UK - Cannabis downgrade set to be reviewed [Megathread]

[0utrider]

The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) will set itself on a collision course with the Government tomorrow when it seeks to persuade the Home Secretary that cannabis should remain at its current status as a class C drug.
The council's refusal to go along with the Government's commitment to crack down on cannabis may count against it when it comes under scrutiny as part of a review later this year. A Home Office spokesperson reiterated last week that the council's role is confined to providing advice on classification.
But one ACMD member, Professor Les Iversen, a pharmacologist at Oxford University, has warned that if its advice is ignored "it would call into question the whole function and future of this group". And Dr Richard Pates, a clinical psychologist and member of the body until last December, said: "I suspect there is political influence being put on the ACMD, but it has a great deal of integrity."
Politicians remain divided on what has become a fiercely fought issue that has propelled the use of cannabis and its impact on mental health to the forefront of the drugs debate. David Blunkett, who as Home Secretary was responsible for downgrading cannabis in 2004, is unrepentant and has said: "Classifying cannabis as class C is a much more honest approach, both politically and in terms of how the drug is policed." David Cameron, the Conservative Party leader, who recommended reclassifying cannabis to class C when he was on the Home Affairs Select Committee, is now more in line with Gordon Brown. He has admitted: "I think on reclassification we got it wrong ... the sort of cannabis now being smoked is so strong and there is such a link to mental health issues that it should be class B."
Pressure on the Prime Minister to take decisive action and override the wishes of the ACMD is growing. Professor Robin Murray, one of Britain's top experts on schizophrenia and cannabis, will warn MPs of what he says are the real dangers of the drug at a meeting tomorrow of the All Party Parliamentary Committee on Cannabis and Children. "Education is much more important than classification," he said. "The problem is that education costs money, switching the classification doesn't."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...is-816217.html

[enquirewithin]

Gordon Brown is trying to excel Blair in stupidity. He is a lame duck leader before even being elected once! I suppose he thinks this is cheap vote winner amongst the more conservative electorate.

But remember, this man supported the WMD lies of Blair-- he bankrolled an illegal war.

[MotherSuperior]

It's a joke it's a CD at all. Most of the other class C's have danger potential well above that of mj... SWIM knows a thing or two about benzo addiction.

Notwithstanding the amount of politicians who admit to have used it at one time ot another... didn't Tony Blairs son get caught in possession? or was he just drunk and acting 'disorderly' in public?

It's the Daily Mail crowd vote winner and Gordon needs those votes with the economy going down the pan... though SWIM hates to say it Gordon would be the lesser evil of having a conservative government.

SWIM has so much to say on this, a drug user, as an experienced RN who has worked with people who have substance misuse issues(mostly alcohol... if only someday the real extent of alchohol MIS use was compared to other chemicals... SWIM is singing to the choir here SWIM thinks!). Again the government seem reluctant to take advice from people who are 'near' the coal face(ACMD) for PR reasons. SWIM read also that since new licensing hours were brought in that alchohol related hospital admissions, crimes, etc are up in the region of 30%(for the former) but this figure was from a tabloid to. From the 'ground' acute admission's are certainly up in SWIMS experience though SWIM enjoys a bevy and likes being able to got SWIMS 24/6(almost 7) store to buy alcohol any time..... however SWIM does not see the alchohol policy changing anytime soon(which SWIM is glad) but in context SWIM should spend more time trying to build a time machine... the only question is whether to go back or go forward as SWIM assumes that one day they will have to realise the war of drugs(some already do) that the 'war on drugs' is unwinnable') at try the alternative if only to help the economy

[enquirewithin]

It's the Daily Mail crowd vote winner and Gordon needs those votes with the economy going down the pan... though SWIM hates to say it Gordon would be the lesser evil of having a conservative government.

It's time to vote for the Liberal Democrats. At very worst, they couldn't do worse than the usual two partners in crime!

[MotherSuperior]

Heh, it was just on BBC News that Gordon Brown is going to take 'personal responsibility' for reclassifying MJ to a class B drug. I would have thought he had far more pressing issues.

On one hand this really sucks.... on the other on the chance Brown fails, it will be SO funny. Actually Gordon's had so much 'bad luck' that SWIM wouldn't write of the possibility.

SWIM is firm believer in the 'British Model'(pre 68 laws... pre control to much extent). Hardly any drugs related crime, hardly any deaths, docs freely scripted so many nice things) actually before '68 there was no National Speed limit, you could leave your front door open sersiosly from a stastical point of view drug wise things were so better then and the soloution is sooo obvious but politically impossible. No dis-respect but things went wrong when we(as usual) we started following the US model.

[ramjet]

The latest from the BBC:

Row looming over cannabis grading

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is expected to reclassify cannabis as a Class B drug - against the advice of officials.

The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs is understood to have argued that cannabis remains Class C, to which it was downgraded under Tony Blair.

But Gordon Brown is thought to be keen to reclassify to "B" as he is worried about the "more lethal" use of skunk - a stronger form of the drug.

The Tories want cannabis to be Class B. Lib Dems want ministers to heed advice.

Penalty clause

The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) publishes its report later, as Ms Smith is set to make a statement to MPs on the government's stance.

The document has been compiled by judges, doctors, police and drug counsellors who are believed to have concluded that cannabis should remain Class C.

Among its 20 recommendations, it calls for stricter penalties for dealing the drug in schools, mental health hospitals and prisons.

It also says ministers should set up a "concerted" public health campaign to reduce the use of cannabis among young people.

However, the council says the drug causes less harm than those in Class B, such as amphetamines and barbiturates.

It argues that it should remain in Class C, where the maximum penalty for possession is two years, rather than five.

But, during the inquiry, "a minority" of council members disagreed, saying they were "very concerned" about the mental health risks of the widespread availability of more potent forms of the drug.

'No deterrent'

The ACMD did not look at the message conveyed to the public or the impact on policing, which it is not legally obliged to do.

BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw said this would give the home secretary "grounds to disregard the panel's advice - and restore cannabis to Class B".

But Martin Barnes, from the charity Drugscope, says Mr Brown should listen to the experts.

"The advisory council will be saying, as they did in their previous report, that rather than base policy on speculation or anxiety, it needs to be based on evidence," he said.

