A coroner has recommended pill testing be conducted in NSW, along with the decriminalisation of personal drug use and the scrapping of sniffer dogs at music festivals.
The NSW Police Commissioner has strongly opposed the suggestion.
In addition to the pro/anti pill testing debate it raised the question of whether the body that enforces the law should be so publicly involved in a civilian policy decision.
Thoughts on both topics.
because in the Philippines they do…
@petry: Probably, but does it really matter? The reality is that thousands of drug pushers and countless more users are no longer a scourge on their society. There's still a lot of work to be done there, but it's a huge step in the right direction. And remember that we're talking about shabu (ice) — not pot or MDMA or whatever. Ice addiction is fast becoming a problem in Australia, like it was in the Philippines. And anybody who thinks it only affects the drug user themselves clearly has no experience with it.
@dcash: so opioids aren't anymore? big pharma and its millionaire medical salesforce doing very nicely here.
you can abuse more coroners talking about it online here I'm sure - when you're taking a break from watching cop shows on telly….
@petry: I still don't know what you're getting at. Are you suggesting opioids are a bigger problem than ice, and specifically because you believe they are over-prescribed by health professionals? If so, how does legalising currently illegal drugs solve this problem?
@dcash: ‘It’s time to call this what it is: Australia’s very own overdose crisis.
‘And make no mistake; it’s a crisis that is getting worse.’
That is John Ryan, Chief Executive Officer of drug policy organisation, Penington Institute. He is discussing the results of Australia’s annual overdose report 2019, released this week.
According to the report, the number of Australians who died from unintentional overdoses has increased by almost 38% in 10 years, from 1171 fatalities to 1612.
Opioids – both pharmaceuticals and in illicit forms – continue to be the primary drug group associated with unintentional drug-related deaths. However, for the first time since 2003, heroin was involved in more unintentional overdose deaths than the next highest opioid group (oxycodone/morphine/codeine).
Benzodiazepines was the second most common group of drugs linked to unintentional overdoses, followed by stimulants such as methamphetamine or ice.
‘It’s very important to note that this is not, and never has been, only a crisis of illicit drugs,’ Mr Ryan said in a statement.
‘Not all stimulants are methamphetamines, and not all opioids that cause death are heroin,’ he said.
‘Australia has a problem with pharmaceutical drugs as well as illicit drugs.’
Those pharmaceutical-related overdoses included an increase in the number of drug-induced deaths involving anti-convulsant medications (from 0 in 2012 to 67 in 2017), and an increase in the number of unintentional drug-induced deaths involving anti-psychotics (from 21 in 2012, to 192 in 2017).
Mr Ryan told newsGP he questioned what contributed to the significant rise in heroin and methamphetamine overdoses.
‘Whether that’s because of more limited prescribing by doctors and people switching to illicit drugs – there’s no data for that – but it looks like we’re continuing our trajectory of people dying from overdose,’ he said.
When it comes to opioids, Mr Ryan said, Australia is careening ‘down a similar path’ to the US.
‘About seven years ago, their overdose deaths from prescription opioids [began] to stabilise as deaths due to illicit drugs like heroin, fentanyl and methamphetamine skyrocketed,’ he said in a statement.
‘Reducing access to prescription drugs without addressing the underlying causes simply changes the type of drugs that are abused – with fatal consequences.
‘Australia shouldn’t follow America’s failed approach.’ But Australia continues to follow America blindly…we kill the mentally ill by force
@petry: Ok, so a lot of people are dying from unintentional heroin overdoses. So how does de-criminalising all drugs solve this problem?
@dcash: since I never said that or anything like that here I suggest you troll elsewhere. I answered your question because you were incorrect in your assertions and your petulance is now obvious. the 1000% increase in fatalities in 5 years attributed specifically to anti psychotics tells u 2 things.
no- one gives a damn about the mentally ill in Australia and
as a consequence its just gonna keep on increasing because no-one gives a damn about the mentally ill in Australia.
That's why veterans ptsd has been removed from the mix by the powers that be… by removing vets from consideration as a component of the mentally ill, and trying to implement 2 tier treatment u can leave the rest to be chained up, dehumanised, tortured and eventually 'accidentally' euthanized by the state.
Enjoy your tv show's.
@petry: I'm trolling because I can't see how your replies are related to what I was talking about in the first place? Where did I say anything about the mentally ill? And what makes you think that I'm suggesting that our veterans deserve anything other than the very best level of support we can possibly offer? Personally I find your insinuation offensive, so I won't be responding any further.
@dcash: glad to see u know u a troll and proud of it, but u still just carry on making up stuff just to try and get my posts removed …
@petry: Could you at least answer the question posed to you -
Are you suggesting opioids are a bigger problem than ice, and specifically because you believe they are over-prescribed by health professionals?
With a simple yes or no.
Can you provide peer reviewed evidence that it actually works?
There's plenty of anecdotal evidence that it has had terrible outcomes, like the extra judicial killings of completely innocent people. Is that a worthy trade?
