Highs and lows of burgeoning synthetic drug market

[Bush Turkey]

pulled from ABC am radio website

""New South Wales is conducting a parliamentary inquiry into how to regulate synthetic drugs, and Queensland's going to announce a new policy in the coming weeks. But no matter the legal response, it seems synthetic drugs could be here to stay.""

anyone know anymore info about this???

Edited October 27, 2012 by Bush Turkey

[Torsten]

I've been attending the NSW enquiry and have made a few comments about it. and yes, I get the overwhelming feeling that almost everyone has realised that 'more of the same' will not work. Lawyers association, drug squad chief, scientists, medics, educators, various government departments, etc all seem to indicate we need to try something new, with the NZ model being of the greatest interest. The only real opposition was from the mining industry.

[whitewind]

EDIT: On a per-user basis, this probably isn't very accurate. The information we require is how frequent cannibalism actually is, under the influence or not. What is most interesting, is that I have not heard of any of the cases mentioned, yet bath salt linked cannibalism is all over the media.

Edited October 27, 2012 by whitewind

[Bush Turkey]

interesting times! Does anyone have a link outlining the NZ model?

[SunChaser]

Here’s a media release explaining it.

http://www.nzherald....jectid=10839585

[Heretic]

These RCs don't even have the chemical name on the label ??? How can the user know what they are taking ?

[goneski]

And how is that working out for the Kiwis?

Call me a cynic, but it just seems like a blanket ban under the guise of 'regulation'.

[Anodyne]

And how is that working out for the Kiwis?

Call me a cynic, but it just seems like a blanket ban under the guise of 'regulation'.

 

Don't think of it as a ban. What they're doing is removing untested drugs from the market until they pass basic toxicity testing. These are the same tests that any drug must pass to be approved for therapeutic use. Now in practice this could work out with no "legal highs" ever being approved under this system, but if that was the intent, then why the hell did they bother creating a bunch of new regulations? They could've just said "nah, banned" and pounded their gavels.

The fact that they are even considering the approval of recreational drug use is staggering - I mean, think about the implications of that! And yes, there are flaws in this plan - the main one that I can see so far is the fact that it will be up to private businesses to finance the expensive testing - so their interest would likely be in making loads of money by selling said drugs, not necessarily for the safety of consumers. But that's already the case with all therapeutic drugs - and that's the main message I'm taking away from this. They're essentially putting recreational drugs and therapeutic drugs on the same footing, saying "prove that it's safe enough, and you can go ahead and market it". Hell, even if all the testing never results in any approvals, it will still be interesting to have some safety data on all these new compounds. All in all, I think it's a pretty amazing step.

Edited October 30, 2012 by Anodyne

[goneski]

I'm still extremely skeptical..

My main concern is that they won't put recreational and therapeutic drugs on the same footing, and there will be a complete lack of transparency.

Sure, this could be seen as a leap forward, but given the current 'war on drugs', there's every reason to be skeptical.

Surely human clinical trials requires government licensing. How can manufacturers even be certain they would be granted this licensing? Even if they were

to make substances that may (or may not) be safe for human consumption, who's to say they'll even be given the chance to prove themselves?

I doubt manufacturers can just cough up a lump sum for testing and be given a yes or no as to whether or not their product is legal and marketable.

I suppose we'll wait and see.

Anyone have any information on how this has panned out in NZ? Or is it too early yet?

edit: this is from July... http://www.abc.net.a...ugs-ban/4134280

The department of health estimated that carrying out clinical tests would cost manufacturers up to NZ $2.0 million for each synthetic drug, effectively deterring them from trying to sell such substances in New Zealand.

 

And that's one reason for skepticism. Is this really about safety (consider marijuana here)? Or just a deterrent and continued (failed) attempt at the war on drugs?

Considering marijuana is still illegal here, and it seems sure as shit that's unlikely to change for now -- manufacturers of synthetics have no chance in hell.

Given the 'anything goes' synthetic drug market at the moment, and how there seems to be a lot of synthetics out there that are actually illegal -- how is this likely to change?

The boys in blue have already stated they're having an incredibly hard time policing all the new synthetics that are cropping up.. Would this model / legislation affect that?

