Science Select commitee's rating of drugs

[Phil Stovell]

From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs

Most dangerous to least.

(L=Legal, A,B,C="controlled" Class A,B,C)

1. Heroin(A)

2. Cocaine(A)

3. Barbiturates(B)

4. Street Methadone(A)

5. Alcohol(L)

6. Ketamine(C)

7. Benzodiazepines(C)

8. Amphetamine(B)

9. Tobacco(L)

10. Buprenorphine(C)

11. Cannabis(C)

12. Solvents(L)

13. 4-MTA(A)

14. LSD(A)

15. Methylphenidate(B)

16. Anabolic Steroids(C)

17. GHB(C)

18. Ecstasy(A)

19. Amyl Nitrate(L)

20. Khat(L)

[Jasbird]

Post by Phil Stovell
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs
Most dangerous to least.
(L=Legal, A,B,C="controlled" Class A,B,C)
1. Heroin(A)
2. Cocaine(A)
3. Barbiturates(B)
4. Street Methadone(A)
5. Alcohol(L)
6. Ketamine(C)
7. Benzodiazepines(C)
8. Amphetamine(B)
9. Tobacco(L)
10. Buprenorphine(C)
11. Cannabis(C)
12. Solvents(L)
13. 4-MTA(A)
14. LSD(A)
15. Methylphenidate(B)
16. Anabolic Steroids(C)
17. GHB(C)
18. Ecstasy(A)
19. Amyl Nitrate(L)
20. Khat(L)

Calculated using a framework like this:
<http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmsctech/1031/103110.htm>

Note how this completely ignores the harms caused by prohibition itself?

including:
a) criminalising drug users, including teenagers and trampling upon
human rights;
b) fostering a violent criminal gang culture (which controls the drug
trade);
c) violence and destabilisation of drug-producing countries such as
Columbia, Mexico and Afghanistan;
d) the sale of low quality drugs made more dangerous by the cost-cutting
measures of traffickers. For instance hundreds of drug users have died
in the USA recently injecting fentanyl-laced heroin.


--------------------------------
Nobel-prize winning economist, Gary Becker, says:
legalize drugs, tax them as luxury goods to stop people
using them; it will be as efficient as criminal sanctions in
reducing use but far cheaper and more humane.
<http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2005/03/the_failure_of.html>
<http://home.uchicago.edu/~gbecker/illegalgoods_Becker_Grossman_Murphy.pdf>
--------------------------------

[Smolley]

Post by Phil Stovell
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs
Most dangerous to least.
(L=Legal, A,B,C="controlled" Class A,B,C)
1. Heroin(A)
2. Cocaine(A)
3. Barbiturates(B)
4. Street Methadone(A)
5. Alcohol(L)
6. Ketamine(C)
7. Benzodiazepines(C)
8. Amphetamine(B)
9. Tobacco(L)
10. Buprenorphine(C)
11. Cannabis(C)
12. Solvents(L)
13. 4-MTA(A)
14. LSD(A)
15. Methylphenidate(B)
16. Anabolic Steroids(C)
17. GHB(C)
18. Ecstasy(A)
19. Amyl Nitrate(L)
20. Khat(L)

19. should read Amyl Nitrite(L)

Nitramyl is another name for isoamyl nitrite. The name "amyl nitrite" is
actually ambiguous as it can refer not only to 3-methyl-1-nitrosooxybutane,
but also its isomers 2-methyl-1-nitrosooxybutane, 3-nitrosooxypentane,
2-nitrosooxypentane, and most commonly 1-nitrosooxypentane-n-amyl nitrite.
Other synonyms for amyl nitrite, which may refer to any isomer, include
Pentyl Alcohol Nitrite and Nitrous acid, pentyl ester. The name "amyl
nitrate" is commonly mistaken for amyl nitrite; they are two different
chemicals.

[Huge]

On 2006-07-31, Jasbird <***@houdini.com> wrote:
[snippage]

Post by Jasbird
Note how this completely ignores the harms caused by prohibition itself?

So far as politicians are concerned, there aren't any. They never, ever,
consider the downside of their legislation, which is ironic given that
the vast majority of it has the opposite effect to that desired.

