Banning synthetic cannabinoids – a “kronic” overraction?

During Questions Without Notice in the Australian Senate on June 22nd [Page 50], Senator Steve Fielding challenged federal Attorney-General Representative, Senator Joe Ludwig over his government’s intentions toward previously legal synthetic cannabinoid products, known quaintly as “synthetic cannabis”.

One particularly common brand is named “Kronic”. Fielding’s ignorance is telling. He refers to such products as being “sprayed with a synthetic chemical” and as such are “designed to manipulate people’s minds”. He further relays concerns about anecdotal reports, which whilst serious are not conclusive. No documentation or conclusive study is presently available leaving quantification and qualification impossible. No correction has been made for the use of other substances in conjunction with Kronic or pre-existing psychiatric conditions or symptoms. It is for the very reason we must take these reports seriously that they deserve proper scientific inquiry.

Ludwig admirably fills his time relaying the excessive reaction of W.A. in banning such preparations under the Misuse of Drugs Act (which provides for a 25 year sentence in certain cases). QLD will move to ban 15 of these products under the QLD Drugs Misuse Act. He omits that NSW is seeking to regulate “synthetic pot” at the level of heroin. One wonders at the logic of this rash action given the well documented failure of prohibition and the recent report from the Global Commission on Drug Policy, damning prohibition and urging implementation of legalisation models [CNN].

More prohibition opens the way for criminals to move from growing, harvesting, preparing and packaging cannabis for transport and sale, to switch to small vials of synthetic cannabinoids. These could be added to any legal vegetable matter or herb, in unknown concentrations and mixes further compounding already known problems arising from an imbalance in cannabinoids due to hydroponic growing techniques.


ABC Lateline gave a balanced report on these developments. When NSW health minister, Kevin Humphries, describes psychotropic synthetic cannabinoid preparations as a “synthetic psychotic drug”, one can be sure he’s not speaking from a position of evidence. Still, “synthetic pot” that’s been with us for four years, will now be as illegal as heroin, in NSW. As already noted anti-drug zealot and W.A. Premier, Colin Barnett was true to form in announcing 25 year prison terms for some offences.

The fact is we don’t know the full side effects of synthetic cannabinoids ingested without supervision beyond the certainty that inhalation of any combustible material is a dire challenge to pulmonary health. We may assume confidently that psychotropic effects are similar to cannabis. And we may ask genuine questions about the effect of significantly greater concentrations of THC in synthetic concoctions both as acute and long term (or chronic – no pun) effects. Paul Dillon raises good points about the rapid rise of availability, of varieties of synthetic drugs. Paul does raise a false analogy citing a synthetic THC cannabinoid – no doubt HU-210 – referring to it being 100 times more potent that natural THC. Had he taken the time to express the need for health responses here it would have been welcome.

Indeed, we don’t know the the effects of 22% of Complimentary and Alternative Medicines in Australian pharmacies that, lacking any trial data, were fraudulently submitted as “evidence backed” and rashly added to the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods by the TGA. But there’s no rush to ban these products or to wage a War on Placebo, despite fears of adverse drug interactions or contamination with heavy metals and poisons. Regrettably, this clip has the standard file footage of unnamed researchers looking at brain scans as the voice over notes doctors concerns – despite only anecdotal stories of nasty side effects. Both good and bad effects are the same as cannabis. Sanity is provided by Alex Wodak and Robbie Swann.

Prohibition has failed splendidly, leading only to the creation of vast underworld markets. Here, we may watch it in action. I support warnings that smoking a loosely controlled herb dosed with cannabinoids is cause for caution. But removing the product from legal tax paying outlets and placing it in the hands of criminals who will now sell it as genuine cannabis – without the risks of handling genuine cannabis – is appallingly short sighted.

Ultimately, synthetic illicit drugs are here only because the certain profit provided by prohibition of already popular drugs, has empowered criminal enterprise to produce them. Perhaps it’s time we began to learn from history. I reject argument from antiquity – that humans have always used drugs and thus always will. But it’s irrefutable that without the lucrative market provided by prohibition many of todays problematic illicit drugs would not exist.


