Darklight Posted May 13, 2012 The more things change, the more they stay etc... Some time ago *this* happened, and I didn't notice til now. I'd assumed the NDPSC was still around. Did anyone else note it? Is anyone else following this stuff? What differences could it potentially make? I can't determine any this end from my reading of it but YMMV, there are minds here better than mine From : http://www.tga.gov.a...ttees-acmcs.htm Under revised scheduling arrangements, which took effect on 1 July 2010, the Secretary to the Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA) (or the Secretary's delegate) superseded the National Drugs and Poisons Schedule Committee (NDPSC) as the decision maker for the scheduling of medicines and chemicals. It's worth keeping up with the Record of Reasons after each meeting if you can, and very much worth monitoring calls for submissions for future meetings. Once they have a decision you can't submit an objection to it *unless* you made a submission to the original proposal Which has previously cost us, and the rest of the Australian research community, and presumably the public greatly. I really should read this stuff more often, am put off by the fact that I usually need a lot of help with it Interesting discussion on kava and other entheogens as well as synthetic cannabinoids in Feb 2012 record of reasons, I'll post it in another thread 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LikeAshesWeFade Posted May 14, 2012 I'm interested to read about this discussion on entheogens and synth cannabinoids! I always try to keep up with what's banned and what isn't. Will keep an eye out for your other thread Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marcel Posted May 14, 2012 I wonder who the "applicant" for the entheogen discussion was? I seems like it could have been one of the people on this forum, in particular a certain outspoken Melbournian, who spoke at last year's EGA... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shruman Posted May 14, 2012 http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=27892&hl=submission&fromsearch=1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marcel Posted May 14, 2012 Oh. That's not who I was thinking... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pat Uri Posted May 14, 2012 (edited) I'm wondering what's going on too? Just saw the line up for the committee - talking about stacking the stalls! Phew! - I don't know if it's a case of John Godfrey Saxe poem "Blind Men and the Elephant" or "virgins trying to handle a dick" - most of the expertise is in the abuse of legal drugs! Their experience is skewed by only what they see in hospital - not the other percent who are doing just fine, thank you, man. What's Dept.of Health and Aging gotta do with correct labelling, MSDS, logistics, etc. of industrial and agricultural chemicals, poisons and materials. (Unless they specifically got my old, wrinkly arse in mind!) Industry HATE scheduling - they get sprung all the time! Too lazy to do it - and don't give a shit if someone gets hurt. It reveals their "trade secrets". Scheduling something as an "oxidizing compound" is much cheaper in insurance than "explosive" - even though it's still just as dangerous! Me think that some Capitalists are worming their way out of their responsibility and liability. They account for 99% of the material scheduled! - bloody oath give it to some struggling government department renown for coverups! They'll have more self-regulation than ever - and by that I mean no regulation! Who we gonna dob them into - the company nurse? Edited May 14, 2012 by Pat Uri Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Torsten Posted May 16, 2012 The TGA is a corporation. A statutory corporation, but nonetheless a corporation. It has always resisted being involved in the regulation of non therapeutics because it is the therapeutics industry member fees that fund the processes. So essentially companies like Pfizer pay for the scheduling and enforcement of S9 drugs. One effect this has had is that the TGA was always overly cautious simply because it had to and because it had nothing to lose by being so. The new structure is more democratic. The responsibility falls directly at the delegate of the elected government minister, ie the minister himself. The minister is answerable for any fuck ups. While we still have a drug paranoid government this has resulted in there being not much change from the previous approach, but this may not always be the case in the future. The whole process has also become a lot more open and there are now many more submissions from interested parties that are not pharmaceutical companies. Anyone can have an input. Again, not that it has much effect right now, but it does serve to put positions on record that may not be tenable in the future. The kava scheduling is one such situation. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pat Uri Posted May 17, 2012 For all younguns who do not know (and frankly won't be told) once upon a time there lived the Commonwealth Department of Health who ruled the kingdom of drugs and poisons with the "Ten Commandants" known as "Standard for the Uniform Scheduling of Drugs and Poisons" that came out annually. Plants - as hippy nonsense -didn't get much mention - but the tax and excise control of chemical commodities, their laboratory underwriting for insurance, liability, profit and marketability did. The commandants are:- SCHEDULE ONE - Poisons of such danger to life as to warrant their being available only from medical practitioners, dentists, veterinary surgeons, pharmacists or persons licensed to sell S1 poison....e.g. Antimony, Bromine, Mercury (and wolfsbane, belladonna, hensbane, datura, brugsmansia, nux vomica, lobelia, stramonium, savin, phosphorus, tansy, etc. are specifically mentioned) SCHEDULE TWO- Poisons for therapeutic use that should be available to the public only from pharmacies; or persons licensed to sell S2 poisons...e.g.acetyldihydrocodeine, benzocaine, chloroform, ddt, doxylamine, ethylmorphine, iodine, lindane, vet grade pseudoephedrine, etc. SCHEDULE THREE - Poisons for therapeutic use that are dangerous or are so liable to abuse as to warrant their availability to the public being restricted to supply by pharamacists or medical, dental or vet. Professional S3 for dispensing - known as