[83YearsOfSocialResearch]

Post by Phil Stovell
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs
Most dangerous to least.
(L=Legal, A,B,C="controlled" Class A,B,C)
1. Heroin(A)
2. Cocaine(A)
3. Barbiturates(B)
4. Street Methadone(A)
5. Alcohol(L)
6. Ketamine(C)
7. Benzodiazepines(C)
8. Amphetamine(B)
9. Tobacco(L)
10. Buprenorphine(C)
11. Cannabis(C)
12. Solvents(L)

Dont know how they make cannabis worse than solvents (other than the fact
soap bar probably has solvents in along with ketamine and who knows what
else)

Solvents definitely do kill... instantly...

[Jasbird]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 14:33:46 GMT, 83YearsOfSocialResearch

Post by 83YearsOfSocialResearch

Post by Phil Stovell
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs
Most dangerous to least.
(L=Legal, A,B,C="controlled" Class A,B,C)
1. Heroin(A)
2. Cocaine(A)
3. Barbiturates(B)
4. Street Methadone(A)
5. Alcohol(L)
6. Ketamine(C)
7. Benzodiazepines(C)
8. Amphetamine(B)
9. Tobacco(L)
10. Buprenorphine(C)
11. Cannabis(C)
12. Solvents(L)

Dont know how they make cannabis worse than solvents (other than the fact
soap bar probably has solvents in along with ketamine and who knows what
else)
Solvents definitely do kill... instantly...

I think it has to do with the pattern of drug use. A small number of
people use solvents despite them being legal. That indicates that
solvent abuse is not a huge problem in society (for most of us) - only a
problem for a minority.

But..., what would happen if cocaine were legal? How many would be
doing it daily, every hour, every 15 minutes? That's the way they
thought it out - I'm not justifying the classifications - just
explaining how people might reach those conclusions.


--------------------------------
Nobel-prize winning economist, Gary Becker, says:
legalize drugs, tax them as luxury goods to stop people
using them; it will be as efficient as criminal sanctions in
reducing use but far cheaper and more humane.
<http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2005/03/the_failure_of.html>
<http://home.uchicago.edu/~gbecker/illegalgoods_Becker_Grossman_Murphy.pdf>
--------------------------------

[Pete nospam Zakel]

Post by Jasbird
But..., what would happen if cocaine were legal? How many would be
doing it daily, every hour, every 15 minutes?

Not all that many, really.

Alcohol will pretty much always be the most popular drug because it is the
most social drug (despite the occasional violence it spurs). Alcohol breaks
down inhibitions, and that's what makes it such a good party drug.

Cocaine use will probably have a short-lived boom when it is relegalized, but
most people won't care for it that much.

-Pete Zakel
(***@seeheader.nospam)

"186,000 Miles per Second. It's not just a good idea. IT'S THE LAW."

[Phil Stovell]

Post by Pete nospam Zakel
Cocaine use will probably have a short-lived boom when it is relegalized,
but most people won't care for it that much.

That's because it's such a crappy drug. Not to mention (which I am :-))
the ridiculous method of delivery. It may well have helped Mr Holmes
apprehend criminals, but it turns most people (that I know) into assholes.
Fortunately, the assholes return to normal 15 minutes after they've
shovelled the last line up their noses.

[Phil Stovell]

Post by Phil Stovell
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs

I'm waiting for Claude to correct that table and to comment on the
integrity, mental health and parenthood of the science select committee :-).

[Jasbird]

Post by Phil Stovell

Post by Phil Stovell
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs

I'm waiting for Claude to correct that table and to comment on the
integrity, mental health and parenthood of the science select committee :-).

Claude's mob never even bothered to send in a submission as evidence. I
guess they don't care much so long as drugs remain illegal. I bet they
are even encouraged that alcohol and tobacco are in Nutt's alternative
classification; presumably hoping that these two drugs too will one day
be illegal.


--------------------------------
Nobel-prize winning economist, Gary Becker, says:
legalize drugs, tax them as luxury goods to stop people
using them; it will be as efficient as criminal sanctions in
reducing use but far cheaper and more humane.
<http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2005/03/the_failure_of.html>
<http://home.uchicago.edu/~gbecker/illegalgoods_Becker_Grossman_Murphy.pdf>
--------------------------------

[Phil Stovell]

Post by Jasbird

Post by Phil Stovell

Post by Phil Stovell
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs

I'm waiting for Claude to correct that table and to comment on the
integrity, mental health and parenthood of the science select committee :-).

Claude's mob never even bothered to send in a submission as evidence. I
guess they don't care much so long as drugs remain illegal. I bet they are
even encouraged that alcohol and tobacco are in Nutt's alternative
classification; presumably hoping that these two drugs too will one day be
illegal.

