Drug campaigners today backed the warning from police chiefs that new Government powers to ban legal highs will not work.
The UK Drug Policy Commission (UKDPC), which analyses drug laws, said simply adding to the long list of substances already banned "won't make much difference".
Roger Howard, the UKDPC's chief executive, said: "We are deluding ourselves if we think that the temporary ban will solve the problem."
It comes after the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) said the solution to tackling legal highs does not lie in "adding inexorably to the list of illicit substances".
The police chiefs questioned "the extent to which legislation can realistically be used to address active choices being made by (predominantly young) people".
Mr Howard said: "It's right for the Government to react quickly when a worrying new drug emerges.
"But as Acpo have said, just adding the drug to the long list already controlled won't make much difference.
"The police and forensics are under too much pressure already to be able to offer much deterrent to potential users.
"We are deluding ourselves if we think that the temporary ban will solve the problem."
He went on: "We should think instead about what other powers we can use. Trading standards controls could provide a boosted first line of defence.
"We should encourage retailers to work with the authorities to reduce the damage that drug use can cause, and allow us to bring some discipline to an unregulated market."
Even the Government's own drugs advisers have concerns over the new powers, saying they hope a better way of tackling legal highs could be found.
Professor Les Iversen, chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), said: "Picking them off one by one is not necessarily very productive."
As one substance is banned, another one is produced which has similar effects but which is designed to avoid the scope of the ban, he said.
"That happens all the time.
"Hopefully we can find a better way of addressing the problem, rather than just hitting the compounds one by one."
Speaking at a public meeting in central London last week, he said consumer protection legislation and the Medicines Act 1968 could be used instead.
And he warned that the committee could become overwhelmed if too many legal highs were banned by the Government.
The row follows Acpo's submission to the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee inquiry into the Government's drug policy.
The document, seen by The Times and confirmed by Acpo, said: "From an early stage, the chair of the Association of Chief Police Officers' (Acpo) drugs committee was of the opinion that the solution to the particular challenge of legal highs did not lie in adding inexorably to the list of illicit substances.
"A key question for the Government to determine is the extent to which legislation can realistically be used to address active choices being made by (predominantly young) people and to tackle the undoubted harms caused by the misuse of substances taken essentially for pleasure."
The police would continue to "focus their energies on serious criminality" and "take a less robust enforcement approach" when it comes to personal possession, it added.
Last week, mexxy, which is sold as an alternative to ketamine and has been linked to two deaths, became the first so-called legal high to be subject to the Government's new banning powers.
It will be made illegal for up to 12 months while the Government's drugs advisers consider whether it should be permanently controlled.
But the move prompted Speaker's wife Sally Bercow to say she was tempted to try it before it was too late.
Mrs Bercow assured her more than 45,000 followers on Twitter she would not actually buy any, but admitted she was tempted and "now obsessed with the stuff, despite never having heard of it 1/2 hr ago".
"Am I the only one now slightly tempted to try mexxy before it becomes illegal? I won't, obvs," she wrote.
The ban followed concerns that two people whose bodies were found in Leicestershire in February might have taken some form of the drug after buying it over the internet.
Police warned people not to take mexxy, which was advertised and sold as a safe alternative to the class C drug ketamine, after the bodies of a 59-year-old woman and a 32-year-old man were found in Leicester and Melton Mowbray on February 11 and 12.
Under the new temporary banning order, anyone caught making, supplying or importing mexxy, or methoxetamine, could face up to 14 years in prison and an unlimited fine under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, the Home Office said.
Simple possession will not be an offence, but police and border officials will be allowed to search or detain anyone they suspect of having the drug and seize, keep or dispose of a substance they suspect is mexxy.
A Home Office spokeswoman said: "The UK is leading the way in cracking down on new psychoactive substances by banning them while the harms they cause are investigated.
"Drugs ruin lives and cause misery to families and communities.
"Our strategy is to keep drugs off the streets and punish the dealers."
Chief Constable Tim Hollis, Acpo's lead on drugs, said: "The policing response to illegal drugs continues to be focused on the criminals involved in drug trafficking and dealing.
"The changing landscape of 'legal highs' presents a particular challenge to all those involved in tackling the harms caused by such substances.
"This is largely due to the speed with which such substances are developed, their availability and the use of social networks to promote them."
The Humberside police chief went on: "The police service will continue to work with Government and with public health bodies to develop an appropriate response to the harms these new substances present."
Martin Barnes, chief executive of DrugScope, said: "Acpo is right to highlight the significant challenges for policing and enforcement with the emergence of so-called legal highs, particularly at a local level.
"A number of new substances have appeared since mephedrone was classified, although fortunately none have reached similar levels of availability or use."
He went on: "Temporary banning orders enable swifter action to tackle the blatant importation, production and supply of new psychoactive substances, but we agree with Acpo that new approaches should also be explored.
"The priority should be how best to minimise potential risks and harms. While enforcement has a role to play, simply banning an ever-growing number of substances is a blunt and insufficient response."
Professor David Nutt, who resigned as the ACMD's chairman in November 2009 over the Government's decision to reclassify cannabis from a class C to a class B drug, also backed the police chiefs' warning.
Prof Nutt, chairman of the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs, said: "Comments by police chiefs on the inability of the current system of legislation to effectively address drug harms shows just how far we have come in our understanding of how to best tackle the drugs issue.
"Acpo's pragmatic appraisal should indicate to us all that we need to take a long look at the current approach to drugs and ask whether it really best reflects where harms lie and how best to reduce them.
"If we are serious about preventing harm, it is essential that we take an objective look at the evidence."
WESLEY JOHNSON AND DIANA PILKINGTON MONDAY 02 APRIL 2012
Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.