The Global War on Drugs has failed. Synopsis from The Global Commission on Drug Policy

Meryl Dorey misreads evidence and misleads on HPV vaccine

How much more evidence are we going to need to see before we say that we registered this dangerous vaccination before we had any idea of the many autoimmune conditions it would cause? It’s time to withdraw Gardasil and Cervarix from the market. Meryl Dorey, President Australian Vaccination Network, wrote on June 20th [or 21st Australian time].

The only problem with the above statement is that the evidence Dorey cites does not implicate HPV vaccination as causal to any reactions. We’ll get to that.

It was predictable. Any straw that blew past suggesting adverse reactions, no matter how tenuous, to vaccination against papillomavirus would be seized by Meryl Wynn Dorey. Particularly given this June 18th Lancet study abstract – two or three days earlier – entitled Early effect of the HPV vaccination programme on cervical abnormalities in Victoria, Australia: an ecological study. And just to knock out the “all vaccine research is funded by Big Pharma” untruths; the funding for this study? None.

We do know that vaccine and screening registers aren’t linked. So we’re unable to conclusively comment just yet on the numbers of vaccinated girls presenting without pre-cancerous cells. HPV vaccine is the only variable however, and database linkage would allow more explicit results. We can read above that data collected twice before and twice since the programme began, show a marked negative deviation away from the linear progression of HPV infection induced adenocarcinoma’s and cytological abnormalities.

It is further encouraging in that no change was noted in age groups already sexually active. On June 17 SMH published Cervical cancer vaccine working: study

AUSTRALIA’S cervical cancer vaccination program appears to be paying off, reducing the number of pre-cancerous cells found in young women, a new study has found.

Melbourne researchers have reported in The Lancet that the number of high-grade cervical abnormalities found in Victorian girls under 17 has halved since the program began in 2007, taking the incidence from about one in 100 to one in 200.

It also reported the beginning of a declining trend of abnormalities in women aged 18 to 20, but said there had been no drop off in older age groups.

The researchers said this was probably because older women had already been infected with the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) through sexual activity. The cervical cancer vaccine protects females against several strains of the Human Papillomavirus because it is known to cause cervical cancer.

On July 6th, SMH published, Huge Success for Gardasil;

Rates of new genital wart infection in Australia have plummeted, research shows, in an early positive sign of the success of mass Gardasil vaccinations.

A study taking in patient data from sexual health clinics across the country has shown up to a 60 per cent drop off in new genital wart cases since 2007, when the anti-cancer vaccine was rolled out.

Gardasil works by preventing the transmission of four strains of the Human papillomavirus (HPV), two of which cause cervical cancer and two which cause genital warts.

Experts say while its effect on cervical cancer rates would take longer to materialise, the vaccine’s ability to prevent a less serious though embarrassing problem was now clear.

[….]

“While we knew from clinical trials that the vaccine was highly effective, Australia is the first country in the world to document a major benefit for the population as a whole.”

Free Gardasil vaccinations were offered to Australian girls and young women, aged 12 to 26 years, and about 80 per cent of those eligible are thought to have taken up the offer.

Researchers pooled data from eight sexual health clinics Australia-wide, covering 110,000 new patients and the period from 2004 to 2009.

So let’s quickly examine how the Australian (anti) Vaccination Network weaves it’s lethal message. Dorey’s Twitter account announces, “Autoimmune hepatitis type 2 following anti-papillomavirus vaccination in a (sic) 11 year old girl << more evidence of vax issues”. I followed the link to Dorey’s own website and Tweeted a reply I copied directly from there. “we do not provide evidence for a causal link… may be related… to vaccine… in a genetically predisposed individual”.

Remember, Australia’s self-titled vaccine expert has claimed at the top of her post that, “It’s time to withdraw Gardasil and Cervarix from the market.” I’m not dismissing the seriousness of the potential relationship here “in an 11 year old girl”. But in context imagine how many lives would be lost and disturbed if Dorey’s claim was implicated. Genital warts would increase by 60% and pre-cancerous lesions would double. Here’s the giveaway paragraph. Bold mine, showing five phrases that refute conclusive causality:

Although we do not provide evidence for a causal link, we suggest that the occurrence of the autoim- mune (sic) hepatitis may be related to the stimulation of immune system by adjuvated-vaccine, that could have triggered the disease in a genetically predisposed individual.