Claude's a boozer and a fellow real ale buff. Nothing wrong with that!

Post by Jasbird
--------------------------------
legalize drugs, tax them as luxury goods to stop people using them; it
will be as efficient as criminal sanctions in reducing use but far
cheaper and more humane.
<http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2005/03/the_failure_of.html>
<http://home.uchicago.edu/~gbecker/illegalgoods_Becker_Grossman_Murphy.pdf>
--------------------------------

[TUM]

<uk.misc>
<Phil Stovell>
<Mon, 31 Jul 2006 16:35:51 +0100>

Post by Phil Stovell

Post by Phil Stovell
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs

I'm waiting for Claude to correct that table and to comment on the
integrity, mental health and parenthood of the science select committee :-)

Be careful what you wish for :-)

[Col. Douglas Mortimer]

Post by Phil Stovell
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs

Sorry, Phil but this is bollocks.

Where are the details?

What are the criteria?

How can 'solvents' be less harmful that cannabis when it is estimated that
nearly 40% of 'first timers' overdo it (to death)?

What are the age ranges?

What are the purities?

Etc, etc.

It's a start, agreed, but far too early for publishing.

[Phil Stovell]

Post by Col. Douglas Mortimer
It's a start, agreed, but far too early for publishing.

I expect we'll get updates from time to time and discuss them here.

[Pete nospam Zakel]

Any list that has heroin as more dangerous than alcohol, and cannabis (or any
other drug) as more dangerous than solvents, is total bullshit.

Solvents (a/k/a inhalants) are pretty much *the* most dangerous class of drugs
around.

-Pete Zakel
(***@seeheader.nospam)

Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend;
of course, inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.

-Groucho Marx

Post by Phil Stovell
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs
Most dangerous to least.
(L=Legal, A,B,C="controlled" Class A,B,C)
1. Heroin(A)
2. Cocaine(A)
3. Barbiturates(B)
4. Street Methadone(A)
5. Alcohol(L)
6. Ketamine(C)
7. Benzodiazepines(C)
8. Amphetamine(B)
9. Tobacco(L)
10. Buprenorphine(C)
11. Cannabis(C)
12. Solvents(L)
13. 4-MTA(A)
14. LSD(A)
15. Methylphenidate(B)
16. Anabolic Steroids(C)
17. GHB(C)
18. Ecstasy(A)
19. Amyl Nitrate(L)
20. Khat(L)
--
Phil Stovell, South Hampshire, UK
"They said I should not take him to the police, but rather
let him pay a dowry for my goat because he used it as his wife"

[Phil Stovell]

Post by Pete nospam Zakel
Any list that has heroin as more dangerous than alcohol, and cannabis (or
any other drug) as more dangerous than solvents, is total bullshit.

It's not only harm to the user that's included, it's harm to society as
well, through turf wars and addicts stealing to fund a habit. However,
they have only included street (illegal) heroin, not (legal) diamorphine,
which I think is wrong.

I think that legal diamorphine would certainly be below alcohol and,
possibly, cannabis.

Note: 4. *Street* Methadone(A).

Post by Pete nospam Zakel
Solvents (a/k/a inhalants) are pretty much *the* most dangerous class of
drugs around.

They don't cause turf wars etc. (because they're legal), that's why
they're so low down.

Post by Pete nospam Zakel
-Pete Zakel

[Pete nospam Zakel]

Post by Phil Stovell

Post by Pete nospam Zakel
Any list that has heroin as more dangerous than alcohol, and cannabis (or
any other drug) as more dangerous than solvents, is total bullshit.

It's not only harm to the user that's included, it's harm to society as
well, through turf wars and addicts stealing to fund a habit. However,
they have only included street (illegal) heroin, not (legal) diamorphine,
which I think is wrong.

Not only that, but turf wars and "addicts stealing to fund a habit" is mostly
a result of prohibition, not the drugs themselves.

And if heroin (a/k/a diamorphine) were OTC legal for adults, there wouldn't
be any "street heroin" (for the most part) just as there isn't anyone making
their own stills and distilling their own alcohol (for the most part).

Post by Phil Stovell

Post by Pete nospam Zakel
Solvents (a/k/a inhalants) are pretty much *the* most dangerous class of
drugs around.

They don't cause turf wars etc. (because they're legal), that's why
they're so low down.

Again, that is a side-effect of prohibition. Were all the drugs on the list
legal, they wouldn't be causing turf wars, etc.

