AN UNCERTAIN SCIENTIST'S GUIDE TO TAKING RISKS

Be cautious about invoking the 'precautionary principle'. We can never be sure how dangerous - or safe - cannabis really is

Last year 509,090 people died in England and Wales, and the Office for National Statistics ( ONS ) has just released full details of what they died of. For a statistician this means 346 riveting pages of morbid detail, ranging from the rare fatalities from hang-gliders ( 2 ), dog bites ( 4 ), lightning ( 0, down from 2 the previous year ), men-in-their-40s on playground equipment ( 1 ) to the usual blockbusters such as ischaemic heart disease ( 76,985 ).

Twelve riders were killed after falling off their horse in 2008, the consequences of what David Nutt once called "equasy" - or the addiction to horse-riding. The sacked chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs got into trouble earlier in the year for comparing the risks of equasy with Ecstasy, which directly led to 27 deaths in 2006.

Since both have similar numbers of participants my guess is that Ecstasy pips horse-riding in the risk stakes by a length. But given that around 1,000,000 Ecstasy tablets are taken a week, these are not high risks compared to the effects of alcohol, and certainly not other Class A drugs with which Ecstasy is lumped.

In 2006 heroin was mentioned on 713 death certificates, and the British Crime Survey estimated that 41,000 people used heroin that year - this produces a ( very ) crude annual death rate of 1 in 58. Put another way, heroin users have roughly the same death rate as an average 65-year-old man or 71-year-old woman. You would have to go hang-gliding eight times a day, all year, to have a similar risk.

But measuring the harm of drugs is not just about official statistics. Most of us have our own stories about sad changes in young people that appear closely associated with cannabis, and Professor Nutt points out that users do have increased risk of psychotic episodes. Parents are naturally concerned about the effects on the mental health of their children, and although surveys show that cannabis use has fallen among 11 to 15-year-olds, and schizophrenia rates have also fallen, these will provide little reassurance.

The ACMD acknowledges this and produced a ranking of the relative danger of drugs based on nine aspects of harm, including the broader social consequences.

The problem came when this harm ranking placed Ecstasy and cannabis below alcohol and tobacco. Although Professor Nutt claims these legal drugs can make useful benchmarks that help public understanding, the arguments concerning lethality and legality get hopelessly entangled, so that it is considered improper to "calibrate" illegal activities against legal ( and in the case of horse riding, admirably wholesome ) pursuits.

Jacqui Smith, the former Home Secretary, used public concern as part of the basis for rejecting the council's recommendation to downgrade cannabis, and also cited "doubt about the potential harm", saying "we must err on the side of caution". As Professor Nutt pointed out, this is a form of the precautionary principle, which says that if there is a possibility of severe outcomes we should not wait for complete certainty before acting.

This idea has been applied to man-made climate change, where if we waited for full understanding it would be too late to do anything about it. But the precautionary principle should be invoked with great caution: otherwise every claim of possible harm, from autism after the MMR jab to brain tumours from mobile phones, would lead to government action - and careful weighing of evidence would be washed away in the rush to bring about the illusory goal of "safety".

This means that the crucial role of any scientific advice is to assess and communicate reasonable uncertainty, rather than just list what "might" happen. Which is why it is so bizarre to have A. N. Wilson in the Daily Mail caricaturing scientists as "arrogant gods of certainty".

Perhaps the author of this wonderfully ill-informed comment would like to examine the recent UK Climate Impact Projections? There he would find uncertainty by the bucket-load: projections allow for doubt about how climate system works, accuracy of computer models and so on. A wide distribution of possibilities is given, with even a small probability that average temperatures will not increase at all.

The main problem is that if scientists and politicians are too certain, then adapting to new information can be slow or embarrassing. In 2007 the National Heart Forum made a projection that 48 per cent ( uncertainty range from 40-57 per cent ) of girls aged 2-11 would be overweight or obese in 2020. Yesterday, based on an additional three years data, it radically reduced the projected proportion to 27 per cent. How can this happen? The problem is that the projections are based on a simple extrapolation of the data up to 2020, and so the uncertainty limits do not allow for our doubts about what is going on in the population.

It's only by acknowledging the "unknowns", and trying to quantify how big they are, that scientists can give balanced, and appropriately uncertain, advice.