Here’s Meryl Dorey‘s entire post.

The actual abstract is here. More so Ms. Dorey asks, “How much more evidence are we going to need…”.

Well with all respect, a damn sight more evidence than a single case of HV2 that could have been triggered due to genetic predisposition in one child. A case that’s suggested as maybe being related to HPV vaccination, alongside a clear qualification of the absence for a causal link.

Indeed Dorey’s abuse of the word “evidence” and the quite ridiculous call to abandon the programme is neatly opposed by the caution employed by The Lancet article authors. The Guardian reports in part:

Australian study of injection to protect against HPV virus reveals drop in high-grade abnormalities among under-18s

…. That finding, say the authors, “reinforces the appropriateness of the targeting of prophylactic HPV vaccines to pre-adolescent girls”.

The findings were greeted with international interest.

“The not-so-cautious optimist in us wants to hail this early finding as true evidence of vaccine effect,” write Dr Mona Saraiya and Dr Susan Hariri of the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, US, in a linked commentary for the journal.

But they said they wanted to know more about the vaccine status of the individuals (each woman is supposed to have three shots) and wanted more work to establish whether the reductions in potential cancers were really a result of vaccination or some other cause.

Michael Quinn, professor of gynaecology and gynaecologic oncology at the University of Melbourne, said: “The study is the first anywhere in the world to show falling rates of high-grade change in very young women.

“Although this is likely to be due to the effects of the vaccination programme, further analysis of information linking women’s smear history to their vaccination history will be needed to prove that the fall is entirely due to vaccination rather than other factors.”

Public health experts say that women should not assume they are not vulnerable to the disease after vaccination and should still go for regular screening checks.

In conclusion it appears once again Meryl Dorey is using her hatred for evidence based medicine and vaccines in particular to scare monger an innocent public.

“Getting The Point” – the antivaxxer response to 60 Minutes’ story on their danger to Australia

The Sixty Minutes story on the benefits of vaccines was a conspiracy. Because NineMSN is “a joint venture between Microsoft (yes, Bill Gates – and we know what he thinks about vaccines – they are ‘magic’ according to his latest interview) and PBL whose chairman, James Packer, sits on the board of major vaccine and drug maker, Glaxo Smithkline. Do you REALLY think that a station with their hands in that much dirty money would even THINK about doing a fair story on this issue?” says Meryl Dorey, President of The Australian (anti) Vaccination Network.

Nothing sets off a conspiracy minded anti-vaccination lobbyist like facts.

Below this text is a Sixty Minutes Australia segment, Getting The Point, that aired June 12th 2011. The only irrationality comes from micro-palaeontologist, Viera Scheibner. She is marketed as one of the world’s foremost experts on vaccines, is “sought after as a speaker and expert witness” and worshipped by fellow Bent Spoon winner Meryl Dorey. Scheibner’s claim of being an expert witness and other outright lies are dealt with here splendidly.

“…I am not satisfied that her formal qualifications and professional experience properly equip her to provide a valid professional opinion on the complex subject of immunology…” and
“…one must question her capacity to properly evaluate and interpret the results of others’ scientific experience. I am not prepared therefore to accept her evidence in preference to that of…
 – Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission
[….]
“I draw attention [to] misleading information provided by Dr Viera Scheibner … who continuously writes against immunisation. In the 9 March edition of the Medical Observer, she submitted a very unusual letter [which] makes claims that are not supported by the documentation she referred to. It is very important for people to realise that the information provided by Dr Scheibner is not accurate.” – NSW Legislative Council

Whilst exploiting white coat syndrome through use of her PhD title of “Doctor” to mislead those seeking advice, Viera defends her lack of qualifications. Sixty Minutes found that she has “a doctorate in the natural sciences”, and “some nursing qualifications”. And whilst all autism cases are caused by vaccines, the absurdity of this claim is dismissed because Viera knows more than any doctor. There is nothing good to be said about vaccines, and immunity is gained best by contracting the disease.