You can't blame the drugs for their legal status.

-Pete Zakel
(***@seeheader.nospam)

Worst Month of 1981 for Downhill Skiing:
August. The lines are the shortest, though.

-Steve Rubenstein

[Col. Douglas Mortimer]

Post by Pete nospam Zakel

Post by Phil Stovell

Post by Pete nospam Zakel
Solvents (a/k/a inhalants) are pretty much *the* most dangerous class of
drugs around.

They don't cause turf wars etc. (because they're legal), that's why
they're so low down.

Again, that is a side-effect of prohibition. Were all the drugs on the list
legal, they wouldn't be causing turf wars, etc.

Solvents are an excellent example of how kids will get high no matter what
The Law does to try and prevent it.

We all use escapism to some extent, albeit drugs, booze, books, movies or
meditation.

When you are trying to escape from Hell on Earth, the fact you might get
banged up for a few years or even the thought of death isn't entirely hard
to accept.

When you are addicted you don't even think about whether you are shooting
brick dust or smoking dog shit.

And there's always some bright fucking spark who wants to tell you that
Jesus loves you. Yea, right. You think I care? All I want is enough to get
me through one more day.

[Jasbird]

On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 20:43:09 +0100, "Col. Douglas Mortimer"

Post by Col. Douglas Mortimer

Post by Pete nospam Zakel

Post by Phil Stovell

Post by Pete nospam Zakel
Solvents (a/k/a inhalants) are pretty much *the* most dangerous class of
drugs around.

They don't cause turf wars etc. (because they're legal), that's why
they're so low down.

Again, that is a side-effect of prohibition. Were all the drugs on the
list legal, they wouldn't be causing turf wars, etc.

Solvents are an excellent example of how kids will get high no matter what
The Law does to try and prevent it.

Solvents are an excellent example of how drug prohibition encorages
extremely risky behavior; with consequent severe harm.

Heroin is another example. Discouraging use means making heroin more
dangerous: banning clean needles, banning paraphenalia, lying about the
effects, etc. The net effect - people do it anyway but harm is greatly
increased.


--------------------------------
Nobel-prize winning economist, Gary Becker, says:
legalize drugs, tax them as luxury goods to stop people
using them; it will be as efficient as criminal sanctions in
reducing use but far cheaper and more humane.
<http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2005/03/the_failure_of.html>
<http://home.uchicago.edu/~gbecker/illegalgoods_Becker_Grossman_Murphy.pdf>
--------------------------------

[Jasbird]

Post by Phil Stovell

Post by Pete nospam Zakel
Any list that has heroin as more dangerous than alcohol, and cannabis (or
any other drug) as more dangerous than solvents, is total bullshit.

It's not only harm to the user that's included, it's harm to society as
well, through turf wars and addicts stealing to fund a habit. However,
they have only included street (illegal) heroin, not (legal) diamorphine,
which I think is wrong.
I think that legal diamorphine would certainly be below alcohol and,
possibly, cannabis.

The drug experts strongly disagree with you on that.

Here they go:
<http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmhaff/318/1112701.htm>

Look at questions: 490 - 495, 503 - 505, 519 - 535, 551 - 562

One of the problems with these parliamentary committees that they never
ask the right questions. They'll ask a question about decriminalization
or legalization but they don't ask how the current evidence base might
change under a legalized framework. The get a reply about the dangers of
overdoses but neglect to ask how that problem might be minimized. The
experts would probably say - we can't say - we need to do more research!


--------------------------------
Nobel-prize winning economist, Gary Becker, says:
legalize drugs, tax them as luxury goods to stop people
using them; it will be as efficient as criminal sanctions in
reducing use but far cheaper and more humane.
<http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2005/03/the_failure_of.html>
<http://home.uchicago.edu/~gbecker/illegalgoods_Becker_Grossman_Murphy.pdf>
--------------------------------

[Jasbird]

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5230006.stm#drugs>

The House of Commons and the House of Lords are in recess until
October 9. (26.07.06)


--------------------------------
Nobel-prize winning economist, Gary Becker, says:
legalize drugs, tax them as luxury goods to stop people
using them; it will be as efficient as criminal sanctions in
reducing use but far cheaper and more humane.
<http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2005/03/the_failure_of.html>
<http://home.uchicago.edu/~gbecker/illegalgoods_Becker_Grossman_Murphy.pdf>
--------------------------------