Deborah Cameron, of the drug and alcohol treatment charity Addaction, said education was needed, adding that changing the classification of cannabis would do little to deter people from smoking it.

Scientific advise

"The young people that we see don't think about the classification of cannabis before they smoke weed," she said.

"They don't understand the system and it doesn't deter them."

Last month, Mr Brown said he wanted to "send a message" to young people that using cannabis was "unacceptable".

Cannabis was downgraded to Class C - which includes substances such as anabolic steroids - from Class B, in 2004. It means possession is treated largely as a non-arrestable offence.

The Conservatives have called for cannabis to be returned to Class B, while the Liberal Democrats have urged the government to be more open about the scientific advise it receives.

Home Office research published in February suggested skunk dominates the UK market - comprising 70% to 80% of samples seized by police.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7386889.stm

The outlook looks gloomier by the second. As you say Mother, it's a cheap vote winning trick designed to pander to an irrational drug hysteria and to prove the government is "tough on crime", despite contrary accusations.

One of Brown's apparent justifications is that cannabis is far more potent than it used to be (so obviously it can't have been anywhere near as bad when cabinet members smoked the stuff in their teens: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6907040.stm). I'm skeptical about this assertion in the first place, but even if it where true, I failt to see how it provides a justification for re-classification or even continuing criminalisation.

[meep]

The Daily Mail has ben harassing Brown again, every time the Mail prints something
detrimental to or criticises browns controll he jumps hurdles to prove them wrong. It really is getting pathetic.

Swims wonders who the fuck is running this shit hole of a democracy anyway?

[klaatu]

Possibly the drubbing the the Labour Party have just recevied in the Local elections and defeat in the London Mayoral election might give Gordon Brown pause for thought. Every single Labour politician and spin doctor that I've heard being interviewed in the last 24 hours has repeated the mantra that these defeats are simply the electorate telling them they need to listen.

As we know politicians only ever listen to the voices in their own heads, but the worst local election results for 40 years might get through to Gordon Brown and make him heed the advice from the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Advisory Committee on the Misuse of Drugs and leave Cannabis classified as class C.

And maybe the sound I can hear is that of a pig taxiing for take-off.

Klaatu

[Pondlife]

I think you may be right. Following the disastrous results in the local elections, Gordon Brown has said publicly that he will "listen", so it might be a political mistake for him to reject a report from an independent committee now.

Perhaps he will just kick it into the long grass now to avoid having to make a difficult decision.

[enquirewithin]

Gordon Brown, a lame duck Prime Minister who has never been elected and who bankrolled the UK's contributions to the humanitarian disaster in Iraq (as Chancellor) , desperately tries to appeal to conservative voters in 'middle England' by ordering the reclassification of cannabis to Class B. This man also 'believed' in Saddam's WMDs. Hopefully the police will mainly ignore this.
__________________________________________________ _



Reefer madness: Do the drug laws work?

Gordon Brown is expected today to announce tougher laws against cannabis possession, even though medical experts and the police believe he is wrong.

