1. 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.
    PLEASE HELP
  1. catseye
    He is credited with inventing legal highs. So why is the man who made a fortune evading the law now calling for the authorities to step in? Jeremy Laurance meets him.


    It is a remarkable statement - the rock musician and drugs activist credited with spawning the global legal highs industry is now calling for new laws in Britain to protect the millions of young people who take the substances.

    Legal highs are synthetic chemical substitutes for illegal recreational drugs such as cannabis, cocaine and ecstasy which often sell at a lower price. The industry has grown dramatically in the past decade in response to demand from clubbers and festival goers, but it has proved difficult to regulate, and some products have proved lethal.

    Matt Bowden, 42, is known as the godfather of the legal highs industry. He was a user of crystal meth – a highly addictive form of amphetamine – in the 1990s until he teamed up with a pharmacologist in New Zealand to find a safer, synthetic alternative. Two family members had died from the effects of drugs and he concluded better substitutes must be developed.

    The resulting product, called BZP, sold so well that it was noticed beyond New Zealand's borders. Soon budding chemists everywhere were busy tweaking the molecular structure of existing drugs such as cocaine and cannabis and selling them as "legal" alternatives for large amounts of money.


    Dealers found that instead of negotiating an illegal supply of cocaine from dangerous south American thugs they could buy a kilo of mephedrone from a nice man from China with no questions asked.

    Now Mr Bowden says that new regulations are needed to protect consumers from the products he helped spawn.

    "The goal should be to encourage development of progressively safer alternatives to alcohol and the other drugs," he said, as figures were released showing an explosion in the number of new chemical substances coming on the market and in the number of online shops selling them.

    The number of new chemical entities is growing each year and has increased threefold since 2008. Figures from the European drugs monitoring centre in Lisbon show 49 new substances were identified in 2011 up from 24 in 2009 and 13 in 2008.

    There has also been a boom in online shops selling legal highs, up fourfold in the UK since 2010. Similar increases have been seen across Europe. Mr Bowden, speaking from Paris where he is on holiday, said the legal high industry should be regulated like the drink, food or medicine industries. He had "stepped back" from running his company Stargate and now acts as a consultant on the industry to the New Zealand government.

    "It is clearly possible to regulate. The level of regulation should be commensurate with the level of risk, and the majority of these drugs carry a level of risk far lower than the risks associated with many other normal daily activities including driving a car, swimming off the beach and drinking alcohol.

    "However, given the political pressure on the consumption of drugs (other than alcohol) and the availability of technology and screening systems for risk analysis of new drugs developed for the pharmaceutical industry, it seems prudent that parallel systems be implemented for regulation of new psychoactives."

    At a briefing in London this week organised by the Science Media Centre experts warned the growth of the industry posed an increasing risk.

    Dr John Ramsey, a toxicologist from St George's Medical School, University of London, said: "There are 50 new compounds emerging each year. There were 49 in 2011 and 29 so far this year. What can we do about it? It is clearly not right that young people should be able to buy and use recreational drugs that have never been tested."

    Dr Ramsey said it was "always possible" something would be produced that was "really toxic". A drug called MPTP caused symptoms of Parkinson's disease – tremor and stiffness – in every user who took it.

    "We haven't had a drug that causes that level of harm since. Drug-related deaths usually involve more than one drug – it is impossible to say which caused it. In very few cases can we say this drug caused this death. But the potential is there for long-term chronic harm."

    The appeal of legal highs is based on their price, availability and effectiveness. When supply problems with cocaine, a class A drug attracting the maximum penalty for possession, led to a drop in the purity of the drug available on the street and a rise in price, dealers stepped in, offering mephedrone which was cheaper, purer, Class B and had much the same effect.

    In April, the Government banned methoxetamine, also known as Mexxy, under a temporary class drugs order, the first time the new power has been used, giving the Advisory Council of the Misuse of Drugs 12 months to assess its harms.

    But the effect of removing it from the market has been to make the advisory council's job in assessing it more difficult because there is less user experience to go on.

