OPINION: Reactive laws linked to increased drug use

AFTER reading ‘‘Dangerous drug back to damage vulnerable’’ (Herald, 14/2),   I am left wondering when this chemical arms race will end.

The story reports a man became ‘‘cognitively impaired’’ after what was reported as a ‘‘bender on synthetic cannabis’’. A product was named by his mother, who reports that the man’s life and health had been destroyed by an addiction to this product.

In 2012, a research paper on ‘‘synthetic cannabis’’ trends was published in the International Journal of Drug Policy, which investigated the links between reporting and policy. Although journalists may be reporting with the best intentions in mind,  it said stories ‘‘might not be completely accurate given an absence of toxicological data and do not appear to be a deterrent’’.

The paper demonstrated there was a link between reactive policies and increases in drug-related harm: ‘‘Further awareness is created, which could increase harm as more individuals try synthetic cannabis, and once banned, newer, less-understood psychoactive products enter the market to replace the banned drug.’’

The product blamed in the story may or may not have played a part in the man’s ‘‘cognitive impairment’’. It can’t even be said with certainty that the product is a ‘‘synthetic cannabis’’ product or a ‘‘psychoactive substance’’. Yet, it can be almost guaranteed that, even though the tone of the article was negative, more people will now seek out the product.

Whatever the results of testing by police, it can also be pretty much guaranteed that any court case will be long and expensive.

The state’s apparently ‘‘ground-breaking’’ laws are based on laws introduced into Ireland in 2011, which were intended to reduce the harms caused by ‘‘psychoactive substances’’. 

The most recent data on drug-related health issues in Ireland shows that young people there are some of the highest users of these sorts of substances in Europe, because these are now widely available on the illicit black market. Not only are these laws ineffective at reducing harm, they look to be relatively unworkable due to their broad nature. 

The chemical arms race is fuelled by bad laws and emotionally charged stories.  Rather than reducing the potential for harm, these stories seem to fuel the demand for these products. Rather than protecting the community, enforcement of these laws seems to be an expensive, unworkable shemozzle that creates a criminal black market. 

There are other options. Rather than the continual pursuit of prohibition, which is ineffective at its goal of reducing harms in the community, we could regulate such products, test them for risks, tax them, fund health and education initiatives and truly reduce harms. 

Or just legalise cannabis.

Nick Wallis is a social tonics researcher with the Eros Association