Independent. By Jeremy Laurance and Nigel Morris

Wednesday, 7 May 2008

Defying the weight of medical and scientific opinion, Gordon Brown is to order tougher new laws today on cannabis possession. The Prime Minister has decided to overrule his own expert advisers and reverse the downgrading four years ago of Britain's favourite illegal drug from a class B to a class C substance, threatening cannabis smokers with five-year prison terms.
His announcement comes amid fears that Britain is in the grip of an epidemic of cannabis-induced psychosis. This is based on the conviction that the cannabis sold on the streets is stronger than it was a generation ago and is tipping increasing numbers of vulnerable people into metal illness, including schizophrenia.
Headlines proclaiming that skunk is 20 to 30 times as strong as the cannabis smoked in the 1970s have fuelled public alarm. The Prime Minister has spoken of the "lethal" effects of the new strains, as if they were comparable with the harm caused by heroin and crack cocaine.
Yet there is no epidemic of psychosis – rates have actually declined since the mid 1990s. Almost three million people a year use cannabis; very few develop psychosis. Despite this, parents are more worried today that their children will become schizophrenic if they smoke cannabis than they were five years ago.
The new focus on the harm caused by cannabis is to be welcomed, as there are reasons for concern. What has united medical specialists and drug workers is the conviction that whether cannabis is classified B or C is an irrelevance. Worse, it could distract attention from the central issue, which is the need to educate young people about the risks. Mr Brown's announcement, which ministers believe will be popular with the Middle Britain voters who deserted Labour last week – was endorsed by the Cabinet yesterday. It would mean the maximum penalty for possession of cannabis rising from two to five years.
Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, will argue that the about-turn is necessary because of the increasing strength of cannabis in circulation. She is also expected to warn that it can act as a "gateway" drug to more addictive substances. But ministers were accused last night of using the classification system, which places illegal substances into three categories according to their harm, to score points against their opponents.
Shortly after arriving in Downing Street in June last year, Mr Brown announced a review by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) of the status of cannabis, making clear that he wanted its reclassification from B to C reversed. That decision had been taken in 2004 by David Blunkett when he was Home Secretary, and was meant to free police time squandered on prosecuting users. Mr Brown believed it sent the wrong message to young people. But the advisory council
reached the opposite conclusion last month in a report sent to the Home Office in which it said cannabis should remain in class C. It dismissed the argument that downgrading the drug had sent a confusing message to the public and said the link between heavy cannabis use and mental illness was unproven.
Despite the advisory council's refusal to support moving cannabis up a category, the Prime Minister has made clear he is intent on doing so, last week describing much of the stronger "skunk" variety of cannabis as "of a lethal quality".
His concern about the dangers chimes with that of psychiatrists treating the victims of drug-induced psychosis, but his remedy does not. Doctors have been worried for at least a decade about the impact of cannabis on mental health. It is our most widely used illegal drug and studies show that the cannabis available on the streets is stronger than it used to be – though not as strong as some have claimed. Skunk, which is now ubiquitous, contains at least 14 per cent of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) compared with about 6 per cent in 1995 (and 3 per cent in the herbal cannabis available in the 1970s). That makes it two or three times as strong as it was a decade ago, not 30 times.
Some 80 per cent of people with schizophrenia smoke cannabis, but this does not prove that it causes the illness. Many sufferers use it to self-medicate. The drug may aggravate their symptoms, but there is conflicting evidence about its role in causation. In its last review in 2006, the advisory council concluded: "The evidence suggests at worst that using cannabisincreases the lifetime risk of developing schizophrenia by less than 1 per cent."
Its new report is expected to accept that the skunk that now dominates the market in the southern cities is stronger than in the past. In addition, a pooled analysis of 35 studies published in The Lancet in June found that cannabis users were 40 per cent more likely to develop a psychotic illness than non users, and the risk was doubled in heavy users. On that basis the researchers – seven psychiatrists from Bristol, Cardiff, London and Cambridge – estimated that 14 per cent of cases of schizophrenia might be due to cannabis.
The psychiatrists admitted they could not prove cause and effect but concluded that there was "now enough evidence to inform people that using cannabis could increase their risk of developing psychotic illness later in life". Professor Robin Murray of the Institute of Psychiatry, a leading exponent of cannabis-induced psychosis, welcomed the finding but said it underplayed the risks from the stronger skunk now available: "My ownexperience suggests the risk with skunk is higher. Therefore the estimate that 14 per cent of cases of schizophrenia in the UK are due to cannabis is now probably an understatement."
A second factor is that cannabis contains two main psychoactive ingredients – THC and cannabinidol – the second of which is thought to have anti-psychotic effects. Skunk contains almost no cannabinidol.
Others have challenged The Lancet finding, pointing out that there has been no significant increase in the incidence of schizophrenia over the past 30 years, despite a sharp increase in cannabis use. A review of trends in the UK by the University of Keele, commissioned by the ACMD, found that cases of schizophrenia fell between 1996 and 2005. Cannabis use also fell during this period but the researchers say evidence from case control studies is inconsistent and the two trends cannot be linked.
While the role of cannabis in psychosis remains a matter of dispute, there is broad agreement over the issue of classification.
Most specialists accept there is no scientific basis for altering the advisory council's 2006 conclusion that cannabis is "substantially" less harmful than the class B drugs amphetamines and barbiturates and should therefore remain in class C. Drug and mental health charities agree that the law is too blunt an instrument to deliver public health warnings, and have called for education campaigns to warn young people of the risks. They point out that consumption of cannabis has fallen 4 per cent since 2003, after being downgraded to class C in 2004.
Mr Brown will cite the support of the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), which has changed its position on the classification of cannabis, after backing Mr Blunkett's decision to downgrade the drug from B to C four years ago. But Acpo said last week that it would not revert to the days when cannabis possession technically gave rise to automatic arrest, which wasted so much police time that it was often ignored, and wanted officers to retain the option of cautioning cannabis users, a stance which could lead to accusations that it would become a class B substance in name only.
The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs was set up in 1971 at the same time as the current drugs classification system was established. When Mr Brown overturns its conclusions today, it will only be the second time the committee has been overriden by a government.
Martin Barnes, the chief executive of the charity Drugscope, made a final appeal last night for the Government to abide by the advisory council's conclusions. "We remain unpersuaded that a move back to class B is the best way to reduce cannabis harms and levels of use, particularly among young people," he said.
Roger Howard, chief executive of the UK Drug Policy Commission, said: "The system of drugs classification is now at risk of becoming discredited by political point-scoring and false expectations of the benefits any changes in classification will bring. It is not an effective way to 'send a message' to young people. The Government ought to review the system, as it promised to do in 2006, and consider options which return independent scientific analysis to the core of future classification decisions."
The Labour MP Paul Flynn, called for a complete overhaul of the approach to drug addiction, arguing the current classification system was irrelevant to helping addicts kick their habit. He said: "Banging people up in prison doesn't work. The message that Gordon Brown will be sending out is that he doesn't understand drugs and doesn't understand the problem, so he's going to try to win a few cheap headlines."
The advisory council called for cannabis to be downgraded as early as 1979, but Margaret Thatcher's government said it would never reduce drugs penalties. It was not until Mr Blunkett became convinced that cannabis was unnecessarily diverting police resources, that he announced the reclassification four years ago. But his three successors have been uncomfortable with the decision. Charles Clarke came close to reversing it, asking for evidence of links with mental illness, but backed off on advice from the ACMD.
Last night, the Tories backed the reclassification, but said it had to be properly backed up by police enforcement. David Davis, the shadow Home Secretary, said: "If young people still believe it is OK to take the drug and law enforcement agencies fail adequately to deter and prosecute the misuse of cannabis then Gordon Brown will have failed another test of leadership."
What the experts say
Deborah Cameron chief executive, Addaction
There is a contradiction at the heart of the Government's policy on cannabis. The classification system has distracted politicians for too long – we need to get back to tackling the actual harm drugs cause.
Chris Huhne Lib Dem Home Affairs spokesman
Instead of pandering to tabloid newspaper editors, the Government should be listening to the independent experts. There is no point wasting taxpayers' money on having the Advisory Council if their advice is ignored.
Lord Ramsbottom Former Chief Inspector of prisions
You've got to have a coherent strategy that looks across all drugs and targets them in proportion to the damage they do. It's no good isolating cannabis... I simply do not believe that prohibition works.
Martin Barnes Chief executive of Drugscope
One of my concerns is that the Government should go against the Advisory Council's advice and reinforce the cannabis scare stories. Cannabis is not a harmless drug, far from it. That is why it is already illegal.
Paul Flynn Labour MP, Newport West
Banging people up in prison doesn't work. The message that Gordon Brown will be sending out is that he doesn't understand the problem, so he's going to try to win a few cheap headlines.
Dr Brian Iddon Labour MP, Bolton South East
This will create further confusion. This government claims its policies were based on evidence, but the Advisory Council has provided the evidence and the Government is going to ignore it.
Richard Garside Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, King's College London
If drug classification was based on harm caused to society then alcohol would be higher than some class-B drugs. It sets out the principles for which drugs are socially acceptable.
Mark Steel Comedian and columnist
It's crackers. The only reason Gordon Brown's doing it is because otherwise the Daily Mail will have more ammunition against him. Most people under 60 must have smoked it. That would make everyone criminals.
Colin Blakemore Professor of Neuroscience, Oxford University
Gordon Brown has been a great supporter of science. It is a pity that he has allowed his heart to rule his head in his desire to reclassify Britain's most popular illegal drug.
Tim Kendall Deputy director of research, Royal College of Psychiatrists
The debate about classification is at best a useless distraction and at worst a diversion of attention and resources from the far bigger problems of crack cocaine and heroin.
______________________________


