Fiona Measham, Karenza Moore, Russell Newcombe and Zoë Zoë (née Smith)
Significant changes in British recreational drug use were seen throughout 2009, with the emergence and rapid growth in the availability and use of substituted cathinones or…
Abstract
Significant changes in British recreational drug use were seen throughout 2009, with the emergence and rapid growth in the availability and use of substituted cathinones or ‘M‐Cats’ (most notably mephedrone and methylone), a group of psychoactive drugs not currently controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (HM Government, 1971), with similar effects to ecstasy, cocaine and amphetamines. The reasons for the appearance and appeal of this group of so‐called ‘legal highs’ are explored here in relation to availability, purity, legality and convenience. The authors argue that a reduction in the availability (and thus purity) of illegal drugs such as ecstasy and cocaine and resultant disillusionment among users was a key motivation for displacement to substituted cathinones, conveniently and legally purchased online. Finally, we explore policy considerations around the likely criminalisation of substituted cathinones and the challenge of providing rapid yet considered harm reduction responses to emergent drug trends in the face of a minimal scientific evidence base and eager press demonisation.
Details
Keywords
The purpose of this paper is to compare the response to HIV/AIDS and drug use (drugs harm reduction) with tobacco harm reduction.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to compare the response to HIV/AIDS and drug use (drugs harm reduction) with tobacco harm reduction.
Design/methodology/approach
Analysis of historical and contemporary sources, combined with personal knowledge of key stakeholders in the history and development of both fields.
Findings
Both drugs harm reduction and tobacco harm reduction share a similar objective – to reduce health risks for people who are unwilling or unable to stop using their drug of choice. Both also share a broader public health aim of helping people to make healthier decisions. Drugs harm reduction – as a response to HIV/AIDS – included the adoption of a wide range of radical harm reduction interventions and was a public health success. It became an established part of the professional Public Health agenda. In contrast the Public Health response to e-cigarettes and tobacco harm reduction has ranged from the negative to the cautious. A recent Public Health England report is exceptional for its endorsement of e-cigarettes.
Originality/value
Highlights contradictions in Public Health responses to drugs and tobacco; and that public health interventions can be implemented without and despite the contribution of professional Public Health.