    Dr Ramsey said: "Controlling this market by restricting supply is pretty much doomed to failure. The only way is to reduce demand. We need to persuade young people taking these drugs is a stupid thing to do."

    New drugs: How legal highs beat the law

    Anyone who paid attention in their organic chemistry classes will remember compounds being illustrated by a series of carbon, oxygen and hydrogen atoms joined together by little lines. Manufacturers of legal highs pay close attention to these diagrams. The difference between a legal high and an illegal one is often a hydrogen atom here, a carbon atom there.

    Over recent years there has been an explosion of compounds which mimic the effects of popular drugs such as cocaine, ecstasy and cannabis but are chemically different enough to avoid falling into the illegal category. Chemical compounds are effectively legal until they are banned, meaning the Government has to be reactive once the chemicals hit the market.

    According to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addication, the number of online shops offering at least one psychoactive substance or product rose from 314 in January 2011 to 690 in January 2012.

    Laboratories in countries with less strict laws on manufacturing chemicals are churning out new compounds at a rate of knots. One example which caught media headlines two years ago was mephedrone, a chemical with similar properties to ecstasy, which was shipped primarily from labs in China and marketed as "plant food".

    The Government banned mephedrone. But replacements soon filled a gap in the market. Methoxetamine, a popular alternative to the tranquiliser ketamine, was recently put on a temporary ban list. No doubt in a lab somewhere someone is fiddling with a couple of carbon atoms to find an alternative.

    Jeremy Laurance
    The Independent
    13 July, 2012

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/matt-bowden-the-drugs-lord-whos-strictly-legal-7939583.html

Comments

  1. sledhead583
    Definately agree with Bowden and Ramsey. It will be interesting to see what other countries will do in response to the problems created by research chemicals. I live in the U.S. and it seems like every time I go to certain shops they want to sell me some new legal alternative to something and I have noticed that these RCs have been progressively getting more potent.
  2. Aminatrix
    This is like one of those child projects that gets away from you. If i could talk to Mr Lawrence i would say that a better solution would have been to start harm-reduction kiosks/sites/pamphlets and the same time he first noticed the rising trends.

    Things are definitely out of control right now, but no government (with the exception of maybe swiss, perhaps netherlands eventually) will choose the correct course, which is of course, regulating these compounds, providing safe legal channels so that purity and identity is guaranteed (although mislabeling will still happen on occasion, as people are human).

    Governments are already starting a disturbing trend: scheduling all of these psychoactive compounds under schedule 1 (or the equivalent in your country)

    What will happen next is that entire families of RC's will be banned, and chemists will try entirely compounds, or modifications that drastically alter the structure and effect just to be legal.

    Chemicals will be made that intend to 'breakdown' to controlled substances in the body (aka "prodrugs") and these may break up into a dangerous compound + the psychoactive compound, or worse, might not breakdown due to a genetic lack-of-enzyme in a small % of people, causing liver, kidney, or other irreparable damage.

    As the signature in the OP, every prohibition springs an underground. Well some say it's because people want to do what you tell them not to, and while that's true, the fact is that the desire to alter one's state of mind is as strong as the 3 natural forces, sex, food and shelter. Of course this mostly applies to people already familiar with psychoactive compounds, but if you look into history or other cultures, you will see some form of mind-alteration in nearly every one.

    The answer is not to just keep making new laws and then skirting them, this is a game that gets more dangerous the longer it goes on, and the people in power are only concerned with keeping the populace working: to make money that gets funneled to the top while workers are underpaid.

    The Swiss are the only one's I actually agree with, (although i am not up to date on every government's policy. Basically the Swiss mantra is 'we don't follow other countries leads, we decide what's best for our people'. And if you look at the voting statistics, a very comparatively large number of Swiss folk vote compared to Americans. Even though switzerland has a fairly high addicted population, many other places are higher. More importantly: only swiss policies have actually led to safer drug use, in a world where people are going to use drugs at all costs.
  3. Lelouch
    He probably realised that the legal highs coming out nowadays are way more dangerous and addictive than their original illegal counterpart.
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!