Government set to defy its own experts and upgrade cannabis again

Alan Travis, home affairs editor
The Guardian,Wednesday May 7 2008

The home secretary, Jacqui Smith, will today stress the dangers of more potent strains of cannabis as she is expected to defy medical opinion by announcing that the drug will be upgraded from class C to class B.
Smith is expected to justify her decision by highlighting the strength of "skunk" strains of herbal cannabis now widely available. Gordon Brown last week warned of the "more lethal quality" of much of the cannabis now available, described it as a gateway drug, and said that reclassification was needed to "send a message to young people that it was unacceptable".
The decision flies in the face of recommendations to be published today by the government's scientific experts, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, that cannabis should remain class C.
The ACMD was asked last July by Smith to take their third look at cannabis classification in recent years. While acknowledging that cannabis use had fallen significantly since David Blunkett's decision in 2004 to downgrade cannabis from class B to class C, she said there was real public concern about the potential mental health effects, particularly of stronger forms.
The ACMD held a special session in February and heard evidence that 80% of cannabis seized from users was of the herbal variety rather than resin. Experts said the potency of homegrown herbal cannabis tended to be two and a half times that of imported resin. But they said users now often moderated their intake.
They were also told that the incidence of new schizophrenia cases reported to GPs had gone down, not up, between 1998 and 2005, indicating a weak link between increased potency and use in the past two decades and mental health problems.
The Association of Chief Police Officers confirmed to the Guardian last week that they intend to retain their "confiscate and warn" policy for most who are found with a small amount of cannabis, although some chief constables want to see a fine imposed instead.
It is expected that reclassification will, however, lead to tougher enforcement in cases where there are aggravating factors such as public disorder or evidence of organised crime, for example involvement in large-scale cannabis growing. Since cannabis was downgraded in 2004 the proportion of young people using it has fallen each year from 25.3% in 2003-4 to 20.9% now. Among those aged 16 to 59, the proportion over the same period has fallen from 10.8% to 8.2%, according to the British Crime Survey.
Campaigners for drug law reform have questioned the relevance of the drug classification system, which dates back to 1971.
Roger Howard, chief executive of the UK Drug Policy Commission, and a former government drugs adviser, said last week that this case underlined the muddle at the heart of government over the purpose of a drug classification system which was unlikely ever to be able to "send a message to young people". Since cannabis had moved from class B to class C, the number of schoolchildren who think it is fine to try cannabis had halved, he said.
Brown's decision to overturn the advice of his own drug experts by pressing ahead with a tougher policy on cannabis could still face a high court challenge from campaigners. Any such challenge would have to demonstrate that ministers took the decision to upgrade cannabis without fully considering the ACMD's report. The Guardian understands that at the ACMD meeting, the 23 medical and drug experts heard a presentation on the possible mental health impacts of stronger cannabis from psychologist Dr Martin Frisher of Keele University pharmacy school. The presentation used unpublished data from a confidential report he has drawn up for the Home Office.
He and his colleague, Professor Ilana Crome of Keele's academic psychiatry unit, used data from 183 GP practices across Britain between 1996 and 2005 to work out whether schizophrenia is on the rise, and whether it can be linked to the increase in cannabis use since the 1970s.
Their paper found that between 1996 and 2005 there had been significant reductions in the prevalence of schizophrenia. From 2000 onwards there were also significant reductions in the prevalence of psychosis.
The authors say this data is "not consistent with the hypothesis that increasing cannabis use in earlier decades is associated with increasing schizophrenia or psychoses from the mid-1990s onwards".

[Lunar Loops]

Another piece from The Independent (UK):

Leading article: Clouds of confusion

Wednesday, 7 May 2008

It is hard to think of a more wrong-headed response from Gordon Brown to his plummeting popularity than the expected approval today for the re-classification of cannabis. This will constitute a reversal of a reform introduced only four years ago that downgraded cannabis from a class B to class C narcotic.

Mr Brown, chastened by Labour's electoral humbling, claims that he is listening. He is; but not to those who know what they are talking about. The Government's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs has come down against re-classification on public health grounds. Though popular varieties of cannabis are stronger, it argues that there have been no studies that demonstrate a causal "link" between cannabis use and mental illness.
Sadly, such informed counsel has been ignored. Instead, Mr Brown has turned his ear to the hysterical outpourings of certain sections of the press, which have long demanded a reversal of the downgrading of cannabis on the grounds that no government "tough" on drugs would have relaxed the law. The Prime Minister is giving them what they want.
This is gesture politics at its most pathetic. The Prime Minister argued last week, on reclassification, that: "We really have got to send out a message to young people [that] this is not acceptable." Mr Brown seems to think that official drug classifications are a deterrent. This is a fantasy. For one thing, despite the 2004 downgrading, cannabis possession remains an arrestable and imprisonable offence. Reclassification will do nothing except double the maximum sentence for possession to five years. And since this sentence is very rarely used, it will have no added deterrent effect whatsoever. The 2004 downgrading was a step forward because it freed up the police to concentrate on tackling the distribution of hard drugs. Now officers will once again find their time wasted arresting cannabis smokers.
Once again, the fight against addiction and trafficking of hard drugs is hampered by muddle-headed politicians playing cheap politics with an issue of deadly seriousness. The Government should be treating addiction as a medical and educational challenge, focusing on harm-reduction, rather than prosecutions. As Professor Robin Murray, one of Britain's top experts on schizophrenia and cannabis argues "education is much more important than classification. The problem is that education costs money, switching the classification doesn't".
Rather than taking time to formulate a rational and effective policy on curbing drug abuse, the Prime Minister has chosen to exploit the classification issue to win a handful of favourable headlines. If this is Mr Brown's idea of a bold political re-launch, he is in even deeper trouble than he imagines.

[MrG]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7386889.stm

Government advisers are to recommend that cannabis remains a class C drug, despite government concerns over its effects on crime levels and health.
In a report, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs will say cannabis is not harmful enough to be upgraded to the more serious class B.

But Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is expected to ignore the report.

Cannabis was downgraded from class B to C four years ago, but Gordon Brown has called stronger varieties "lethal".