Can you provide the same that it hasn't worked?
There's plenty of anecdotal evidence that it has worked tremendously well. If it wasn't for China pushing drugs into the Philippines in a massive way, they might have been on the way towards a long term solution. Some of the so-called "innocent people" may not have been pushers, only users, but they were criminals none the less. Besides, even before President Duterte came into power, there were always extra judicial killings going on; that's just business as usual in the Philippines.
Can you provide the same that it hasn't worked?
Not interested in proving a negative when you're suggesting it is successful.
Some of the so-called "innocent people" may not have been pushers, only users, but they were criminals none the less.
Some of those people are 100% innocent. If even one person gets extra judicially killed the whole thing is a massive failure.
Imagine being serious that what is going on in the Philippines is a good solution to anything.
@DogGunn: How many Filipinos, living in the Philippines, have you spoken to personally about it? How many Filipino families that have been destroyed by drugs, have you spoken to personally?
Ok so some people are clearly so unaware of the effects of many drugs which are illegal, and have never touched them in their life, hence making the uninformed "they're illegal for a reason" argument and we shouldn't help them. MDMA in it's pure form (which is what the whole topic is based on - pill testing), a pill containing MDMA, taken in regulated doses of 120mg is safer than most legal drugs that exist and have zero recorded deaths - same applies to LSD, Mushrooms and other psychoactive drugs. I bet not a single person here who opposes pill testing, and/or thinks we should punish drug users can explain the effects that MDMA has on the body/how it interacts with the brain.
I myself can admit to being a user of many drugs, a few times a year and no I am not addicted. No I don't need it to survive, and no I'm not psychologically dependent. I hold a job at a corporate firm and do additional study outside this. I cause no harm to any individuals around me, and have never had to seek care for drug related injuries, yet I still pay my share of taxes to treat individuals in hospitals with lung cancer induced from smoking, or liver related diseases from alcohol. For those who think illegal drugs causes a significant amount of harm to others, just be aware of the chart below which outlines alcohol as the number one most harmful drug socially and economically. If someone can outline how taking magic mushrooms or an MDMA pill at a festival is able to result in more crime/harm (other than hugging too many people) than alcohol then please let me know. Please discuss below
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/06/25/what-is-…
MDMA is a pretty safe drug, but you're kidding yourself if you really think they have zero recorded deaths. Even if you discount the thousands of polydrug deaths and just look at the MDMA only deaths you're not at 0. It's only a handful on record, but not 0.
LSD has numerous deaths largely by misadventure. Tripping your balls off into traffic or off a balcony seems a bit silly to proclaim it as completely safe. There have been recorded deaths of specific isolated LSD toxicity. It's rare, the drug is quite safe probably safer than MDMA even, but it is not without its fatalities.
Shrooms seem to largely be deaths by misadventure, people falling off buildings or committing suicide, rather than direct toxicity. Again I'd hardly say that's a completely safe fatality free drug.
If you want to make an argument that they're safer than alcohol or smoking so it's silly that they're illegal, that's fine. But you don't need to lie to do that.
I work in toxicology, and I'm a bit torn on pill testing. My main concern is that from what we see in hospital, the overwhelming majority of the toxicity from drug use is the drugs themselves, not mysterious additives that the pill testing will help avoid.
There's no doubt however that unwanted additives in the pills exist and no doubt that consumption of drugs laced with other drugs is more likely to end you up in our ED, however the presentations to hospital because of this are rather small in comparison to the presentations for intoxication and overdose on the drug they were intending to take.
Are the assays they're doing quantitative? I doubt it. My raver friends do their own pill testing and the kits they're using can only identify the presence of drugs, nothing about quantity. So its not like you can easily check that the 100mg of fun they've bought actually contains 100mg and not 500mg. We have enough trouble doing urgent quantitative drug levels on our inpatients. I doubt that they could ever do that in public.
So yes, it will probably help reduce a small number of unintentional intoxications and overdoses. But it won't help the vast majority of them, and I'd be interested to see if there's any evidence to show that there won't be any increase in drug use when people are able to test them (I doubt it would significantly increase). Also be interested to know the cost of the program for the number of hospital presentations its likely to reduce. Could be money better spent elsewhere potentially, given healthcare spending is a finite pool. But then it's probably not a very expensive program to run. Hell sell the kits at cost price and you'll probably have a decent number of people taking them up just to make sure they're not getting some bonus Meth with their MDMA.
Awesome - thanks for sharing.
Yes, I too wonder what magical machine people expect to have at the festivals that will give them the response that they think they can get.
Some kind of rugged 'in the field' gas chromatograph that can spit out a result in 3 mins…?
First of all - it doesn't exist (AFAIK) and I'm sure groups such as Dancewise who do really good education/harm minimisation work on the ground would gladly appreciate the hundreds of 000's such a thing would cost if it did exist.