In March 2004 there was some activity in the BMJ defending the scam of one no-longer-a-doctor, Andrew Wakefield. We now know his work was fraudulent. Quite ironic because defence of Wakefield and attacks on Brian Deer, were often themed on the bias of the dastardly pro-vaccine industry publication, the BMJ. Which incidentally allowed Scheibner [Principle Research Scientist (Retired)] to publish a letter that gives one ample insight;

Orthodox medicine is toxic and harmful. It seems accepted that all medications have side (undesirable) effects. However, this is only relevant to orthodox medications. Correctly administered, homoeopathic remedies and natural remedies have no side effects. One has to elaborate here that there could be uncomfortable feelings after homoeopathics but they are desirable effects. Elevated temperature, rashes and vomiting are signs of detoxification and of a desired change of a chronic condition into an acute illness leading to healing.

Which to the lay person means homeopathy does not work. The disease of, say, measles will run it’s course and fevers (convulsions for 1 in 200), rashes, high temperature are symptoms of the infection you will endure until it passes. If you are unfortunate enough to be one of the one in 5,000 who die, sustain encephalitis or one in 8,000 who contract Subacute Sclerosing Panencepahltiis you will not recover. She continues…

Orthodox medicine with its pharmaceutical industry has become a huge money spinner and as such has become vulnerable to political interference. Vaccination is the best example. To make a lot of money, vaccinators want to vaccinate every child. The more children are vaccinated, the more obvious are the serious side (undesirable) effects including brain damage and death. Politically motivated medicine denies or plays down undesirable effects. The word “obvious” has been banished even though it is considered prudent medical practice that when a medication or a procedure is administered and symptoms appear afterwards, then that medication and/or procedure must be considered as the cause of the observed symptoms…..

This rubbish goes on, ultimately ending with a bald faced lie: “No Competing Interests”. But Scheibner’s hoop jumping can be easily matched by her Bent Spoon Award winning pal, Meryl Dorey. The Australian Vaccination Network Facebook page – aka The Twilight Zone – lit up with outrage at the intrusion of evidence. The first “response” was from Meryl Dorey herself and bulging with lies. Meryl was advised not to appear. She didn’t choose not to. Presently in the Supreme Court fighting the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission it was a no brainer.

Meryl Dorey comment on facebook

But worse is her claim that a.) she offered them the names of reputable doctors and b.) that reporters actually contacted her to make excuses for not interviewing them. Then follows the ranting about Bill Gates and James Packer, who “… don’t care about your children or my children. They don’t care if they live or die. So long as they can make money doing what they are doing and protect their financial interests in the meantime…”.

Conspiracy rant - Meryl DoreyOther comments included, “What a crap biased report, no surprise. Immunization rates must need a boost.” “Pathetic piece of reporting. One can only hope that people see it for what it was.” “Why weren’t the parents of Ashley Epapara and Saba Button interviewed? For the exact reason that MD mentions above. Not good for business.” “Isn’t this a live vaccine … can’t the reporter pass on the virus to the baby if she just had her booster shot???” “When will reporters actually read Dr Andrew Wakefield‘s study and report on it accurately? Are they incompetent reporters who don’t check their facts, or are they outright liars? And if they are incompetent reporters, how to they get to be on a prime time program like 60 minutes? Ugh. So glad you didn’t lower yourself Meryl Dorey. Disgusting and irresponsible reporting by 60 minutes.”

And on it goes with feverish “liking” of each twilight zone observation.