'Concerted effort'

In its report, to be published later, the council calls for stricter penalties for dealing the drug in schools, mental health hospitals and prisons.
It also says ministers should set up a "concerted" public health campaign to reduce the use of cannabis among young people.

However, the council says the drug causes less harm than those in class B, such as amphetamines and barbiturates.
It argues that it should remain in class C, where the maximum penalty for possession is two years, rather than five.

But, during the inquiry, "a minority" of council members disagreed, saying they were "very concerned" about the mental health risks of the widespread availability of more potent forms of the drug.

When considering cannabis classification, the council did not look at the message conveyed to the public or the impact on policing, which it is not legally obliged to do.
BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw said this would give the home secretary "grounds to disregard the panel's advice - and restore cannabis to class B".

'Unacceptable'

Ms Smith will give the government's response to the council's report in a statement to MPs.
Last month, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he wanted to "send a message" to young people that using cannabis was "unacceptable".
He added that he was worried about the "more lethal" use of skunk - a strong form of the drug.
Cannabis was downgraded to class C - which includes substances such as anabolic steroids - from class B, in 2004. It means possession is treated largely as a non-arrestable offence.
The Conservatives have called for cannabis to be returned to class B, while the Liberal Democrats have urged the government to be more open about the scientific advise it receives.
Home Office research published in February suggested skunk dominates the UK market - comprising 70% to 80% of samples seized by police.

[Pondlife]

The ACMD report "Cannabis: Classification and Public Health" has been released, and is available here: http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/loc...=5023&catid=21

As expected, it recommends that cannabis remain a Class C substance. As with all ACMD reports, it's worth reading the whole thing if you have time.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Many thanks for the addition to the archive.

[Pondlife]

Looks like it's official - Cannabis will go back to Class B.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7386889.stm

Cannabis laws to be strengthened

Cannabis is to be reclassified as a class B drug, Jacqui Smith has said.

The home secretary said that because of the "increased strength" of some types, she wanted to reverse Tony Blair's 2004 downgrading of the drug to class C.

She highlighted "uncertainty at the least" on the future impact on young people's mental health from cannabis.

Her statement to MPs came despite the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs' review - commissioned by Gordon Brown - saying it should stay class C.

'Psychotic illness'

The maximum penalty for possession of a class B drug is five years in prison, whereas it is two years for a class C drug.

Since cannabis was downgraded there has been widespread concern about the increased prevalence of stronger "skunk" varieties.

Ms Smith said this now accounted for 80% of the cannabis seized on the streets and the drug was nearly three times stronger than in 1995.

She added that the government's change of heart - which is subject to parliamentary approval - was part of a "relentless drive".

Ms Smith told MPs: "There is a compelling case for us to act now, rather than risk the future health of young people.

"Where there is a clear and serious problem, but doubt about the potential harm that will be caused, we must err on the side of caution and protect the public.

"I make no apology for that - I am not prepared to 'wait and see'."

In its report, Cannabis: Classification And Public Health, the advisory council described cannabis as a "significant public health issue".

But it said it should still remain a class C drug, as the risks were not as serious as those of class B substances, such as amphetamines and barbiturates.

The report said the evidence suggested a "probable, but weak, causal link between psychotic illness, including schizophrenia, and cannabis use".

However, in the population as a whole, it played only a "modest role" in the development of these conditions.

Council chairman Sir Michael Rawlings told BBC Radio 4's World at One: "The strength of things like skunk hasn't really changed very much over the last few years but it's now more widely used... The question of potency is a very complex area."

Campaign

The advisory council did not look at the message conveyed to the public or the impact on policing, which it is not legally obliged to do.

Sir Michael added: "The government may want to take other matters into account. That's their right. They are the government."

In its report the council called for a campaign to reduce the use of cannabis, particularly focusing on young people.

It also voiced concern over the prevalence of domestic cannabis farms supplying the market and the involvement of organised criminal networks.

Ms Smith said she accepted the vast majority of the council's recommendations, but not the classification of the drug.

And Gordon Brown said at prime minister's questions that he believed making cannabis a class B drug was supported by the public and the police.

Last month he said he wanted to "send a message" to young people that using the substance was "unacceptable". Class C includes substances such as tranquilisers, some painkillers, GHB (so-called "liquid ecstasy") and ketamine - from class B. Possession of class C drugs is treated largely as a non-arrestable offence.

Shadow home secretary David Davis said that the government's reversal of its earlier decision showed the downgrading of cannabis had been a mistake.

He also accused ministers of "dithering" by commissioning a report when they could have acted last summer.

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said that, as its advice had been disregarded, ministers should disband the advisory council of experts and replace it with an advisory council of "tabloid newspaper editors".

Labour MP Chris Mullin, who was chairman of the Commons home affairs select committee when it recommended that cannabis was downgraded to class C, said: "The government should follow the advice of the experts rather than that of the tabloids."

[klaatu]

I suggest vititors to this forum in the UK take every opportunity possible to use this latest U-turn of the Labour government to illustrate that ministers' hollow words following last week's elections were pure hypocrisy.

They claimed that they would now become a "listening party". Yet their first opportunity to demonstrate this has seen them ignore the expert advice of thier own advisors and stick to the dogmatic line set by Prime Minister Brown.

They are liars and hypocrites.

Klaatu

[Coconut]

Originally Posted by klaatu

They are liars and hypocrites.

Are you surprised? They're politicians.

[AntiAimer]

Funny how everything in the above article^, contradicted why it has been reclassified. It basically makes you come to the conclusion that they just wanted it to be without any legit reason, it's like reefer madness all over.

Sad that more peoples lives will be ruined, they actually think this will stop "teens"...

[Lunar Loops]

There's a part of SWILL that thinks "So What?" SWILL made the point when cannabis was first downgraded that it was not exactly something to get too excited about. Sure it could be seen as a small step in the right direction, but it made no 'real' difference to any cannabis smoker. Most police forces had already been operating a policy of only handing out a caution (and confiscating the goods) to users found with anything under 7g (considered personal use) on their person. This is how they are going to continue dealing with 'offenders'.

No real change, this is little more than cosmetics.

The thing that actually gets to SWILL is the way that expert advice is sought and then totally ignored by the government. This is government without reason......not surprising, but very demoralising.