With pill testing as was previously stated, along with it comes counselling and education. Drug education should be amongst the number one ways to tackle the issue you talked about, informing users of recommended doses per body weight and the notion that you should first take half to test for purity. Whilst it is evident that overdoses are more common, that's typically because of the lack of education in which one weak pill may require a couple to have an effect whilst a stronger pill may only need 1 or 2. Whilst pill testing may not solve all the problems, it is just one step towards better outcomes for users, and is a no-brainer to be implemented across the state. Finally, it is very doubtful that no matter how high purity MDMA the pill is, it is unlikely for a single pill to be packed with enough of the substance to actually kill. For one to actually go into cardiac arrest or toxicity of the substance, they would be needing to take 1000mg plus of the substance, which is simply unheard of in a single pill, not to mention the cost it would set back for the dealer/supplier for selling such a high purity/quantity pill in the first place. Hence why more drug education is needed alongside pill testing in the state to prevent things like overheating/loss of consciousness for those who choose to partake in the drug in more moderate doses.
Additionally, evidently from pill testing in other countries such as in Europe, pill testing has not lead to an increase in drug taking at all, and actually in most cases lead to a decline (See article below).
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2019-01-15/pill-testing-c…
Historically in many other countries, more liberal attitudes towards drugs have led to decreases. Most people who aren't doing MDMA right now aren't avoiding it just because it's illegal. I don't care how legal heroin is, I'm not keen to give it a try.
Hard drugs in particular this seems effective. Most people shooting up meth or heroin, to put it very simply, do it because their lives suck. Making their life not suck so they don't feel they have to anaesthetise themselves is the best way to reduce hard drug use in my opinion.
Absolutely education and harm minimisation are key.
You write about 'toxicity from drug use'. I have no doubt you get to see a lot of that.
But I wonder if this comes back to the point I made in a comment above: can you please break it down by substance? How many cases (or percent of hospital admissions) are caused by each of the legal and illegal drugs?
It would be even more interesting to see that expressed as a 'per number of users' of each substance.
I'd expect roughly this order:
* highest absolute number and percentage: alcohol
* followed by legally obtained prescription drugs
* followed by legally obtained over the counter drugs
* followed by opiates
close to the end of that list I'd expect to find the typical party drugs
Meth's our biggest single drug by far, but then we aren't admitting the smoking related lung diseases which would dwarf the meth users, and we only take extremely severe alcohol intoxication under us (as in, requiring Intensive Care admission drunk) so I've only had a couple of them. Most of the alcohol intoxications we've had have been because they have other drug abuse history and we weren't sure what they'd had.
Plenty of abuse of legal drugs. Some for self harm reasons, some for recreation, some to come down off Meth. Pregabalin is my particular bug bear prescription drug of abuse. TGA needs to upschedule that like the NHS did.
Get a few in for weed every now and then, for cannabis hyperemesis. If you ever notice that your stoner mate keeps using all the hot water, thats probably why.
Only a few party drug users that I can recall this year, but they mostly just sleep it off in ED after having a bit too much fun so pretty rare they need a longer admission. The catastrophic mitochondrial uncoupling cases we've had have all been Meth, not other stimulants. Yet to see someone in for LSD and only 1 for shrooms.
It's fun stuff with some colourful characters.
You can find the deaths/100000 for most drugs. MDMA is very low. Not 0 though as some would like to pretend.
Thanks so much for putting things into perspective, much appreciated.
Meth, yes of course I knew it is a big problem. But I thought much more because of the psychological long term consequences and the resulting social implications (alienation and crimes). Do you reckon numbers through the door of the ER are actually higher than alcohol related cases, or is it just a lot more likely that you as a toxicologist get involved?
Not surprised to hear that party drug users aren't frequent ER customers and if they are mostly not too serious. I wonder how many of those overdoses were caused by an attempt to 'destroy evidence' when confronted with sniffer dogs.
@team teri: I'm not sure about the overall stats but ED gets heaps of alcohol intoxication. Friday night is full of drunk tools. We try not to be involved with them unless they've done some serious damage. Alcohol abuse costs us all $billions a year.
I should add that my hospital is on the wrong side of town from all the good party locations. Can't speak for the hospital that they would drain to. But yeah most of the ones who do come just need to sleep it off. Sometimes the kind folks in ED will give them some assistance with taking that nap. Similar for most of the meth presentations who just come in and sleep it off overnight and hopefully aren't too psychotic when they wake up.
@[Deactivated]: Thank you, alcohol abuse costs millions and even billion dollars a year. Legalising other drugs can also put a burden on the healthcare system even more.
People talk about alcohol legalisation but look at it's effects. Drunk drinking, alcohol-induced rage related incidents and even alcohol related deaths.
If you are having your cognition impaired to a high degree, you are going to be a danger to yourself and others.
alcohol abuse costs millions and even billion dollars a year. Legalising other drugs can also put a burden on the healthcare system even more.
Just trying to understand the point of this statement
@sleet: Why are you so scared to say it then? Did you use an example to support your argument but it may have backfired because you didn’t actually want alcohol banned?
@Vote for Pedro: There is nothing to be scared about? It's an internet discussion? What is there to be scared about exactly? You just dont understand the point i guess.