Politicians need to be willing to accept scientific uncertainty and still take decisions, and this means getting an idea of the magnitudes of the risks, even when our understanding is incomplete. None of us expects certainty in our lives, but we could all get better at acknowledging our ignorance without succumbing to the twin perils of panic or paralysis.








URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v09/n1008/a04.html
Newshawk: Herb
Pubdate: Wed, 4 Nov 2009
Source: Times, The (UK)
Page: 31
Copyright: 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd
Contact:
letters@thetimes.co.uk
Website: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/454
Author: David Spiegelhalter
Note: David Spiegelhalter is Winton Professor of the Public
Understanding of Risk at Cambridge University















natural ways to pass drug test
how to pass a drug test
how to pass a drug test
tips on passing a drug test
pass drug test

PEACE PRIZE WINNING OBAMA BACKS MILITARY GROWTH IN COLOMBIA

Hours after this year's Nobel Peace Prize was announced, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson spoke to a college audience and gently admonished "our new Nobel Peace Prize-winning president."

Richardson, the ex-presidential candidate, diplomat and a past Nobel nominee, relayed a simple message to President Barack Obama: "Pay more attention to Latin America."

But in an ironic twist shaken out from last month's Nobel surprise, Obama beat out the odds-on Nobel favorite, Piedad Cordoba, a Colombian senator and successful hostage negotiator who for years has promoted negotiations to end the four-decades-long civil war in Colombia. Oddly enough, Obama has embraced the opposite solution to the tragic conflict in South America - a military expansion.

In July, the Obama administration announced a deal with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe - Cordoba's nemesis, America's ally - that will send at least hundreds of U.S. troops to seven Colombian military bases. The idea behind the expansion, U.S. officials said, is to track cocaine traffickers and the insurgent forces they fund.

But Obama's first major policy decision on inequality-stricken Latin America also reinforces a regional arms race, an unsettling trend that diverts more and more resources to building up armies instead of bolstering social development.

At a talk to students at UCLA last month, Venezuela's ambassador to the United States, Bernardo Alvarez Herrera, addressed the deal, "You cannot be talking about peace and at the same time increasing the presence of the military in Colombia."

The comment was made the day before Obama's Nobel Peace Prize was announced.

The deepening U.S.-Colombia military partnership has been roundly criticized, but the story suffers from Latin America's second-thought status among many in the U.S. The criticism comes not just from Venezuela, but even moderate governments in Brazil and Chile.

"It was kind of sprung on people. Nobody saw it coming," said Michael LaRosa, a Rhodes College professor, of the decision to send troops to Colombia. "To some degree, it goes against everything that President Obama has been trying to do in Latin America, which is openness, transparency, reaching out."

John Lindsay-Poland, a California-based Latin America researcher, also has suggested that the expanded military partnership isn't in tune with Obama's latest accolade.

"This is a time when Washington should invest in peace talks, not institutionalizing its relationship with the military," Lindsay-Poland wrote on his blog.

LaRosa noted that three of the Colombian military installations where U.S. forces will be renting space are on the country's tense eastern border with Venezuela. "So it looks like we're trying to get close to Venezuela - and not because we want to get to know the Venezuelan people better," he said, "but because of the oil reserves there."

Weeks after news of the U.S.-Colombia deal broke, Venezuela's oil-rich leader, Hugo Chavez, promptly announced another major arms purchase with Russia - $2 billion worth of surface-to-air missiles, battle tanks and anti-aircraft missile launching systems. Chavez specifically invoked the U.S.-Colombia pact as a justification.

Meanwhile, Brazil, the regional heavyweight, spent a record $24.6 billion bulking up its military last year.

But Venezuela and Brazil aren't the only nations in the region devoting large sums to military spending. In 2008, so did Colombia ( $12.3 billion ), Chile ( $4.9 billion ), Ecuador ( $1.3 billion ) - even Bolivia ( $1 billion ), home to Latin America's most extreme poverty. Nor is the trend a one-year phenomenon. According to the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, overall military spending in Latin America and the Caribbean spiked by 91 percent over the past five years, to $47.2 billion in 2008.

Even a respected analyst who favors U.S. assistance in combating Colombia's leftist guerillas cautions against the trend.

"We do have an arms buildup, which I think is worrying because Latin America, in relative terms, has been pretty peaceful," said Michael Shifter, director of the Andean program at the Inter-American Dialogue. "But the risks are increasing. There's very little transparency about the arms purchase and what their purposes are."