[aerozeppelin123]

This made me laugh and pretty much sums everything up:

http://transform-drugs.blogspot.com/...following.html

Wednesday, May 07, 2008

Millions quit cannabis following reclassification

After listening to Jacqui Smith MP talking about skunk cannabis in Parliament today millions of young people have decided to quit using cannabis and drink 3 litre bottles of white-lightning cider instead. Across the housing estates of Britain vulnerable young people, more used to the daily truant ritual of a skunk fueled psychotic axe-rampage, could be witnessed huddled around radio's hanging on Home Secretary Smith's every word. Interviewed afterwards many were of the opinion that now they faced a super-stern warning from the police for cannabis possession, instead of a mere moderately-stern warning like in the old days, the risk was simply too great. It was time to quit weed and hit the cider big time. This fear was combined with a new found insight into cannabis provided by Gordon Brown, specifically regarding the 'lethal' skunk version of the otherwise completely benign sixties flower power drug smoked by Smith and her cabinet colleagues way back when.

The general opinion around the bus shelters was that Smith and Brown, given their in-depth academic research, backgrounds in the drugs field and Phd's in epidemiology and psycho-pharmacology respectively, were far better qualified to advise today's youngsters about drug harms than those 'unqualified jokers on the thingy-wotsit committee', as one former feral youth described it. He added;

'now cannabis is class B and we all know how bad it is for you again, there's no point wasting money on education, treatment and prevention any more. That cash would be far better given to the police so they can alienate us with some futile heavy-handed enforcement like they did with my big brother. A criminal record should really help any remaining tokers get on in life'.

lethal skunkabis: relax, its a thing of the past

Other reports are also coming in of queues forming at airports of evil Vietnamese gangsters waiting to fly home. Interviews suggest that now no-one is smoking lethal skunkabis anymore the evil foreign criminals have decided to close their network of suburban cannabis factories. There are also strong indications that a major contribution to the foreign criminal exodus is fear of the move from a trifling 14 year sentence for cannabis supply under the namby-pamby old class C regime to the new scary 14 year sentence under Class B.

Triumphant ministers have drawn comparisons to the reclassification of meth-amphetamines (combined with the new war on lemsip) that successfully scared off any potential meth users or dealers, and the classification of ketamine which similarly put paid to use of that drug with a flick of the legislators pen.

Who knew drug policy was so simple?

Reputation Comments on this post:

	lol great
	Thank you, I needed something to cheer me up over this nonsense!
	Good post

[Lunar Loops]

Here be the word direct from the mouths of the bolting horses (The Labour Party website).

http://www.labour.org.uk/labour_crac...bis,2008-05-07

The piece is reproduced below, but if you go to the link above you can post your own comment (and read those of others). The piece also had a particularly smug looking picture of Jacqui Smith beside it, but I removed this for fear of causing offence.

I can't believe they actually have the cheek at one point to qoute a few words from the ACMD report in an attempt to justify their decision. Talk about cherry-picking and the piece they do use is out of context. Enjoy.

Labour crackdown on cannabis

Labour’s Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has announced that cannabis will be reclassified as a Class B drug, sending a strong message that the drug is harmful and should not be taken.

Cannabis use has fallen significantly across all age ranges and this is a testament to the success of the previous ten years of Labour’s Drug Strategy. However, the reduction in cannabis use must not be allowed to reverse.

Reclassification reflects the fact that skunk, a much stronger type of the drug, now dominates the cannabis market. It accounts for 81 per cent of cannabis available on our streets compared to just 30 per cent in 2002. The average age of first use is 13 years old and young people may binge on skunk in the same way as alcohol, trying to achieve the maximum effect.

If they do, the independent Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs found that the consequences of this "may be serious to their mental health".

Taking effect from early 2009, the classification change will mean: Tougher penalties for repeat offenders; a national crackdown on cannabis farms; action against those who sell cannabis paraphernalia, including cannabis seeds; a new public information campaign highlighting the dangers cannabis causes to health; and new sentencing guidelines to ensure that cannabis supply near colleges and universities, mental health institutions, schools and prisons will be considered an aggravating factor.

Labour’s Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said:

"Cannabis is and always has been illegal. It now dominates the illegal drugs market in the UK and is stronger than ever before.

"I make no apology for erring on the side of caution and upgrading its classification. There is a compelling case to act now rather than risk the health of future generations.

"The enforcement response must reflect the danger that the drug poses to individuals, and in turn to communities. Those who are repeatedly caught with cannabis must face tough punishment and that is why I have asked the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to propose more robust enforcement measures to reflect re-classification.

"It is also important that the organised criminals behind the growing threat of cannabis farms feel the full force of the law, and that we use every opportunity and means to disrupt their activities so that the UK becomes a high risk place for them to operate.

Alan Johnson Labour’s Health Secretary said:

"The message has always been that cannabis is a harmful and illegal drug and should not be used. We are determined to ensure that young people in particular are well aware of all the risks. Our multi-media 'FRANK' campaign will ensure that this is the case."

Labour’s Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families Ed Balls said:

"Cannabis use by young people has been falling over recent years but remains a persistent problem. The reclassification sends the right message to young people about the risks from cannabis use - this is especially important given its increased strength and the heightened risk to young people.

"We also know parents are concerned about the recent trend towards the use of stronger strains of cannabis by young people and the potential for significant mental health problems that would severely impact on a young person's future."

[Lunar Loops]

Originally Posted by Lunar Loops

Taking effect from early 2009, the classification change will mean: Tougher penalties for repeat offenders; a national crackdown on cannabis farms; action against those who sell cannabis paraphernalia, including cannabis seeds; a new public information campaign highlighting the dangers cannabis causes to health; and new sentencing guidelines to ensure that cannabis supply near colleges and universities, mental health institutions, schools and prisons will be considered an aggravating factor.

This piece from the Labour party website caught SWILL's attention. This is a new direction and what exactly do they consider paraphernalia?

[aerozeppelin123]

If you look at the comments on that article on the Labour website though, you will find that nearly everyone is saying what a stupid move it was (and I assume that most people registered to that website will be Labour voters, so good to see that they can see sense and are not just blindly following their party).

[Euphoric]

Britain Strengthens Pot Laws

Ignoring advice of expert panel, government says it must protect public from potent street cannabis
May 08, 2008 04:30 AM

LONDON–Defying advice from its own expert scientific panel, the British government yesterday moved to toughen cannabis laws, arguing that the public must be protected from the dangers of super-strength pot circulating on U.K. streets.