OTC.. Pseudoephedrine is notably S3 - take a doctor's prescription for it and the pharmacist will rip it up. It is under Schedule 3 - not Schedule 4 - how else will the cops chase up the speed lab? It's all about catching crims, not stopping supply! SCHEDULE FOUR - Prescription only. Pharmacist has little power over S4. Many 'doctor shoppers' stay here. SCHEDULE FIVE - Poisons that must be available but require caution in handling, storage and use. Most of industry (99% of the bulk of scheduling) is here. Caustic, ammonia, acetic acid and anhydride, Arsenic, Barium, Roundup, Industrial acids, ketones, phosphorus acids, etc. by the 40t unit. SCHEDULE SIX - The classic poisons. Anything that takes less than 2g to ruin health. Everything here is suicidial. SCHEDULE SEVEN - all my R&D favorites - poisons of exceptional danger - where toxicological information is incomplete or unknown. Exceptional precautions in handling. E.g. 4-aminopyridine, fluroacetic acid, methylbromide, (nicotine at the levels I research at), paraquat, Polychlorinated Biphenyls, Thallium, Vinyl Chloride, really a whole load of stuff you should not have heard of. SCHEDULE EIGHT - Dangerous drugs of addiction. Need I say more? SCHEDULE NINE <@ i actually designed the label! S9 - Outlawed substance, subject to government control. No minimum for procession - merest trace of presence will do. Schedule "sin bin" for everything that will never be recognised on the schedule. No therapeutic use - but not exactly poison. Cannabis is here - hence why all the "Holy Smokin' JeWHovah" analogs were not capable of being called "drugs" either....they were plant hormones for bonzai...interesting loophole while it lasted. There is all manner of safety warnings, label requirements, MSDS, etc. that go with scheduling. You'll notice every part of it is about supply, sale, correct taxing, etc. little about consumption. I had heard they were re-engineering the whole system. I'm retired from the industry, leaving others to become very, very busy people! They didn't know what they were doing before, I doubt they do now. They think that by making more subroutines, more discussion, more devolving, more complexity that they will make it more simple? Little changes, as much as it stays the same in their status quo. Will they ever get around to scheduling tobacco or cannabis - they've had several centuries. A little more "committee" speed things up? When all it takes is decisive open decision making. Haven't they heard of the dialectic materialism between themselves and the people? I come to this forum for information, because they cannot provide it. Get yourself off to a fully expenses paid Pharmaceutical Company convention in Las Vegas. There they indulge all the young medicos to try their new chems on human subjects with bonus points. Free samples! holidays! bribes! The money those drug manufacturers make! - legally or illegally there fortunes to be made (and competition to kneecap) - if you're a soulless capitalist! Now that's the way modern health is dispensed! Big Pharm rules! - I feel safer already! Folks - I write to this forum largely because I do not have $40K handy to lay down to Therapeutic Goods every time I have a good idea. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pat Uri Posted May 17, 2012 (edited) The main conflict in therapeutic goods scheduling over poisons&drugs is MSDS, labelling, emergency procedure, etc. (In fact I'd hate to see the full scheduling of any pot plant!) Classic example: - oven cleaner would be detergent and caustic. Detergent - should be labelled "if ingested induce vomiting" by Schedule. Caustic solutions - should be labelled "if ingested DO NOT induce vomiting" by Schedule. Big conflict! - who gets to decide? In the end - Mountains moved, oceans drained - it was decided the former apply in solutions >10% caustic. Hence, the near industry standard of 9.5% caustic - exempt from schedule (NOS) The only benefit of being blinded by 9.5% or 10% being the liability avoided under schedule. Again it is only your rich competition who raised the "burden of proof" and dobs you in to the law. You must pursue your own patent. Cigarette companies are behind the prosecution of unlicensed tobacco growers, the police would prefer they just didn't see it. It's got so bad - there are certain oven cleaners that well exceed 9.5% without labelling. There is no one to dob them into either - the company nurse? Edited May 17, 2012 by Pat Uri 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pat Uri Posted May 17, 2012 Ha! Ha! A bit of delving and I suspect Industry wants one form of Scheduling for them - and another for the common folk, trying to do their own research and development, or stock a lab., etc. All in keeping the means of making wealth off the working class - I'll be bound! If any other SABsters wanna form a committee with me to advise on all manner of substances, co-ordinate task forces to survey, test and analyse native and introduced plants for naughties, raid gardens for compliency, define the status of new compounds etc. we'll do it for half the price of the present committee's tender. Who's with me? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pat Uri Posted May 18, 2012 (edited) "virgins trying to handle a dick" With respect to the distinguished panel's expertise, qualification, experience and, no doubt. impartiality I would like to amend the above to read:- "virgins - who are also academic, late middleaged, "menhating" lesbians - trying to handle a dick" as better representative of the circumstantial metaphor. May I publically state here I have nothing against virgins or lesbians (or combinations thereof) - in fact I love them! - and support pluralism in society. Thank you, valued readers! Edited May 18, 2012 by Pat Uri 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darklight Posted May 19, 2012 The whole process has also become a lot more open and there are now many more submissions from interested parties that are not pharmaceutical companies. Anyone can have an input. Again, not that it has much effect right now, but it does serve to put positions on record that may not be tenable in the future. The kava scheduling is one such situation. Thanks T, that wasn't obvious to me from my readings of the change, but it is important to know Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
