Welcome to UK420

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.


bongme

Warning UK faces 'worst research blackout in history' as Home Office falters on drug law

18 posts in this topic

hi

 

vid on link

Warning UK faces 'worst research blackout in history' as Home Office falters on drug law

TORY MP Crispin Blunt has blamed the Home Office for blocking a change to how an illegal hallucinogenic drug is tested as a new antidepressant.

 

In an op-ed seen by Express.co.uk, Crispin Blunt MP describes how he urged Prime Minister Boris Johnson to change what is known as the "schedule" of the drug psilocybin. This change would mean it would be easier to run trials on its use in mental health treatments. The Prime Minister had already approved the rescheduling of psilocybin for exploring its potential as a treatment for depression, which he informed Mr Blunt in a meeting in May.

 

Despite this, the Home Office “fails to act, perpetuating what can be considered the worst research blackout in scientific history,” according to the Conservative Drug Policy Reform Group (CDPRG), of which Mr Blunt is chairman.

Rescheduling, in this case, means that psilocybin would be easier to get hold of and test in scientific and medical trials.

Psilocybin, found in magic mushrooms, will still be a Class A drug for anyone looking to consume it.

The group say that if the Home Office continues to drag their feet over making psilocybin easier to trial for medical purposes, there will be “dire consequences for the UK’s life sciences sector” and those who “stand to benefit” from new treatments.

 

Mr Blunt used an analogy to describe the current situation of not looking at the uses of certain illegal drugs in treating mental health problems.

He likened restrictions on cannabis and other currently illegal substances to “keeping an offender whose risk of future offending is close to zero, is desperate and able to become a contributing positive member of society".

He said: “Some sensible supportive probation supervision might be appropriate, but instead they are locked up in a maximum-security prison at vast expense indefinitely.”

 

“In the 110 days that have passed since the PM’s sign off nearly 2,000 people have taken their own lives; the majority probably preventable when this research is translated into treatment.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “There is an established process for the development of medicines, which enables medicines including psilocybin to be developed, evaluated in clinical trials and licensed based on an assessment of their quality, safety and efficacy.

“The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) is currently considering barriers to legitimate research with controlled drugs. The first part of their review was published in July and the second part of the work is now underway. We will carefully consider any recommendations or advice they provide.

“We currently have no plans to reschedule psilocybin under the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001.”

 

Psilocybin has been the subject of numerous clinical trials in addressing mental health conditions against which currently-available medication has had little effect.

Dr Robin Carhart-Harris and Professor David Nutt of Imperial College London have found that psilocybin could target areas of the brain which current antidepressants cannot touch.

However, the CDPRG argues that the brain drain coming from professionals and experts in the space leaving for other countries with different drug policies will put the UK further behind on pioneering new treatments.

 

The CDPRG add that a change in policy on psilocybin could pave the way for exploring how other drugs, like LSD or MDMA, can be used to treat mental health conditions.

Currently, psilocybin cannot be produced, supplied or prescribed without Home Office sign-off.

Yet recent data from YouGov shows that over half of the UK public support a change in the law which would mean psilocybin is more easily accessible for treatment trials.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “There is an established process for the development of medicines, which enables medicines including psilocybin to be developed, evaluated in clinical trials and licensed based on an assessment of their quality, safety and efficacy.

 

 

“The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) is currently considering barriers to legitimate research with controlled drugs. The first part of their review was published in July and the second part of the work is now underway. We will carefully consider any recommendations or advice they provide.

 “We currently have no plans to reschedule psilocybin under the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001.”

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1493174/psilocybin-drug-law-UK-change-UK-science-research-warning-Crispin-Blunt

 

Vid On Link

 

Bongme

 

 

 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post


And still nothing happens, just a lot of blustering and false hope. Britain leading the way in oppressive governance for profit. 

:puke:

11 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Hi

 

We need a game-changer 2p

 

 

the two London parties will not let you vote on it or anything for that matter They have imported an EU Voting system where only 650 people in London Only get to vote on anything Don't know about anyone else but a lot of things they have voted on I would have voted the other way! I suspect millions of others would have done the same.

 

Remember when the EU MPs voted on everything we have taken the same stance as you have to remember most of these UK politicians only KNOW EU politics as most were born under the EU Flag and that's the only politics they know.

 

We need a Political party that represents the UK people and let them vote of things not just 650 people in London and only celebrates get to have a say on everything and not the public at large as you can see in the article more than half of the UK would vote for change :yep:

 

I suspect most of the young on here will not remember the UK before the EU when we had a real democracy and the public voted on most big issues that's gone it seems. :soap:

 

Bongme :yinyang:

 

 

Edited by bongme
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Hi

 

Most of the UK media will not show you this I had to go to Oz for this but as you can see Italy will be voting on Cannabis but the UK will not let you vote...