The decision, which reverses a 2004 easing of sanctions against marijuana use under former prime minister Tony Blair, is intended to send a message against "skunk," a more potent hybrid that now accounts for 80 per cent of street cannabis seized, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith told Parliament.

Citing studies linking pot consumption with mental health issues, Smith said cannabis would be reclassified as a Class B illegal substance as "part of a relentless drive to tackle drugs and the harm they bring to families and communities."

The move came against the advice of the 23-member British Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, which yesterday called for cannabis to remain in the less serious Class C category after conducting a review of available scientific evidence at the government's request.

Government critics seized on the gap between science and politics, noting the decision comes on the heels of local elections that saw support for the ruling Labour Party under Prime Minister Gordon Brown collapse to its lowest standing in 40 years.

"Cannabis use is falling, as is the incidence of psychosis. We need public education, not public flagellation," said Liberal Democrat MP Chris Huhne, who added the government should consider replacing its science panel with a committee of "expert tabloid editors."

The Independent posted an online editorial calling the reclassification "gesture politics at its most pathetic ... If this is Mr. Brown's idea of a bold political relaunch, he is in even deeper trouble than he imagines."

On paper, the reclassification will more than double the maximum sentence for marijuana possession to five years. (In Canada, the maximum penalty for possession up to 30 grams is six months or a $1,000 fine. For more than 30 grams, it's five years less a day.)

In practice, however, the change may not result in a significant increase in criminal charges for simple possession because senior British police officials have requested to maintain a policy of simply issuing warnings and confiscating the drug in the vast majority of cases.

"When you look at the evidence, both internationally and here in the U.K., it is clear that the drug classification system is a very poor vehicle for delivering messages to young people," said Ben Lynam, of Britain's Drug Policy Commission.

"Among young people in Britain, marijuana use has been in decline for some years and that trend is uninterrupted by any change in classification, upward or downward. But at the same time, you wonder why the government would ignore the committee, which looked at all of the evidence with cool, rational objectivity. It leads to the conclusion that this is a political decision."

Slightly more than 8 per cent of Britons aged 16 to 59 reported using cannabis in the last year, compared to 11 per cent five years ago, according to British government statistics. Among Britons aged 16 to 24 – 20.9 per cent reported smoking cannabis in the past year, compared to 27.3 in 2002.

Drug-policy experts agree more study is required on the potential harm of the more potent strains of marijuana in Britain today, which contain higher concentrations of tetrahydrocannabidinol, or THC, the psychoactive ingredient in pot.

"Much has been made of the need to `send out a message' on cannabis use. Unfortunately, the message sent out by this decision is that drugs policy can be driven as much by political considerations, media headlines and scare stories as by the evidence," said Martin Barnes, chief executive of DrugScope, a British health policy centre.

http://www.thestar.com/article/422799

[Alfa]

Rob Johnston

New Labour’s schizo policy on cannabis

The government is happier punishing cannabis users than admitting it cannot inspire youth to do something more interesting than get stoned.

Today, the British government will ignore its own Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) and announce its intention to reclassify cannabis so that possession of it will carry harsher penalties. This is despite the fact that cannabis use has declined in the four years since it was ‘downgraded’ and the police will not change the way they deal with possession on the street.

Up until four years ago, cannabis was categorised as a ‘class B’ drug, which meant that in theory - if not in practice - people caught in possession of the drug on the street could expect to be arrested. The maximum penalty for possession of a class B drug is five years. In January 2004, cannabis was downgraded to ‘class C’, meaning lower penalties and a ‘presumption against arrest’.



The main excuse given for returning cannabis to class B is a link between smoking ‘skunk’ cannabis and the development of schizophrenia - even though causation is a long way from proven.

Over the next few days, conventional wisdom will be often repeated, even by those who should know better. The myth (usually expressed in a tone of regret) is that the mild and mellow hash smoked by the flower-power generation has been swept aside by genetically modified ‘super skunk’ (1) that is 10-30 times stronger. Just one spliff raises the threat of schizophrenia by 40 per cent (2) and can cause lifelong mental illness or suicide (3). Teenagers who smoke cannabis regularly can turn into psychotic, slavering serial killers (4).

Reclassification of cannabis is supposed to ‘send a message’, but the message it sends is that politicians do not understand either young people or probability.

‘Using cannabis doubles your risk of getting schizophrenia’ – say psychiatrists (5). Even if that statistic is proved true, it could almost be a pro-dope argument:

* If 100 teenagers do not use cannabis, one will eventually develop schizophrenia
* If 100 teenagers use cannabis regularly, two will eventually develop schizophrenia
* If 100 teenagers use cannabis heavily for several years, five will eventually develop schizophrenia.

In other words, 95 per cent of teenagers could smoke the drug every day for years and not get schizophrenia. Teenagers despise hypocrisy, double standards and scare stories. In fact, programmes that try to scare teenagers into ‘better’ conduct actually lead to more offending behaviour (6).

Instead of spending years locked in a bedroom smoking dope, teenagers should be out exploring the world, having new experiences and relationships, doing things they enjoy and things they will regret, testing their limits and learning about life. That politicians and the generation in charge have created a nation in which so many young adults want to spend their formative years in a stupefied dope haze demonstrates the contempt our society has for the young in general. Rather than address this wider issue, the powers-that-be seem happier to crack down on the symptoms - dope smoking - rather than tackling the cause - the loss of any sense of purpose in society.



Sadly, the cannabis/schizophrenia controversy is too great a temptation for all the vested interests not to take advantage. Gordon Brown looks tough as he contradicts the advice of namby-pamby ‘experts’, clinical researchers get grants for more studies, mental health charities have their turn in the spotlight, newspapers can scream about axe-murderers … and drug dealers profit from free advertising about ‘super strong skunk’.

But, every part of the conventional wisdom is simply wrong.
The super-skunk fallacy

Just about every commentator trots out the ‘fact’ that powerful ‘skunk’ has replaced cannabis resin (‘hash’) and is 10 (or more) times stronger than in the 1960s, ‘…when I was a flower power acolyte, smoking grass’ – says Marjorie Wallace of SANE, the mental health charity (7).