A decade ago, Plan Colombia was launched with the aim of interdicting drugs and supporting the Colombian government, not going after the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC.

"But after 9/11, quietly, Plan Colombia funds began to go after three terrorist organizations as the United States names them in Colombia - the FARC, the paramilitary groups and the ELN [National Liberation Army]," LaRosa said. "So there was mission creep and mission change."

It's a mission creep our newly minted Nobel laureate endorses.

Nowadays, Cordoba, the Colombian politician and peace activist Obama beat for the Peace Prize, is still pressing the Uribe government for a prisoner swap with the FARC as a way to stimulate a different approach.

But unlike Obama, she'll have to press forward on that thankless task without the prestige of a Noble Prize to back her up.






URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v09/n1008/a03.html
Newshawk: Suzanne Wills
Votes: 0
Webpage: http://drugsense.org/url/0POlyY3n
Pubdate: Sun, 8 Nov 2009
Source: Dallas Morning News (TX)
Copyright: 2009 The Dallas Morning News, Inc.
Contact: http://www.dallasnews.com/cgi-bin/lettertoed.cgi
Website: http://www.dallasnews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/117
Author: David Alire Garcia
Note: David Alire Garcia is a freelance writer on Latin America.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/opinion.htm (Opinion)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Obama
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/Plan+Colombia















home remedies for passing drug tests
home remedies for passing drug tests
natural ways to pass drug test
ways to pass a drug test
natural ways to pass drug test

NORML WARMS UP MEDICAL POT PROPOSAL

In a panel discussion yesterday in Ellis Auditorium, nine patients described a dizzying array of illnesses ranging from epilepsy to a rare joint disorder known as Larsen syndrome. Two sat in wheelchairs, and one young man told the audience he was there to speak on behalf of his father, who is bedridden with multiple sclerosis.

All panelists said they had found one drug that significantly calms the symptoms: marijuana.

The Missouri conference of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws gathered yesterday at the University of Missouri, and advocates say they are gearing up for a renewed push to pass medical reform legislation in the state.

In a daylong roster of speakers, none was more powerful than the sufferers of chronic illnesses who say smoking marijuana calms their nerves, decreases nausea and eases pain. And, they say, they're tired of being treated like criminals for using it.

"It's a real human tragedy to find a safer alternative" to pharmaceuticals "and then to be hit so hard by a legal system that doesn't understand," said a Columbia resident and marijuana user who was charged with a felony in South Dakota for growing cannabis. The man, who asked not to be named, said he smokes to treat pain associated with a urological condition.

Brian Chitwood of Farmington said that when he was being treated for Hodgkin's lymphoma he was given chemotherapy drugs that left him with a nonstop feeling of nausea. He found that smoking a joint could restore his equilibrium.

There were other cancer patients that asked me, 'How come you go out back and you come back smiling?' " Chitwood said. "So I took two of them out back, and they came back smiling, too."

In 2004, Columbia became the first municipality in the state to allow patients with a doctor's written permission to possess less than 35 grams of marijuana. At the conference, one patient proudly displayed her written doctor's recommendation, and others discussed creating a database for the public of sympathetic Columbia physicians.

But advocates said Columbia laws don't go far enough, that they put medical users in a bind by stipulating that they cannot legally grow their own crop and forcing them onto the streets to enter into a criminal transaction to make a purchase.

Over the past year, Columbia has had two murders associated with robberies during marijuana transactions.

"I can't buy it. I wish I could grow it on my porch, and then I would know exactly what I was getting," said Christy Welliver, an MS sufferer who has a medical recommendation from a Columbia physician to use marijuana to prevent muscle spasms. "But I can't do that, so I do have to rely on people giving it to me because I won't break the law."

A House bill introduced during the last legislative session in Jefferson City would have legalized medical marijuana for a long list of afflictions such as MS, cancer, fibromyalgia and AIDS. NORML advocates plan to urge the bill's sponsor, Rep. Kate Meiners of Kansas City, to file it again in the upcoming session.

But Paul Armentano, the deputy director of the national NORML organization, urged advocates to push for a bill that gives doctors the widest possible latitude in prescribing cannabis. As a cautionary example, he cited the medical marijuana law in Vermont, where strict qualifications have limited marijuana treatment to only 35 people.






URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v09/n1008/a01.html
Newshawk: Jay Bergstrom
Pubdate: Sun, 8 Nov 2009
Source: Columbia Daily Tribune (MO)
Page: A16
Copyright: 2009 Columbia Daily Tribune
Contact:
editor@tribmail.com
Website: http://www.columbiatribune.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/91
Author: T. J. Greaney
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/NORML (NORML)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?253 (Cannabis - Medicinal - United States)















home remedies for passing drug tests
pass a drug test
natural ways to pass drug test
how to pass a drug test
how to pass a drug test

LEGISLATOR WANTS CSU TO GROW POT FOR THE STATE

A state legislator is hoping to corner the market on medical marijuana by having Colorado State University oversee the cultivation of all pot used in the burgeoning industry.

It could give a new meaning to "higher education." At least half of the revenue generated by the proposal would be used to fund the state's colleges and universities.

Sen. Al White, R-Hayden, told Boulder Weekly that the state's marijuana-growing operation should be handled by CSU because it is the state's primary agricultural school. White says the operation could probably be accommodated with about 10 acres of land.

He says has not yet discussed the issue with CSU or higher-ed leaders.

"This is the first I've heard of it," CSU spokesman Brad Bohlander told Boulder Weekly. He declined to comment on the substance of the proposal until after CSU officials discuss it with White and see some draft language.

"It's going to spark some interesting conversation," he says. "And that's not a joke."

White has proposed legislation that would effectively give the state complete control over the growth, sale and distribution of medical marijuana, possibly putting an end to the gold rush of dispensaries that has emerged in Boulder and around the state. He says the state would contract with "licensed pharmacists" to sell the marijuana, whether that pharmacist is based at an established pharmacy like Walgreens or a dispensary.

"It kind of throws that whole 'caregiver' thing out the window," he says, acknowledging that "it would be a monopoly."

Half of the money generated by the marijuana sales would be used to support higher education in the state, White says. The other half would be used to build up a "rainy-day" fund, and once that fund exceeds $1 billion, the remainder would be sent to higher-ed, which has been "taking it in the shorts" financially in recent years.

White told The Denver Post that the revenue generated by his proposal in the first year could reach $160 million, after overhead costs are taken out.

White told Boulder Weekly that the reasoning behind the bill is that there isn't enough order or regulation in the medical marijuana industry, and that if the state were in charge, there would be some consistency in the quality of the pot being provided to patients. He describes the two extremes of marijuana quality now as everything from "ditch weed that's really better suited for sandals or doormats" to "THC so strong it would make a rocket scientist a drooling cookie monster."

He also expresses concern that demand seems to be outstripping supply right now, and that weed is being purchased on the black market. White attributes a degree of that black market to "Mexican drug cartels" and asks why the state should continue to support "narco-terrorist killers."

Asked whether his plan flies in the face of the tradition Republican stance of less government and a free market, White replied, "This is more of a law-and-order deal, which Republicans are always about."

He says no other state has approved such a plan, but several have similar controls over the liquor industry within their boundaries.

He says his bill would contain a five-year sunset provision in case it needs to be tweaked or discontinued at that point. White stops short of predicting whether pot could be legalized by that time, and he says his plan is not an effort to legalize the substance, but also says that "the feds may respond to what we're doing in Colorado by moving it from a banned substance to a controlled substance." The program would also undergo an annual audit under the legislation.

Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, who is proposing medical marijuana legislation of his own, told Boulder Weekly that he is not in favor of White's plan, in part because of the damage it could do to the state's reputation.

"I don't think we want to be known as the state that is growing marijuana," he says.

As for the idea of having CSU grow the marijuana, Romer says facetiously, "Every parent in America will want to have their kid going to 'Pot U.'"

CU spokesman Ken McConnellogue told Boulder Weekly that CU officials had not yet heard about or discussed the proposed bill either, adding, "It's not surprising, given the dire straits that higher ed is in."






URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v09/n1009/a03.html
Newshawk: The GCW
Pubdate: Fri, 06 Nov 2009
Source: Boulder Weekly (CO)
Copyright: 2009 Boulder Weekly
Contact:
letters@boulderweekly.com
Website: http://www.boulderweekly.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/57
Author: Jefferson Dodge
















tips on passing a drug test
how to pass a drug test
pass a drug test
ways to pass a drug test
how long does marijuana stay in your system

MEDICAL MARIJUANA ALREADY PAID FOR

Re: "Feds demand users prepay for their pot," Nov. 1.