@Vote for Pedro: Your inference is wayyyy off by the way. I actually personally want alcohol banned but the logistics aren't simple.
Juat fyi i work in the health field and see first hand the detriments of alcohol and illicit substance abuse. So i see it on an almost daily basis.
You sound like an ignorant fool
@sleet: That’s sweet. Thanks.
We’ve seen what prohibition does. Just look at the Sydney Lock out laws. Just shifts the problem or creates an underground market. Newtown on a Friday/Saturday night is a sh*thole. Sure it ‘fixed’ the problem at the X, but shifted it elsewhere.
Banning fixes nothing, just shifts it underground.
Why not factor into your conversation the lives the MSIC has saved? The people who have had engagement with professionals and directed to services to beat addiction? I’ve had significant experience in the health field with the MSIC. I’m surprised with your commentary that you are in the health field at all.
Could be money better spent elsewhere potentially, given healthcare spending is a finite pool. But then it's probably not a very expensive program to run. Hell sell the kits at cost price and you'll probably have a decent number of people taking them up just to make sure they're not getting some bonus Meth with their MDMA.
This program would be a relatively fixed cost.
Purchase the machinery / lab equipment - once off cost ($100-200k per machine or set of machines). Obviously a small amount on consumables and maintenance.
And then the cost of lab techs / staff per event.
The forced police cost for some events is in the area of $100-200k - where police say "you must pay us $X for you to get your permit".
Plucking figures out of the air. 10 staff, $100 p/h, 8 hour festival. Cost: $8,000.
You could increase that 10-fold and not even come close to user-pays policing cost.
I don't think anything involving a lab is a viable solution. They'll have to be tests they can do on site. Even doing the most basic qualitative test in a lab will take too long and be too difficult at that scale.
There's already kits you can buy to test your own drugs. They would be using something like that.
Also it's not like taking a softer stance on drugs removes the police/security costs. So your $8k vs $200k comparison is a bit silly.
There are reagent kits or home test kits which you mix the pill in with a bit of solution and it changes colour which cost about 20 bucks. This is what people do at home, but not what they do when talking about pill testing at festivals. These only shows the main ingredient and may not show potentially dangerous contaminates and are not that accurate.
The main ("cheap") machine they use and is what was used in the 2 ACT trials:
An Alpha II FTIR (Fourier transform infrared spectroscope).
https://www.bruker.com/products/infrared-near-infrared-and-r…
The price for these is not publicly available - all suppliers have pricing as "request quote". The best estimate I can find is around $25,000 AUD each. At a festival they'd possibly have 2-4 in use at once. They also need lab technicians to run the tests and a doctor to provide medical advice to the patron after the results come back.
There is more advanced equipment with better detection methods, but those are priced much higher than 25k.
@lysp: Seems a lot better than the basic stuff you can buy for home, or using drink spiking kits as some people do. Doesn't seem to show the dose of drug though, just components.
@[Deactivated]: You are correct about dosage - Aus is mostly about ruling out severely toxic substances (eg. Wiki: N-Ethylpentylone, Wiki: PMA / Para-Methoxyamphetamine) or pills containing something they didn't purchase (Ketamine instead of MDMA).
I believe the UK have made some progress in to testing strength.
From my quick read-through of the coroner's report though most were due to MDMA toxicity.
This was due to MDMA pills in the 90-2000s only containing 60-120mg of active component due to "super pills" of today containing 300mg+. That means that 3 x 300mg means you're taking 900mg vs someone in the past taking 3 pills for a total of ~270mg.
So due to that, I definitely think purity / strength testing is important, however equipment for that may not be as portable and may cost well in excess of the $25k that current testing equipment costs.
Need to at least start with the FTIR at as many festivals / events as possible for 1-2 years and evaluate a future direction once some more data has been generated.
What's wrong with Darwin's Theory of Evolution? Seems to have worked well so far.
Let people pop pills, take meth, do whatever the hell they like.
If you're too stupid to realise that what you're ingesting has probably been cut with cleaning solutions like Omo, then cya- only the smartest survive! I'm dead serious, I saw a crack head wheeling out a full trolley load of Omo… just Omo nothing else filled to the top, out of a Coles one day.
No one is forcing these idiots to take this stuff.
Yes it's sad when they are young and die, but tough titties.
The public purse should NOT be paying for this.
Make the organisers provide it, and then they pass on the costs to their customers.
I'm a parent. I love my kids dearly. But if they take this crap and die, I'm not blaming the drug dealer… I'm blaming them.
They purchased this crap off the dealer willingly, they supported his career choice, and they took the drug.
As much as I want that dealer caught and sent to jail, any deaths that occur are strictly the responsibility of the user partaking in the activity.
I don't blame the car maker for the death of a speeding motorist.
I don't blame the Government for making the road.
I don't blame other road users.
I blame the person driving the car, speeding recklessly.
Responsibility for ones actions is what is required. This nanny state rubbish where WE THE PUBLIC are somehow responsible for these idiots is laughable.