Edited October 30, 2012 by SYNeR

[Halif]

Well said, Anodyne.

[ghosty]

what?.... all this because some dumb freak banned a marijuana plant. LOL ban more plants, expect more of this i guess. all sounds rather australian to me. i have seen most recipes for these compounds and i can say with no doubt that these can be made very cheap and fast with almost no equipment at all, HUGE money makers. unlike say, growing marijuana, that takes a long time, makes alomost no money etc. they said that plant is banned because it makes people to much money and therfore may support acts of terrorism. well, what banning it did was create exactly the situation that didnt exist with the plant 100's of times worse than they said it did. illogical, backwards, ignorant and stupid. like i said, australian.

[santiago]

kids- do a vodka shooter in your eyeball, what you see is what you get, do not do legal drugs. ( disclaimer - only do illegal drugs where legal or where you wont get caught)

[chnt]

^ that shit is smart, just like oral gavage or anal shots of spirits.

[Torsten]

SYNer - have a look at the history of social tonics and the legislation under different governments in NZ and you will get a better understanding of why this is actually happening and why it should be taken at face value.

[Torsten]

kids- do a vodka shooter in your eyeball, what you see is what you get, do not do legal drugs. ( disclaimer - only do illegal drugs where legal or where you wont get caught)

 

another dumbass comment from someone who hasn't got a clue.

The main reason this pisses me off is not your ignorance, but the fact that you endanger lives with it. The times of 'legal highs' being weak are well and truely over and I get to deal with the consequences [helping emergency staff and sellers] of stupid statements like yours every week when some kid overdoses because they assume all legal stuff is weak. How is 150mg of MXE different to 150mg ketamine? In terms of potency how is 20mg of AM2201 any different to pulling a cone of the best skunk in australia?

[shruman]

Do you know when the transcripts will be available Torsten? or have you taken notes, recording you could share?

bit of an overview on STANZ:

http://www.stargateinternational.org/pages/casestudy.htm

[bullit]

hey yet's buy sum yaje` from torstens mate;; true from the real shaman !!! better than the sinus tabs i have!! and the govener wont know the differentz

[SunChaser]

In terms of potency how is 20mg of AM2201 any different to pulling a cone of the best skunk in australia?

 

AM2201 is a nonselective full agonists on the cannabinoid receptors and is active at 500mcg, rather than a selective partial agonist like THC.

So I’d say the difference is that if you’re ‘very’ lucky and a 20mg dose of AM2201 doesn’t put you in the hospital or kill ya, it would just cause extreme anxiety (the fear), breathing difficulties, vomiting, blackouts and convulsions. Where as, a large cone of extremely potent cannabis will just make you green out.

Am I close?

[Torsten]

thanks jabez, you made my point even better. Legal highs are not harmless.

[bullit]

YES THEY R!!! sum make u depressed you dont know how he all work!!!!!!!!!!!

[Thelema]

so are these things like alpha-pvp actually legal to import and possess? Customs is letting a-pvp thru? What other things might we assume customs is letting through and police are letting be sold?

[C_T]

im guessing there's a difference between customs for business and customs for private individuals...

i'd bet its alot easier for business.

[Thelema]

why? Torsten?

[santiago]

you come across as having a vested interest in the industry a bit too much torsten, i may be a dumbass but i sleep well at night.

besides that kneejerk return of mine...you do notice i said in my dumbass post..............DO NOT do legal drugs, your clearly mentioning dealing with results of dealing with people screwed up on legal drugs. where did i ever say do legal drugs, so clearly your in the wrong here but thats ok dude i wont hold it agains you, im sure your not a dumbass.

albeit very immature of me to be condoning vodka eyeball shooters but i think millions of hospitalisations occured before i was born from alcohol experimentations so a random comment from a random guy on an obscure website wont really change or effect the world radically i think, anyway it was a joke......eyeball, see, vodka....see what you get, nevermind.

Edited November 1, 2012 by santiago

[whitewind]

Was that you on chaser santiago? Did you use an enema to squirt vodka up your bum too? Fuck you'll be on channel 7 soon blaming SAB for the disturbing new vodka chasa trend as seen on utube and twatter #vodkachasa