‘Skunk’ is sinsemilla, which has always been available at a price. It is composed of the unpollinated, flowering buds of the female cannabis plant and, in its raw state, has a higher concentration of THC (the chemical that gives a ‘high’) than imported ‘hash’ (cannabis resin). The other product, now much less commonly found, is ‘herbal cannabis’ – chopped up leaves and seeds.

The Forensic Science Service (FSS) say THC content of skunk has increased from six percent in 1995 to 10-11 per cent today (8). The THC potency of most cannabis resin samples in 2005 was between two and six per cent (9). But FSS sources use no common standards for testing THC content and are vague about the term ‘street seizures’ and whether that refers to final product or raw materials and whether the claimed THC levels are in oils or dried samples (10).

Individuals and criminal gangs now grow most of the cannabis consumed in Britain. Like all good small businesses, they have improved their product over the years and their plants, indeed, produce higher levels of THC. However, also like good small businesses, they do not give away more than they must. The extremely high levels of THC reported in sinsemilla ‘skunk’ are not necessarily found in seizures on the street, but in samples from plants found in cannabis ‘factories’. By the time ‘skunk’ reaches the street, it is almost certainly adulterated with leaves and twigs to bulk up the content.

Casual users – like casual drinkers – probably adjust their usage anyway. Everyone but alcoholics drink vodka at a much slower rate than they drink beer. The same is likely to be true of cannabis users, who will simply use less of a potent product in a joint.
Schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is the most feared psychiatric diagnosis, thanks to media portrayals of psycho-killers, institutionalized zombies and aggressive tramps who shriek at invisible tormentors. Far from the Jekyll and Hyde caricature, schizophrenia is a ‘split’ in the normal ‘internal monologue’ with which we talk to ourselves, work things out, think happy thoughts and express inner doubts.

Another voice appears, at first infrequently. It can offer a running commentary, be full of praise, or be ‘the voice of God’ – Joan of Arc was probably at this stage in schizophrenia. The voice may be barely noticed in the pre-teens and only become regular during puberty – provoked by hormonal surges and personal and educational stress. Over years, the voice can further split into different ‘characters’ and become insulting and hostile; rarely, it urges suicide, even more rarely, violence.

Along with auditory hallucinations often come delusions of being watched, persecuted or controlled and seeing hidden messages in anything from television programmes to song lyrics. Depression and paranoia may go on for years before they become too much to bear and disturbed behaviour attracts attention – commonly between 19-25 years of age.

Well before diagnosis, people often find that self-medication with alcohol or drugs can temporarily quieten or calm the voices. It is unusual for an untreated schizophrenic not to abuse alcohol, nicotine and/or other illegal drugs. Because schizophrenia and intoxicants go together and cannabis use is now so widespread it is extremely difficult to determine whether cannabis has caused the disease or is a symptom of the pre-existing mental disorder.

If there is a strong causative link between smoking cannabis and schizophrenia, there would have been an epidemic of the disease that followed the large increase in consumption of cannabis over the last 30 years. But there has been no such increase; the prevalence of schizophrenia has not increased. What has increased is the number of people admitted to hospital with cannabis intoxication – which mirrors the number of people admitted to hospital with alcohol intoxication.
Schizophrenia – early factors

There is a large genetic component: if a parent is schizophrenic, a child’s risk is 10 times greater; if one identical twin has schizophrenia, the other’s risk is 50 times greater (11).

Many fetal/birth factors double the hazard (as much as is claimed for cannabis use): maternal diabetes or exposure to famine or viral infections; emergency caesarean section; premature birth, low birth weight, oxygen starvation, birth complications, needing an incubator; being an unwanted child or father dying before birth; being born or brought up in a city; below-normal IQ and autistic spectrum disorders.

Migrating to a new country increases the risk 18 times; a mother who doesn’t understand you increases the risk 5.8 times; being in an ethnic minority carries a sliding scale – the more of you there are, the better your chance of avoiding the disease.

There are some very early indicators of risk (12): delayed speech and motor development; late learning to stand, walk or potty-train; poor motor function, autistic spectrum disorders, being kept back a year at school, attention defecit, poor verbal memory. In one study, it was possible for researchers to spot which individuals went on to develop schizophrenia from home movies of very young children – simply from their behaviour.

In a three- or four-year-old, it is perfectly normal to have an ‘invisible friend’ or stuffed toys that ‘talk’, but in a nine- or 10-year-old these could be a risk for later psychotic disease. One in seven ‘normal’ children and teenagers may hear voices occasionally, be paranoid, or feel ‘controlled’ and that something is wrong with their minds. In later childhood, behavioural disorders, family breakdown, loss of attachment to key adults, abuse and neglect all increase the risk for schizophrenia.

Modern studies attempt to identify children with such very early signs of the potential to develop schizophrenia and exclude them from analyses of teenagers who use cannabis, to correct for those who might have taken up cannabis to deal with early symptoms. So far, studies have excluded patients with possible psychotic symptoms occurring after 11 years of age, but not before.

Of course, all those risk factors for schizophrenia are also risk factors for alcohol, cannabis and drug misuse, smoking, depression and criminality.
Conclusion

In conclusion, it is still not possible to say whether cannabis use causes schizophrenia or is an early sign of the disturbed mental state.

Cannabis is not a benign substance for the developing adolescent brain but there is no convincing evidence that smoking a few joints will inevitably cause psychotic disease. ‘Old-fashioned mellow hash’ has not been swept aside by ‘genetically-modified super-skunk’ with astronomically high levels of THC.

The argument about cannabis and schizophrenia reflects the modern view of children. In the memories of the 1968 generation, the ‘mild and gentle weed’ they smoked and made them mellow has been replaced by ‘skunk’ which turns today’s children into aggressive and anti-social monsters. So these anti-social, destructive, feral youth can be pathologised and medicalised out of the way.

All these myths play into the hands of the government, ever-wary of upsetting its cosy relationship with the most reactionary elements in the press.

Rob Johnston is a freelance writer on the environment, health and science.

[Purest]

With paraphernelia its really quite difficult, its widely recognised that most people that buy kingsize skins will not be using them for tobacco. Bongs and pipes can be sold with the purpose of smoking tobacco. Seeds unfortunately will probably end up being more of a black market thing it seems, honestly I don't think they could be any stupider with the way this has all panned out, its entirely brown trying to win back votes in the stupidest way possible.