Progressive policy and fundamentalist resistence

A close look at the rejection of evidence and application of religious belief as guiding principles for members of the Negative team, in debating if drugs should be legalised. Jade Lewis, Greg Pike and Paul Sheehan.
Last post we looked at the debate All drugs should be legalised held by Intelligence Squared. One of the greatest moral, social and human rights based questions today is: Should illicit drugs be legalised?
We ask this question because the harm caused at the community and personal level by prohibition is irrefutable. To this we can add the devastating effects of The War On Drugs – crafted initially by Nixon on the back of the Vietnam war. Few realise the first head of the US Drug Enforcement Administration had his office in Saigon. Returning veterans had to produce clean urine to show they were not using heroin.
Once begun, this foreign policy bonanza worked much like Dr. Whoʼs “psychic paper” pass. Flash it at a sentry and they read whatever convinces them of ones legitimacy. But more so was the USAʼs powerful control over the UNODCP and hence, UN drug policy. Most in the Western world have knowledge of Harm Reduction. The acceptance that punitive measures for drug users ultimately inflicts personal, monetary and social cost on the wider community, and accepting use whilst minimising harm reaps benefits for all.
For this reason nations who focus on evidence and the international right to health provide clean needles through NSPʼs – needle and syringe programmeʼs. Safe injecting facilities are provided increasingly in Europe and elsewhere. Australia has over 1,000 NSPʼs and one Medically Supervised Injecting Facility – MSIC – in Kings Cross, Sydney.
These programmeʼs and facilities serve to manage high risk behaviour, control the spread of blood borne viruses, motivate/provide for users to seek treatment, and they meet community discontent arising from obvious illicit drug use. Most users can return to work, pay taxes, raise a family and remain healthy. But what of intractable addiction? More recently several heroin on prescription schemes in Europe have shown dramatic results in reducing crime, death/illness, uptake of heroin use and length of heroin addiction. Portugal has full decriminalisation and demonstrates a resounding success to date.
Once world leaders in harm reduction, Australia was ready to be the first nation since the War On Drugs began to introduce a heroin on prescription trial in 1997. Despite State government sanction of 6-3, John Howard personally intervened to stop this, and weʼve been backsliding ever since. The rise of Christian Evangelical lobbyists has caused bemusement, angst and disgust.
Australiaʼs full policy is Harm Minimisation – HM. Supply reduction, demand reduction and harm reduction. Zero Tolerance has only ever been rhetoric. Harm reduction is the least funded, with the struggle to repel supply and the education and (usually failed) advertisements thrust at young Australianʼs taking the two highest shares respectively.
Those who resist drug legalisation seek to distort the argument by misrepresenting the success of harm minimisation. Indeed despite overall reduction in drug use they fraudulently and falsely argue that HM encourages, condones, increases or has no positive effect on use. Attacks on successful initiatives with peacock terminology and weasel worded opinion pieces are common. Published as “research” these are brought up time and again.
In the case of Drug Free Australiaʼs Case For Closure [PDF] against the MSIC, written during itʼs trial status, it is simply rehashed, republished and recirculated. One speaker, Greg Pike is co-author and “statistical analyst”. Greg is best known from his role as Director of the Southern Cross Bioethics Institute, which presently promotes his part in the upcoming debate. Another co-author is the infamous “naltrexone fatality” doctor, Stuart Reece. Embattled DFA secretary Gary Christian is another.
You may wonder why, if supply and demand reduction are funded more than harm reduction, that such groups attack harm reduction – HR. My psychological profiling days may be behind me, but this is clear. HR already attracts right wing condemnation and is easy to misrepresent. The evil druggie and his/her filthy lifestyle is a false pop culture phenomenon. However, conservative Christians cast HR in pop culture format usually in the context of blaming HM. Enter the suggestion of why we need demand reduction. Young Aussies take drugs. Kids from all walks of life. From all faith backgrounds.
For the religiously conservative mind this is an affront. An insult to parenting skills, the instillation of Christian values and indeed, Godʼs work. God “cures” addiction. He does not leave vacuums of vulnerability, in the mind of the fundamentalist. Thus HM in totality is an affront to conservative Christians. Overlaying this is the fear of the success of HR education. An analogue of sex education and condom availability, no proper child would fail to just say no to sex and drugs – or rock n roll for that matter. With two down, supply reduction must be increased along with punitive measures for users. And DFA are adamant they speak for “all Australians”, promoting behaviour control: Harm Prevention.
Another speaker and DFA identity – whose intentions I kind of understand – Jade Lewis wants a drug free Australia, [surprise!] through application of biblical values and the never ending sale of her “story” on DVD. Not your story, or the story of drug policy, or evidence based material – her amazing religious conversion. Jade is ruthlessly exploited by DFA. The excessively priced, only-seen-if-you-buy-it DVD, “Golden Haze” earned Jade the title “The goose that laid the golden haze” – (more on Jade later).