Can I get a refund for my tax money helping raise your kids? Why should the public help fund your decision to have kids?
We pay enough tax to cover all of that. Plus, raising kids isn't illegal. What a terrible analogy.
Someone speeding and requires emergency services, ignore them as well because they were breaking the law? The public funds all kinds of shit that 99% of people don't get any benefit from IE : Me and my partner subsidising everyone and their dogs decision to have kids.
@Duram: I never said don't treat those that require treatment. You've made that leap in logic not me.
Oh… and my kids will fund your retirement later on. K thanks.
As much as I personally despise speeding motorists who've killed someone due to their negligence or recklessness, I'm not about to prevent them from receiving medical care if they need it.
The public has and will continue to fund healthcare and education and everything else.
But I simply don't support that same money being used for people wanting to partake in illegal activity, and expect US to minimise their risk to do so. That level of selfishness can go get stuffed. Or buried. Or cremated. I dont give a crap.
A speeding motorist does so with the knowledge they could get hurt or hurt someone else.
There's no push to fund them to get a faster car or a crash helmet to make it safer for them to do. Absolute rubbish idea to think anyone would support that.
So why fund a drug user who may get hurt doing so? Same principle. Reckless behaviour, knowing the risks, still doing it.
I'll pay for their medical treatment… because we have to, everyone is entitled to that regardless of how they've injured themselves.
But I'm not paying to make it easier for them to do so. Everyone knows the risks. If you still do it and get burned, tough.
Or lets just legalise speeding, upgrade the hoons to lambos, and give them a racing helmet.
If you take drugs, problem belongem you.
Get stuffed with anyone wishing to enable these idiots. Our public money can and should be spent elsewhere, to those who actually have something to contribute to society.
@UFO: @UFO "Our public money can and should be spent elsewhere, to those who actually have something to contribute to society."
I, along with many other users pay our fair share of taxes and contribute plenty to society. Thinking that users are simply just junkies is extremely closed minded - you'll see many banking CEOs who have been exposed for being coke addicts yet apparently they contribute nothing to society? If that's the case, let's cut all the health funding for those who get lung cancer from smoking or cirrhosis of the liver from drinking. Someone who pays taxes is entitled to health services, whether or not you use them.
Trying to say that we should only provide funding for whatever services you @UFO and your family use is a very slippery slope, and is so ignorant and non-self aware, and in fact extremely selfish.
@hakkenuh: You're the second person to make that massive leap in logic, and I'm not sure if its because you simply don't understand what I'm saying, or you're trying to use some massive tangent to win your side of the argument falsely.
Never have I said remove funding for health services to anyone, for any reason.
Never have I mentioned lung cancer or liver damage.
That's a notion you've made all on your own, and doesn't represent my views.
Pill testing has absolutely NOTHING to do with healthcare.
Making that link supports your argument I get that, but you're not fooling anyone but yourself.
If someone eats a high fat diet, if someone smokes, if someone takes drugs, if someone does ANYTHING of their own free will that has the potential to hurt themselves, that's OK. That's fine with me. Free will is fine.
But I'm not going to pay tax payer money to deliver alcohol to you because that'll stop you from driving drunk.
I'm not going to give you fat absorbing diet pills when you eat KFC, because that'll stop you from getting fatter.
I'm not paying to get you Niccorete patches to get you off the ciggys.
That's at your cost.
If you want Omo in your blood because you think it feels good and it's your right to do so… you're 100% right.
But I'm not paying for you to feel better doing it.
you'll see many banking CEOs who have been exposed for being coke addicts
Could you name any of these banking CEOs?
That argument fails yet again.
Kids are not illegal.
The public purse should NOT be paying for this.
The idea is that in the long run, it will cost the tax payer less in that if we can avoid the public ingesting dodgy pills it will prevent the need for first responders, an ambulance ride and a stay in the hospital.
There will always be people that run the risk of taking illicit drugs, it is a straight up fact that prohibition does not prevent this. The best we can do is minimise harm through education and pill testing is a great start at opening a dialog.
Dialog?
You what's an even better educational tool? Experience. Life (and death) experience.
When a kid is convulsing on the ground and frothing at the mouth at a concert because of a bad hit, and the ambos are rushing to him to save his life, and his mates are standing nearby crying and crapping themselves in hysteria, THAT is education. The best type of education you'll ever get. Everyone at that concert will get a lovely reminder of what can happen when you play Russian Roulette. And for a brief moment, they might even think they are just about to suffer the same fate. That type of experience is NEVER forgotten. Near death does that.
The best deterrent is consequence. Teach consequence of ones actions… be they poor or good.
That's the best we can do.
Yes, a dialog since a pill testing tent is a place where people can feel safe from judgement and prosecution and ask questions about these substances and receive evidence based answers without prejudice.