 

Italy set for referendum on liberalising cannabis use, say advocates

 

Rome - Marijuana advocates in Italy have gathered enough signatures to trigger a referendum on liberalising the use of the drug, setting the stage for a nationwide vote on the issue early next year.

The referendum proposal seeks to legalise the growing of marijuana for personal use and ease sanctions on other cannabis-related crimes, with offenders no longer risking prison sentences for selling small amounts of the drug.

 

Organisers of the petition gathered the required 500,000 signatures in seven days, far more quickly than usual due to a law approved in July that allows signatures to be collected online. Previously, only in-person signing was allowed.

“This is an extraordinary result, but it’s not surprising,” said the referendum’s organising committee, which is made up of a raft of pro-marijuana advocacy groups.

 

“The speed of the support shows the desire for change on cannabis,” the committee added in a statement.

The signatures will now have to be officially verified, and the organisers called on people to keep adding their names before an end-September deadline to avoid any risk of the referendum being rejected if some of them are deemed invalid.

Antonella Soldo, from the “Better Legal” cannabis pressure group, said almost half of the signatories were aged under 25.

Organising referendums in Italy has been made much easier by the new law allowing online signatures.

A campaign for a popular vote to legalise euthanasia, launched before the pro-cannabis drive, has already gathered more than 900,000 signatures.

 

Italy’s main political parties in Mario Draghi’s national unity government are divided over cannabis.

The 5-Star Movement favours liberalisation, which is staunchly opposed by the right-wing League and Brothers of Italy. The centre-left Democratic Party generally takes a cautious, non-committal line.

Pro-weed groups received a boost in 2019 when Italy’s top appeals court ruled that growing cannabis for personal use was legal, but that verdict has not yet been reflected in new legislation, leaving the issue unclear.

Reuters

 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/italy-set-for-referendum-on-liberalising-cannabis-use-say-advocates-20210919-p58sx5.html

 

Bongme

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

I don't get your political argument there @bongme

 

If the EU laws were the problem then wouldn't the UK would have previously had and would now again have better drug stances, laws and attitudes and the EU worse, more draconian ones?

 

As it stands, it seems that the European countries have a MUCH more progressive stance than we do and those that do are in the EU.

I would say it is true pretty much across the board that it is the right wing governments behind draconian laws, the UK conservatives are particularly blinkered and fogey serving.  The irony being a lot of the people who will benefit when cannabis treatments are more widespread are seniors.

That's my 2p.

 

Edited by MidgeSmith
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Being in the EU was definitely not the problem,we also had veto power on lots of policy but are now facing a situation where the Tory cunts are free to remove lots of protections we got from being a member.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Rhubarb & Flustered said:

Being in the EU was definitely not the problem,we also had veto power on lots of policy but are now facing a situation where the Tory cunts are free to remove lots of protections we got from being a member.

Absolutely how I see it.

 

We haven't just got a Tory government now, but a hardline regressive Tory government.

 

Some people predicted that our right would be infringed the moment we left. Project Reality was sold as Project Fear by the right wing press.

Edited by MidgeSmith

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, MidgeSmith said:

Absolutely how I see it.

 

 

 

It's also how Boris the Turk saw it before he spotted an opportunity to become PM.

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Still the EU's fault? Get over it ffs. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Rhubarb & Flustered said:

 

 

It's also how Boris the Turk saw it before he spotted an opportunity to become PM.

 

 

A strong irony being the way he use the idea of Brexit as a conceptual 'protection' against Turkish folk joining the EU and migrating to the UK...

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, MidgeSmith said:

A strong irony being the way he use the idea of Brexit as a conceptual 'protection' against Turkish folk joining the EU and migrating to the UK...

 

 

Yeah,he did a complete 180 on that,he had previously done a tv show where he went to Turkey speaking about his Turkish ancestry and went on and on about how they couldn't just join and that the people who said that they could just to back up their anti EU stance were lying.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, bongme said:

Hi

 

We need a game-changer 2p

 

 

the two London parties will not let you vote on it or anything for that matter They have imported an EU Voting system where only 650 people in London Only get to vote on anything Don't know about anyone else but a lot of things they have voted on I would have voted the other way! I suspect millions of others would have done the same.

 

Remember when the EU MPs voted on everything we have taken the same stance as you have to remember most of these UK politicians only KNOW EU politics as most were born under the EU Flag and that's the only politics they know.

