<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Submission to ACMD on Cannabis Review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://drugeducationforum.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/submission-to-acmd-on-cannabis-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://drugeducationforum.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/submission-to-acmd-on-cannabis-review/</link>
	<description>News and views from the Drug Education Forum</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 09:52:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: helensello</title>
		<link>http://drugeducationforum.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/submission-to-acmd-on-cannabis-review/#comment-10533</link>
		<dc:creator>helensello</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:04:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drugeducationforum.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/submission-to-acmd-on-cannabis-review/#comment-10533</guid>
		<description>&quot;Education&quot; is  largely in the hands of the media and journalists who make no effort to present a balanced interpretation of the research findings.  At the ACMD review on 5th February I did not hear any evidence that moving cannabis to Class B would discourage people from using it. Yet there were claims that to move it to B would &quot;give a message&quot; of its dangers.  

I support RETHINK&#039;s recommendations not to move to class B but instead to have a health information campaign.  However cannabis users themselves should take a partnership role for any health campaign for it to have the most impact.  If they are engaged they are less likely to dismiss the risks. Threatening to move it to B is not a good way to engage cannabis users in being open about specific risks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Education&#8221; is  largely in the hands of the media and journalists who make no effort to present a balanced interpretation of the research findings.  At the ACMD review on 5th February I did not hear any evidence that moving cannabis to Class B would discourage people from using it. Yet there were claims that to move it to B would &#8220;give a message&#8221; of its dangers.  </p>
<p>I support RETHINK&#8217;s recommendations not to move to class B but instead to have a health information campaign.  However cannabis users themselves should take a partnership role for any health campaign for it to have the most impact.  If they are engaged they are less likely to dismiss the risks. Threatening to move it to B is not a good way to engage cannabis users in being open about specific risks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter O'Loughlin</title>
		<link>http://drugeducationforum.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/submission-to-acmd-on-cannabis-review/#comment-10262</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter O'Loughlin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:34:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drugeducationforum.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/submission-to-acmd-on-cannabis-review/#comment-10262</guid>
		<description>Yes, of course, everyone including  young people should be left in doubt as to the the anticipated mental, physical and legal consequences of cannabis use. At present insofar as possession for personal use is concerned cannabis is all but decriminilised. 

Repeated changes in classification are counterproductive, not to mention confusing. We need to accept that the downgrading of cannabis was not because of the ostensible reasons of relative harms, but because use is so common that enforcing the law had become at best unviable.

However changes in legislation do not affect the properties of any drug, but in the case of cannabis,notwithstanding political claims to the contrary, use has escalated, and the increasing numbers seeking treatment simply confirm the evidence that was readily available prior to reclassification, but for reasons of political expediency,and, or ideological view points, were either ignored, or supressed.

The idea that anyone should attract a criminal record for illicit drugs use, especially for a first offence is unacceptable; however that does not preclude the concept of specialised educational facilities, where attendance for a prescribed period is mandatory, and where the individual would have ample opportunity to meet with ex users and get their &#039;truth&#039; of how use affected their life.

Habitual users who come to the attention of the Criminal Justice System, are entirely another proposition We need to face up to the fact that many of these do resort to criminal activities to fund their habit, together with the fact that many of them also have mental problems either arising from use, or aggravated by a pre-existing condition.  

Notwithstanding 10 years of seeking to &#039;reduce harm&#039;, the current strategy has failed to produce facilities and resources, where the co-occuring problems can be treated in parralel. In fact the NTA are unable to provide any information on the numbers of those &#039;in treatment&#039;, who have co-occuring disorders, or for that matter what facilities there are for their treatment. It is therefore not surprising that our prison population has a considerable number of inmates with comorbidity, whose pattern of re-offending continues.

Yes, by all means let us have education focusing on all the consequences of drug use, and the most effective methods of addressing them, but perhaps we should start that process in our own back yard before we seek to preach that which we are failing to practise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, of course, everyone including  young people should be left in doubt as to the the anticipated mental, physical and legal consequences of cannabis use. At present insofar as possession for personal use is concerned cannabis is all but decriminilised. </p>
<p>Repeated changes in classification are counterproductive, not to mention confusing. We need to accept that the downgrading of cannabis was not because of the ostensible reasons of relative harms, but because use is so common that enforcing the law had become at best unviable.</p>
<p>However changes in legislation do not affect the properties of any drug, but in the case of cannabis,notwithstanding political claims to the contrary, use has escalated, and the increasing numbers seeking treatment simply confirm the evidence that was readily available prior to reclassification, but for reasons of political expediency,and, or ideological view points, were either ignored, or supressed.</p>
<p>The idea that anyone should attract a criminal record for illicit drugs use, especially for a first offence is unacceptable; however that does not preclude the concept of specialised educational facilities, where attendance for a prescribed period is mandatory, and where the individual would have ample opportunity to meet with ex users and get their &#8216;truth&#8217; of how use affected their life.</p>
<p>Habitual users who come to the attention of the Criminal Justice System, are entirely another proposition We need to face up to the fact that many of these do resort to criminal activities to fund their habit, together with the fact that many of them also have mental problems either arising from use, or aggravated by a pre-existing condition.  </p>
<p>Notwithstanding 10 years of seeking to &#8216;reduce harm&#8217;, the current strategy has failed to produce facilities and resources, where the co-occuring problems can be treated in parralel. In fact the NTA are unable to provide any information on the numbers of those &#8216;in treatment&#8217;, who have co-occuring disorders, or for that matter what facilities there are for their treatment. It is therefore not surprising that our prison population has a considerable number of inmates with comorbidity, whose pattern of re-offending continues.</p>
<p>Yes, by all means let us have education focusing on all the consequences of drug use, and the most effective methods of addressing them, but perhaps we should start that process in our own back yard before we seek to preach that which we are failing to practise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