When a kid is convulsing on the ground and frothing at the mouth at a concert because of a bad hit, and the ambos are rushing to him to save his life, and his mates are standing nearby crying and crapping themselves in hysteria
So a preventable medical emergency is justified if it scares people straight? Even if it results in loss of life and a much larger cost to the tax payer, it's worth it? This kind of thinking does nothing to address the problem of harm associated with illicit drug use. You know what happens in that situation? Their friends who also took the same pill justify their decisions. "Oh they must have taken way more than me/combined it with other drugs that caused them to overdose/they had a different batch of the drug than what I had/ They didn't stay hydrated" and on and on it goes.
This is exactly the situation that pill testing aims to try and mitigate, why should that kind of trauma be put onto people if it can be avoided?
That's the best we can do.
It's not, it's how things currently are and it doesn't work, people still take illicit drugs.
When a kid is convulsing on the ground and frothing at the mouth at a concert because of a bad hit, and the ambos are rushing to him to save his life, and his mates are standing nearby crying and crapping themselves in hysteria, THAT is education.
Man… This is a new low.
so who is responsible for their actions now? not police officers or pollies or teachers or doctors or military personnel - the list is endless - your argument about taking responsibility is fine but nanny state - the state isn't responsible for anything - or anyone paid by it- we now live in a moral vacuum where the weakest and most vulnerable are easy targets for blame..
If we could show it would save you money would you be happy to spend money on it? Sometimes spending $50 on preventative health saves you $100 down the track.
Spending $20 on a drug testing kit and a spot of opportunistic education, even x100000 kids, is cheaper than looking after a single brain injured person from their drug misuse.
I really don't get this push.
7 people die each week in Victoria alone from Alcohol - yet we hear (basically) nothing of this.
Plus, you can get pill testing kits for $20 and DIY.
If you've already decided to stick your finger up at the law, roll the dice and do drugs, how can you then turn to the taxpayers and ask them to pay for more doctors, field lab equipment, staff, political debate, law changes and whatever else is required to test your drugs for you on-site at a festival? (and take these funds away from other forms of harm minimisation).
What am I missing?
the fact that the testing kit will be seized by the festival, which is where the drugs are being sold?
Good point… although the drugs are being sold on the street, online, through friends, etc - not just at festivals.
So why not just sell testing kits at festivals (in the event of a multi-day camping style festival)? The kits themselves are legal.
Or be a bit organised and buy and test beforehand?
Seems to be some pretty basic steps already available for people to take responsibility for their own health.
Or be a bit organised and buy and test beforehand?
That would generally happen. The problem is sniffer dogs and strip searches are at the gate to get in.
That means you can either:
@lysp: or also
We need to start expecting more from people who take them. You're breaking the law, if you're too dumb to break the law without being safe then maybe drugs aren't for you.
throw your drugs away in the event of surprise sniffer dog setup
We need to start expecting more from people who take them. You're breaking the law, if you're too dumb to break the law without being safe then maybe drugs aren't for you.
This was mentioned in the report:
275.
Festivals tend to be seen by young people as more than just another night out and are often highlights of the social calendar. People may plan well in advance and travel long distances to attend. Alex and her friends caught a bus from the Central Coast. Diana and her friend flew up from Melbourne and Joshua and his group drove down from Queensland. In this context drug use appears to be seen as part of the “special occasion”. The NSW Ministry of Health provided information to suggest that young people tend to make plans in advance as to whether they will take drugs and, once purchased, it is unlikely people will change their minds about taking them.
@lysp: The 'for' argument of this debate is really weak due to the use of victim or a type of all or nothing 'hopeless' language. It's also alarmist at times as well, suggesting young people are dropping like flies.
i.e.
etc etc.
If it were a strong argument one wouldn't need to use this language.
People are obviously successfully taking massive quantities of drugs due to the widespread usage and very low rate of issues/deaths. They have little problems sourcing them, getting them into festivals and taking them whilst in there.
Anyone who was intellectually honest about drug health issues would be more focused on and feel much stronger about alcohol related deaths.
Either that or the long term affects of these things like anxiety, relationship breakdown, financial issues and so on.
The 'for' argument of this debate is really weak due to the use of victim or a type of all or nothing 'hopeless' language. It's also alarmist at times as well, suggesting young people are dropping like flies.
There are a few "like flies" incidents. But for different reasons.
Off the top of my head - Calder park 2009. - https://www.smh.com.au/national/melbourne-in-a-trance-to-dea…
Last week, 28 people at a trance music rave at Calder Park Raceway were taken to hospital suffering from GHB overdoses, while on New Year's Day 10 people were taken to hospitals from the Summadayze music festival. Two weeks before, 30 revellers were treated for the effects of GHB at a dance party in Festival Hall.
The drug is particularly dangerous because it is so easy to overdose on it, causing seizures, coma and death. There have been at least 10 deaths from the drug in Australia since 2000.
GHB would not be solved by pill testing - only user education.
Chapel St 2007 - https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-16/three-people-die-from…
Three people have died and more than 20 were taken to hospital in Melbourne over the weekend due to suspected overdoses of the drug MDMA, police have told the Melbourne Magistrates Court.