 

We need a Political party that represents the UK people and let them vote of things not just 650 people in London and only celebrates get to have a say on everything and not the public at large as you can see in the article more than half of the UK would vote for change :yep:

 

I suspect most of the young on here will not remember the UK before the EU when we had a real democracy and the public voted on most big issues that's gone it seems. :soap:

 

Bongme :yinyang:

 

 

 

 

Our current voting system - a representative 'democracy' where we vote MPs in and they decide things in parliament has been in place since long before we joined the EU. We've NEVER had a real democracy here (E2A it would be closer to a democracy if we had proportional representation and we don't because our own politicians have resited it at every turn, nowt to do with the EU).

Edited by Boojum
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

HI

 

am never right

 

oh well think I should stop commenting from now on and be silent or am too old for most lol

 

Bongme :yinyang:

 

Share this post


Link to post

Hi

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Hi

 

Maybe we need change like...

 

 

Electoral Reform in Westminster

The way we elect our MPs is bad for voters, bad for governance and bad for democracy.

 

The way we elect MPs to Westminster means that our parliament doesn’t represent Britain.

The link between how popular a party is at the polling booth and how many seats they get in the House of Commons is often weak and unpredictable.

Millions of people can support one party and get a single MP, while a few hundred thousand people who support a different party can get ten times as many. This means that the issues that are important in Westminster aren’t the same as the issues the public feels strongly about.

When Parliament doesn’t represent public opinion it has a real impact on life in Britain – it’s time we made sure seats matched votes to put voters back in control.

Major issues can be disregarded

The way we elect MPs to Westminster means that politicians can ignore major issues.

People who vote for candidates who don’t get elected aren’t represented at all. But votes that stack up for winning candidates don’t make a difference either. Once a candidate has enough votes to win, any extra doesn’t make them win more.

These two groups of voters combined made up 70% of voters in 2019. Over 22 million people voted yet had no influence on the outcome. The issues they care about can be easily tossed aside, to be only dealt with when they are too much to ignore.

This isn’t inevitable. Most parliaments around the world use systems that mean they have to work on the major issues the public care about – because voters are in charge. You can find out about different ways of choosing MPs in our Voting Systems section.

 

 

Our voices are easily ignored

Voters want real choice and for their voice to be heard in the election – yet in so many seats the result is a foregone conclusion.

Before the 2019 General Election, the ERS correctly predicted the results in 316 seats, half of all the seats in Great Britain. The majority of voters live in seats that are such a safe bet for a party to win that there is little to no chance of the MP changing. This means parties put all their effort into a handful of hotly fought-over seats – shaping their manifestos to appeal to people in seats they might win.

Whether they voted for the winning candidate or not, it’s no surprise that voters don’t feel part of the system when they made no difference to the result. Safe seats foster political disengagement and cynicism towards our political institutions. The average constituency last changed hands between parties in the 1960s, with some super safe seats having remained firmly in one-party control since the time of Queen Victoria.

Changing the way we run elections so that every vote matters towards the result, makes the walk the polling station worthwhile – for everyone.

We’re forced to work around a broken system

Millions feel they have to hold their nose at each general election and opt for someone that wasn’t their first choice.

In the topsy-turvy world of Westminster’s first past the post system voters often feel they have to cast a tactical vote for a candidate whom they wouldn’t normally support, in order to prevent another worse candidate from winning. Nearly one in three voters said they voted this way in 2019.

Even political parties feel they have to take part in electoral pacts, standing down for each other as the system can’t handle too much choice for voters.

Voters and parties shouldn’t have to try and find workarounds to get their voice heard. Under a proportional system, every vote helps get MPs elected to campaign on issues you care about.

 

Fostering division between us

Westminster’s voting system artificially divides the country, polarising us rather than allowing us to come together. While the results map can only have one colour per constituency, in reality, you’ll never find a town where everyone is the same.

Westminster’s one-person-takes all system makes everything black and white, hiding the many areas of agreement. Every issue becomes a stick to defeat an opponent, rather than something to be solved to the advantage of all.

It’s impossible for one MP to represent everyone in their constituency – which is why in most countries around the world you get a group of MPs for each area, representing the mix of opinions in that area. That’s the core idea of proportional representation – opinions in society are represented in proportion to their numbers.

No guarantee of the right winner

Westminster’s First Past the Post electoral system normally delivers governments the majority didn’t vote for, but it also sometimes puts parties in power, even if they didn’t get the most votes.

In 1951 48.8% of voters wanted a Labour government and 48% wanted a Conservative government. Yet there was a Conservative majority. And in the February election of 1974, Labour won 301 seats to 297 for the Conservatives – despite the Conservatives beating Labour in votes by 0.7%.

 

First Past the Post is the worst possible system for electing our representatives. We want to see the Single Transferable Vote, a fairer, more proportional voting system that makes seats match votes – and means no one’s voice is ignored.

 

https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/campaigns/electoral-reform/

 

Bongme

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now