Legally flawed, scientifically problematic, potentially harmful: The UK Psychoactive Substance Bill

Stevens, Alex; Fortson, Rudi; Measham, Fiona; Sumnall, Harry

doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.10.005

Cited by 93 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 12 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The principal psychotropic molecule in salvia, salvinorin A, is an opioid agonist, yet the drug's subjective effect is not analgesic but serotogenic [47]. Further, Stevens et al (2015) point out that animal testing is inconclusive as laboratory animals do not self-administer the drug, which may indicate lack of abuse potential.…”

Section: Operationalizing Psychoactivitymentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Stevens et al (2015) point out that the PSB's criminal clauses contradict the existing legal regime in which maximum sentences reflect the dangerousness of the drug; marijuana offenses lead to a lesser penalty than heroin offenses. Under the PSB judges cannot impose a common sense approach in sentencing, as they will have little if any evidence on the harms of the specific drug involved in the case.…”

Section: Detaching Penalties From Harmmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…It turns out that some substances may have pharmacological effects on the brain different from what experts would predict in the laboratory. For example, Stevens et al (2015) discuss salvia, a plant that once ingested provides a dissociative hallucinogenic effect [46]. The principal psychotropic molecule in salvia, salvinorin A, is an opioid agonist, yet the drug's subjective effect is not analgesic but serotogenic [47].…”

Section: Operationalizing Psychoactivitymentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Can new psychoactive substances be regulated effectively? An assessment of the British Psychoactive Substances Bill

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The regulation of new psychoactive substances (NPS) has confounded governments throughout the western world. In 2014 the UK government convened an NPS Review Expert Panel to consider a range of approaches. Ultimately the Panel recommended that the government ban all new psychoactive drugs and allow only psychoactive substances specifically exempted, such as alcohol, tobacco and those allowed as medicines. The government introduced the Psychoactive Substances Bill (PSB) in response to that recommendation. Passed in 2016, the Bill has attracted a torrent of criticism from scientists and experts. The Bill could be improved with revision, but the problems of the total ban, as envisioned by the PSB, with respect to the NPS, may be inherent: (1) defining psychoactivity is conceptually fraught, with great consequence for the scope of the prohibition; (2) operationalizing psychoactivity as a usable concept for legal control purposes is extremely difficult, perhaps impossible; and (3) the detachment of penalties for violating a total ban from establishing the harmfulness of a substance is normatively troubling. Given the uncertainties about the effects of a total ban, it is appropriate at this time for other governments to assess more fully the nature of the NPS problem, and the potential control approaches.

show abstract

Section: Operationalizing Psychoactivitymentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Detaching Penalties From Harmmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Operationalizing Psychoactivitymentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can new psychoactive substances be regulated effectively? An assessment of the British Psychoactive Substances Bill

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Irrespectively how good the intentions have been to take these policy measures, many new dilemmas and consequences from a "blanket ban" have been addressed by researchers, and The UK Psychoactive Substances Act have been extensively criticized. [6,13,14]. Similar legislations in Ireland and Poland have not managed decrease the NPS use or availability accordingly [15].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aspects of Substance Displacement - From Illicit Drugs to Novel Psychoactive Substances

Andersson¹,

Kjellgren²

2016

J Addict Res Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several hundred new synthetic drugs, novel psychoactive substances (NPS) or "legal highs" have in recent years appeared on the drug market. These can effortlessly be obtained from on-line vendors, offering an easy access to a plethora of new and untested substances, often with unknown or dangerous effects. Several different attempts to reduce the availability of NPS and to prevent accidents and fatalities have been applied by governments around the world. Nonetheless this complex and constantly evolving situation provides palpable dilemmas and challenges to legislators and prevention strategists. One unintended consequence from prohibition and current drug policies occurs when possibly more precarious substances are used to substitute older and more well-known illicit drugs; so called "substance displacement". We have performed extensive research on the use of NPS, by analyzing Internet resources (drug discussion forum, on-line questionnaires), and published several NPS studies. During our research we observed how substance displacement is a common issue, with implications for both clinical practices, drug prevention strategies, as well as for legislators. In the present review we discuss two common themes of substance displacement: 1) Synthetic cannabinoids replace herbal cannabis, and 2) Different attempts for self-medication using NPS. Incitements for substance displacement, that exposes the user to possibly more harmful substances, are founded both in legislation (availability of substances and fear of legal repercussions) as well as from certain policies or cultural perceptions of various medical conditions. We offer no obvious solutions to these complications, but would like to contribute to awareness of how these factors effects drug users and how measures intended to reduce harm in many cases have the opposite effects. Further studies on the divergent motivations and different groups of NPS users are highlighted as imperative to find new and realistic solutions going forward.

show abstract

“…[8]. novel opioids and nitrous oxide) as equivalent [11]. 3 New psychoactive substances (NPS): the UK's Psychoactive Substances Act, 2016 subjects all non-exempt NPS to control due to their psychoactivity rather than their potential harmfulness.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On risk in addiction science, policy and debate

Holmes

Sumnall

2017

Addiction

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Legally flawed, scientifically problematic, potentially harmful: The UK Psychoactive Substance Bill

Cited by 93 publications

References 12 publications

Can new psychoactive substances be regulated effectively? An assessment of the British Psychoactive Substances Bill

Can new psychoactive substances be regulated effectively? An assessment of the British Psychoactive Substances Bill

Aspects of Substance Displacement - From Illicit Drugs to Novel Psychoactive Substances

On risk in addiction science, policy and debate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About