This could have been identified by pill testing. The substance in question actually contained 25C-NBOMe rather than MDMA. Pill testing would have identified this and potentially saved lives. The creators of these drugs added a little bit of MDMA to fool home tests.
In this caes, Victoria Police knew that this was circulating and chose not to issue a warning about it.
https://www.vice.com/en_au/article/3dp5pk/leaked-police-memo…
The reason for at least 5 of the 6 deaths relating to the report was MDMA toxicity - one possibly due to PMA where traces were found.
According to the report pills of the 1990-2010? contained 60-120mg, where pills of today due to a different manufacturing technique can contain 300mg+. So 3 pills of today is equivalent to 8-15 of the "old days".
This may or may not be picked up in testing (unless purity is included), but could be approached by the education component. Or at least putting out a warning saying "xyz is really strong - take half".
If it were a strong argument one wouldn't need to use this language.
People are obviously successfully taking massive quantities of drugs due to the widespread usage and very low rate of issues/deaths. They have little problems sourcing them, getting them into festivals and taking them whilst in there.
There isn't just one single argument. There are many different drugs, many reasons why people are getting hospitalised or dying.
The health approach should be doing as many things as possible to reduce harm. Every little bit counts. To name a few:
Not one thing will solve the issue, but like the road toll - lots of things in combination will try and attack all the angles and reduce injury / death.
Anyone who was intellectually honest about drug health issues would be more focused on and feel much stronger about alcohol related deaths.
Either that or the long term affects of these things like anxiety, relationship breakdown, financial issues and so on.
Even though some might be, not everyone who takes drugs at a festival is an "addict" and not all of them are taking them to mask mental health issues. While that may be the case for ice / heroin. Often festival drugs are simply taken for "fun" as an alternative to alcohol.
While your comments about pre-purchasing / taking some may seem logical. Often people are not always logical. Not even young people - older people as well. How many times have you seen someone kicked out of a pub/club for intoxication and rather than walking straight out - they skull their beer or drink and then walk out. Logic would say just walk out. Doesn't happen that way though.
Testing kits only testing for the presence of a drug. One pill can have a trace of MDMA (enough to show a positive) with a number of other toxic substances, but only test positive for MDMA. The testing machines at festivals are laser accurate and shows every single substance present in the pill from nail polish, to rat poisoning and research chemical compounds. This is far more accurate than $20 ezytest pill testing kits.
Can you please link me to one of these machines?
AFAIK there is no such thing as you described but I would love to be shown I'm wrong.
@hakkenuh: Cool! Thanks for the link.
The product page - https://www.bruker.com/products/infrared-near-infrared-and-r…
I agree, it's more accurate. Unsure how rugged these things are though (might get a lot of knocking about in a festival environment and they seem to be quite sensitive).
I'd still rather not have to pay for this though (equip purchase and maintenance, training, highly qualified operators being paid night shift, other staff - it'll add up).
A user pays system, sure.
@MementoMori: It's honestly not as expensive as you think. The company (pill testing Australia) has been offering to set up for free at the moment at festivals around Australia in the name of patron safety, and definitely will not need anymore funding than the same amount we provide to injecting clinics or for nicotine/smoking related treatment.
@hakkenuh: 'Offering to set up for free' in the hope they'll get a regular, ongoing juicy government contract to provide these services…. Just like all the green companies that push climate change… but yes, it would be good to see all the cost/benefit vs hospital admission etc.
@MementoMori: ATR-FTIR systems are 'rugged'. They're just a standalone box connected to a computer. You chuck a scraping of the pill under the headpiece and screw it down, press play on the computer, and it gives you a spectra of the chemicals in the pill which can then be matched to a database. It's really not sensitive to the festival environment, not when you just want to know what's in the pill.
You pay for the medical services that rush the kids to hospital anyway. You also pay, indirectly, for a lost taxpayer if they die. It is far cheaper to pay for a few FTIR instruments and operators than to lose even 1 taxpayer.
@vindictus: | ATR-FTIR systems are 'rugged'.
Hmmm… not really. They look like they're designed to be setup inside in a lab and stay there. Think of a festival - dust, taking it in/out of a car all the time, being used by people who don't own them, etc. They look about as rugged as a PS4. I would agree they are somewhat portable and don't seem overly fragile but they're not rugged. Wrap it in a chunky 'lifeproof' style phone case thing and then maybe.
The argument about the costs associated with hospital admission vs cost of testing is the better one to make.
Having said that, I'd bet money that the majority of the blow outs at festival is not due to dodgy drugs - it's due to dumb asses who take either way too much or just push themselves too hard with poly drug use, lots of alcohol, not enough food/sleep/rest/knowledge etc.
They could have the purest stuff in the world but if they are too lazy or stupid to measure it out properly (e.g. crystal MDMA) and take way too much then they'll get into trouble. Testing won't stop that.
I'm all for harm minimisation and support but I don't think this is a good bang for buck.
