drug policy agencies (cops, customs, health...) worked jointly on an index - we deserve and need the best index we can get: otherwise we run the risk of pulling bad policy out our a***. This index really doesn't tell us where we could more effectively invest our limited drug-harm-reduction money: overseas work shows a 1:7 benefit investing into drug treatment.
Wouldn't it be great if in NZ we could have a rational debate about whether shifting money from drug enforcement into prevention or treatment or clean injecting equipment is a good idea.
Unfortunately, it's too often the case when people attempt to raise issues in those rare public discussions about drug policy that we too quickly fall into the typical "soft" vs "hard". We are going to need to get past this phenomenon pretty quickly, and the media probably needs to soon show some maturity on drug issues, because later this year the review of the Misuse of Drugs Act will go public - and it will be a great disappointment if we can't talk sensibly about (new and better ways of doing) drug policy.
Interestingly, the NZ drug law review will occur parallel to the United Nations review of global drug control – and member states are already lining up to push a significant rethink of global drug control efforts.
If you’re interested in the international drug stuff can I recommend a glance at the following:
+ the Harm reduction and human rights blog
+ the Transnational Institute
+ International Drug Policy ConsortiumRussell, our peer review won't be done by next week, sorry.
I look in envy at some of the great work being done in Oz at the moment on these issues. For those with an interest in drug policy wonkery check out Uni of NSW's Drug Policy Modelling Program, and especially their harm index work. This is what we anticipated when we first mooted an index to officials.
I'd suggest NZ drug policy officials invest some money into some of these Aussie projects, so we can piggyback on their work.
-
Is it just my imagination, but did the Herald change the headline of yesterday's report online?
Yep, they did:
From "$1.3b drugs bill we're all paying" to " Drug use cost NZ society $1.3 bn, index shows"
-
The Police are at it again, this time showing pot admissions to hospital.
For the record, I was interviewed about this last night by the NZ Herald, and pointed out that the Police illegal drug harm index showed pot-related hospital costs were lower than those for opiates and speedy drugs. It would be useful for Police to keep one piece of their work in context with another.
Again, for the record, I advised the NZ Herald reporter about their mistreated of the LSD "harm" findings. (Doesn't appear they've corrected that).
Once more, for the record, I provided what I thought was quite a useful critique of the harm index to the Herald yesterday, who were doing a follow up story. My criticisms didn't appear in today's story: that's unfortunate. Its seems discussion and debate about this bit of work will exist in the blogsphere only.
Is it just my imagination, but did the Herald change the headline of yesterday's report online?
As previous commenters has noted, this index needs a better examination - we'll be asking some OIAs about this [we were involved in very early discussions about an index, and were surprised to see how it progressed] and are commissioning our own peer review of the index. So this space.
Ross Bell
NZ Drug Foundation -
-
[Sorry, this is a very unsubtle plug for an article on cannabis science and the media...]
Reefer Madness was a 1936 propaganda film describing what happened when pushers lured high school students into trying "marihuana". The tragic consequences included a hit and run accident, suicide, rape, weird orgies and a general descent into degradation, debauchery and despair.
The film was originally financed by a church group and had a clear message: Cannabis, the "smoke of hell" and "the devil's harvest", will inevitably lead to drug-crazed abandon, insanity and death.
Cannabis use has become much more widespread in the last 72 years. More than 50 percent of us have tried it at some stage, and those of us who haven't probably know plenty who have. Few today, even amongst pot's most vehement detractors, would argue for the full accuracy of the film's conclusions.
However, a more subtle form of reefer madness persists in the way the effects of cannabis use can be presented by the media. Alarming sounding statistics are often relayed with little attention given to context or negative research findings, and stories are run under shocking or sensationalist headlines.
An example of this is what happened with the Lancet meta-study on cannabis and psychosis published last July. The main report headline, that smoking cannabis increases the risk of schizophrenia by 40 percent, was very widely reproduced in covering media stories. However, the Lancet paper actually stated that the risk pertains to a small proportion of heavy users, and noted that it was related to quantity - the more you use, the greater the risk. It also suggested that 800 cases of schizophrenia would not have occurred if none of the UK's 6.2 million cannabis users had ever tried it.
Read on... When truth and balance go to pot
And also, on drug testing in schools - it's a pity Northland's Business of the Year (2007) director didn't read this research from closer-to-home.
-
The NZ Drug Foundation has published some essays about pot - the first in a series that will run from now through 2008.
Check out our Let's talk about pot pages.
-
"RB's such an a-hole."
Like that, you mean.