Greg Pike
Greg is co-author of the Case for Closure and a crusader against humane or progressive policy and free choice. His “bioethics institute” gig is a misleading peacock in some of today’s most pressing health issues. Abortion to him is of course, murder and at one time he claimed – as a research outcome – most women do not want choice. His argument against euthanasia once included the appalling claim that a patient travelled to Switzerland – with others – to die with dignity, as “… a case of someone wanting to pursue death under activist like circumstances.” [ABC 7:30 Report Feb. 2007].

Greg Pike

The right to die for the terminally ill is supported by as many as 85% of Aussies according to some polls. The reluctance of politicians shows the grip of the Australian Christian Lobby on vote wary parties. Prior to the above debacle, Pike wrote “Once the killing starts, there’s no stopping it” in January 2007. It included;

Continue reading

All Drugs Should Be Legalised – Intelligence Squared Debate

On May 10th this year Intelligence Squared – the forum for live debate – hosted All Drugs Should Be Legalised in Sydney Australia.
You can watch the video alone here, or check out the audio here. They note on their website.
In most cases, prohibition has failed to curb demand and the provision of illicit drugs has become the lucrative trade of organised crime – with the associated ills of corruption, violence and health risks.
Some people urge tighter restrictions on all recreational drugs as the cure for social ills linked to their use and abuse. Others argue that all drugs should be legal – subject only to prudent regulation.
Below are the pre and post debate audience figures for All drugs should be legalised.
Question Pre-debate poll Post-debate poll
For: 46.8% 69%
Undecided: 32.3% 8%
Against: 20.9% 23%
Well prior to this debate, I was struck (to put it mildly) at the makeup of the negative team. Decorated veterans from The Enemies of Reason army, I felt more disappointment than the outrage I expected would engulf me. It was clear those bastions of moral evangelism and anti-drug hysteria, Drug Free Australia had quite likely been called upon to muster a good riposte to the ever expanding evidence supporting a change in policy. Like calling upon conspiracy theorist and anti-vaccination lobbyist Meryl Dorey of the AVN for “balance” one can rest assured DFA, enamored with pseudoscience, could fill the anti-drug niche. For “balance” if you like.
My next post will be my own biography of the negative team. These guys have a lot in common and I feel it’s only just to point out the “incestuous” relationship that manifests as informed opinion, but is in fact a superstitious, narrow and morality based attack on secular Australia, progressive policy, free thought, free choice, human rights and individuality. Yet my disappointment in “releasing the hounds”, so to speak stems from the fact I myself can argue against legalisation for reasons never mentioned here. Yet they tend to be reasons on variations of legality and access. Or concerns over black markets. Or solutions proffered by other pro legalisation movements. Australia is unique. Great arguments come from Norm Stamper and his colleagues at LEAP – Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. But we don’t have shoot outs in suburban streets and thankfully, haven’t tortured and jailed our civilians at the rate the USA has. We already have Harm Reduction – we just need more. Period.
The negative team is:
Jade Lewis is a former drug addict who now campaigns and educates against use of illegal drugs. As a young teenager she was a champion junior athlete who competed internationally, and won the WA Doug Hancy Award, Athlete of the Year and Junior Sportswoman of the Year. Her records remain unbeaten in Western Australia. Her later heroin addiction, criminal behaviour and volatile relationships are recorded in her book, Golden Haze. She now educates at schools on positive relationships and runs a program for women prisoners.
Dr Greg Pike is the Director of the Southern Cross Bioethics Institute in Adelaide, South Australia where he focuses primarily on the influence of bioethics on public policy development. He trained as a physiologist with a PhD in muscle electrophysiology, becoming Hospital Research Scientist at the Royal Adelaide Hospital in the Department of Surgery. He is the Chairman of the Board of the Australian Drug Treatment and Rehabilitation Program and a member of the Institute on Global Drug Policy, has served as a Deputy Member on the SA Council on Reproductive Technology and was a member of the Australian Health Ethics Committee for the 2006-09 triennium.
Paul Sheehan is one of the most thought-provoking commentators in Australia today. A columnist for The Sydney Morning Herald, Sheehan is a prominent writer and has written on the bigger debate about the politics of cultural diversity in contemporary Australia. He is one of Australia’s best-selling authors with three best-selling books including, most recently, the number-one best-seller, Girls Like You.
The positive team is:
Nicholas Cowdery AM QC BA LLB was the NSW Director of Public Prosecutions running the largest prosecuting agency in Australia from 1994 to 2011. He became a Barrister in 1971 and was Public Defender in Papua New Guinea for four years. As a Barrister in private practice in Sydney, he specialised in criminal law appearing in many high profile cases including the prosecutions of the late Justice Lionel Murphy (of the High Court of Australia) and of the late Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen (former Premier of the State of Queensland). He is a member of the NSW Sentencing Council and the Advisory Committee, Sydney Institute of Criminology and the National Advisory Committee, Centre for Transnational Crime Prevention, University of Wollongong. He is the author of Getting Justice Wrong: myths, media and crime.
Wendy Harmer is a prominent Australian broadcaster, entertainer and veteran of countless international comedy festivals. She has presented top-rating morning radio and has hosted, written and appeared in a wide variety of TV shows including ABC’s Big Gig and In Harmer’s Way. Harmer is the author of several books for adults, two plays and a series of children’s books. She has also hosted the television Logie Awards and has been a regular newspaper and magazine contributor.
Dr Alex Wodak AM is a physician and has been Director of the Alcohol and Drug Service, St Vincent’s Hospital since 1982. His major interests include prevention of HIV among injecting drug users, treatment of drug users and drug policy reform. Dr Wodak is President of the Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation and was President of the International Harm Reduction Association (1996-2004). He helped establish the first needle syringe program (1986) and the first medically supervised injecting centre (1999) in Australia when both were pre-legal. Dr Wodak helped establish the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre (1987) and the Australian needle syringe program annual survey (1995).
It’s clear drug law reform has manifest merit. This by no means suggests a simple reverse of policy or free for all is justified. Managing existing problems through evidence based approaches is the avenue needed. This is not the “handouts to children’ moral panic we’re often misled with. Whilst it’s true alcohol is far more damaging to individuals and society – something we ignore handing out ever more lenient licences – I don’t think the “my buzz vs your buzz” argument applies here, either. Prohibition is an abysmal failure to be sure. Indeed the sole cause of illicit drug induced tragedy. However because this can be demonstrated in a crisp top down, if not straight linear fashion doesn’t assuaged the reality that reversing this insult to our species is a complicated bottom up process that will have set backs, loud opposition and unforeseen hurdles and successes. Fortunately other nations have taken the step. Portugal is finding great success after a decade and now Poland is moving toward legalisation.
Today we struggle with drugs unheard of when this open door to profit was gifted to organised crime. Not only is there fantasy, ecstasy, mephadrone and a repulsive mix in between of these amphetamine type stimulants, but so much profit ensues that clandestine production is the norm. This has given us crystal methamphetamine and hydroponic cannabis. Our media and politicians score an E and an F for Epic Failure and in the main deserve our disgust and derision. That newspapers can be sold with articles gloating over and baying for blood for problems they themselves have in no small way contributed to beggars belief. That elected politicians pander to Christian Lobbies or their own retarded opinions, rather than serve the community that placed them in office is undemocratic.
Along the way, police have fallen to corruption and far, far worse. Prominent informers in cases of police involvement in production, selling and underworld murders have themselves been murdered. Far from a case of “they deserved it”, as crown witnesses under police and custodial maximal protection their deaths signify an attack on the very heart of our justice system. As I write the head of Barwon prison, David Prideaux is missing on a hunting trip in the Victorian Alps. This report came in a few minutes ago.
I can confirm Prideaux is a high profile witness in the murder of Carl Williams who was bashed to death in the most secure section of the most secure jail in the state whilst under 24 hour watch. Williams in turn was preparing to give evidence into the murder of informant Terry Hodgson. Hodgson was preparing to give information into the theft of pseudo-ephedrine allegedly by himself and Drug Squad officer Paul Dale. In the case of the two informers, police had leaked documents to underworld figures outlining their intentions. Hodgson was under police guard in a safe house, with all security details – alarms, lights, locks etc, known only to police. Investigations showed he and his wife were shot in the back of the head, kneeling, after letting someone in to the safe house.

Continue reading