The amount of people getting into trouble with drugs because their 'ecstasy' pill contained PMA or something is a pretty low % of the people who get into trouble. Fortunately I believe most of these type of fake pills get stopped in the supply chain due to peoples conscious and natural market forces.
You’re missing the point. We want to control the testing for two reasons; the pill testing, but more importantly the conversation.
The 'conversation' ??
Also, no conversation going on about the HUGELY more impactful alcohol deaths - 1 a day in Victoria alone. We are still talking about Anna Woods who died 10+ years ago (of hydrotramena, not MDMA).
Yes, the conversation.
I agree that alcohol is a much bigger problem than a couple of pills. But we should be able to do more than one thing at a time. This discussion is about pill testing.
@Vote for Pedro: OK, I'll be more specific. What's the topic of 'conversation'?
If it's 'pill testing' then that's a circular dependency?
Sure, of course we can discuss both at the same time. However, would you agree the volume of the pill testing conversation is an 8/10 whereas the volume of the daily alcohol deaths is a 1/10? That's my point.
We should be educating kids on why the illicit drug trade is bad. Maybe tell them stories of drug mules having their families kidnapped, or drug cartels killing random citizens in Mexico.
Telling them that smoking a joint will lead to heroin the next day doesn't seem to work.
No stories.
Actual live events they can watch in person.
Let them watch a mate collapse at a concert. Real life story right there. If you can't tell them of the danger because of stupidity, show them.
A picture is worth 1000 words.
Telling them that smoking a joint will lead to heroin the next day doesn't seem to work.
Because it's a lie. Just like telling them that the war on drugs is their fault, is also a lie.
Maybe the coroner should recommend people don’t take drugs..you can’t legislate for stupidity
is that because the lawmakers are so stupid? Like it don't matter Oz is getting hotter?
We’ve been doing the “Don’t do drugs” thing for decades. Has it stopped people from taking drugs?
Perhaps the coroner has considered the failure of that approach and has recommended we try something different.
That coroner is a (profanity).
so because you don't agree with them that gives u the right to abuse them anonymously online?
Add $5 on the price of tickets and promoters can pay for pill testing
less than 50 cents if u do the math
I don't disagree with pills testing so long it's user pays. I have no desire to sponsor someone else's past time.
People who use drugs recreationally have to be the solution to the problem. You can't rely on this decade long argument between the coroner and police commissioner to have a result or outcome that will satisfy the problem and put an end to the debate. They will exacerbate the problem further always. It's part of their role in the subject.
The same way a police commissioner is conditioned to always oppose illegal drugs, recreational drug users need to be conditioned responsibly towards the way they consume drugs. Don't do it in public places where you're going to be charged $5 a bottle of water. Don't do it in places where authorities expect you to be. You are business to them, its got less to do with your safety.
Keeping drugs illegal fuels the black market drug producers and sellers, who are happy with the current state of criminality. Theyre the ones who know their business is dead if drugs are illegal. And you have to wonder why the Australian Government maintains their stance.
The Coroner has a solution based on facts, evidence, results from pill testing at events overseas, but common sense is no way to end an argument.
Do your drugs in the safety and privacy of your own home.
its not conditioning - its more to do with quota's and being seen to do something. the war on drugs has long been used to increase police funding and surveillance. add in terrorism and its big bucks putting together a domestic paramilitary to be used for the enforcement of social control as opposed to just rule of law.
everyone knows the war on drugs has been useless which is why piecemeal legalisation is occurring worldwide. But to give ground on the drug argument reduces the constant right wing political drive for more police and more paramilitary equipment.
Yeah do em in the privacy of your own home till you fizzle your brain and change from a productive person to a disable pension for life . Cost without medicals is astounding and not paid by someone in the privacy of their home .
i took recreational drugs when i was younger and i had some of the best times of my life, never hurt anyone or myself. back then and now its the people that drink alcohol which are the ones that cause all the problems. yet because its legal everyone just shuts up and just says oh dont mind him hes just drunk. what about all the tax dollars spent because of drunk drivers? all the police needed to control crowds in busy nightclub and bar areas, booze busses. victims of drunk drivers, assaults because of fights, alcoholics the list goes on.
people seem to have zero perspective on this issue the topic is PILLS (MDMA) which is a recreational drug NOT a substance that is widely regarded as addictive. testing can be as simple as putting a small sample into a solution with different colours and strength of colours determining if other substances are in them. and more extensively sent to a lab or even a portable machine can do the job. i would much rather go to a nightclub where everyone was on MDMA than a bar where everyone was piss drunk. the people on here spouting nonsense about drug addicts really need to get off there high horse, theyre probably the same guys that think getting drunk is a great night. the hypocrisy is absurd.
Nice statistical sample Bud of the happenings :)
Suggest you look up people with mental conditions on the disable pension permanently suffering from their use of amphetamines .
nice comprehension of the actual post and my comment BUD. this isnt about AMPHETAMINES. suggest you take some courses on literacy skills before you try and belittle someone. but well done at trying to sound witty.
Of course. Why discriminate?