I have to say, I'm absolutely disgusted at this move from Health Canada. It has been demanding payment for something that has already been paid for. Health Canada has tendered the contract to grow cannabis and has paid out millions of dollars for acquiring its supply of medical marijuana. Taxpayers have already paid in full for this medication. Demanding that ill and infirm patients pay -- for what has been called an inadequate product -- on top of what Canadians have already paid, is as insulting as it is disgusting.

Ethan Erkiletian

( More money going up in smoke. )






URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v09/n1009/a02.html
Newshawk: CMAP http://www.mapinc.org/cmap
Pubdate: Sun, 08 Nov 2009
Source: Edmonton Sun (CN AB)
Copyright: 2009 Canoe Limited Partnership.
Contact:
mailbag@edmsun.com
Website: http://www.edmontonsun.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/135
Author: Ethan Erkiletian
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v09/n988/a01.html
Note: Parenthetical remark by the Sun editor, headline by newshawk.














how to beat drug test
urine drug testing
ways to pass a drug test
home remedies for passing drug tests
home remedies for passing drug tests

BACKING FOR DRUG EXPERT'S REVOLT

Alcohol and tobacco are more dangerous than cannabis and Ecstasy - this was the controversial view that cost the Government's chief drug adviser Professor David Nutt his job. Here Darren Devine asks whether Professor Nutt is a dangerous radical trivialising harmful substances or an expert who has paid a high price for highlighting the hypocrisy at the heart of Government drugs policy.

WHEN professor David Nutt said horse riding or "equasy" was as dangerous as taking the class-A drug Ecstasy it put him on an inevitable collision course with his political masters.

The scientist and then chair of the Government's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs ( ACMD ) said he was trying to question why society tolerates some potentially harmful behaviours but not others, such as drug use.

He argued "equasy" could be blamed for 10 deaths a year and more than 100 traffic accidents.

His article in a scientific journal produced a backlash from drugs hard-liners opposed to any reform, with then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith ordering him to apologise.

And when he continued to campaign for the Government's drugs classification system to be replaced with an index of harm current Home Secretary Alan Johnson decided enough was enough.

Within his index of harm the professor, who has four children aged 18 to 26 - more than one of whom has confessed to taking drugs - wanted alcohol and tobacco ranked higher than cannabis and Ecstasy.

Amidst the threat of mass resignations from ACMD and the announcement of a review of its functions Mr Johnson decided the scientist could not continue being both a "government adviser and a campaigner against government policy".

But within Wales there is sympathy for the professor's position.

Chief executive of South Wales drugs charity Kaleidoscope Martin Blakebrough said Professor Nutt was right to suggest alcohol and tobacco are more harmful than cannabis and Ecstasy.

Despite concerns over the binge-drinking culture Mr Blakebrough said the Government has liberalised the country's alcohol laws with 24-hour licensing.

The 47-year-old believes this is because the industry is estimated to be worth ?28bn to the British economy and makes a hefty contribution to the Treasury's annual tax take.

Mr Blakebrough, who served on the ACMD with Professor Nutt for nine years between 1998 and 2007, said: "We need to have tougher laws in relation to alcohol because this Government has seen a reduction in the price of alcohol and has extended the licensing hours. It's done everything to facilitate the alcohol industry in every way it could.

"And they've always got away with pretending they're tough on drugs and the causes of crime while practically being in league with the alcohol industry.

"On a Friday night in Newport what's the biggest problem - people shooting heroin up their arms, or getting drunk and urinating in the streets and shouting and attacking people?

"I think most people would say alcohol is our biggest problem."

But Mr Blakebrough said Professor Nutt has "wanted to be a martyr" through his protests against Government policy and should have resigned before he was sacked.

He believes as chair of ACMD he had a duty to look beyond his own professional perspective and take "collective responsibility" for the committee's position.

He added: "He has continued to make the point that it was a stupid decision by the Government ( to reclassify cannabis as a class B instead of a class C drug ) but remained as their chief adviser.

"And that is inconsistent. He can argue he's a scientist, but he was head of a committee that included people from the police and drugs services and he had a responsibility to look beyond his own professional discipline."

But Clive Wolfendale, chief executive of Welsh drug and alcohol agency CAIS, suggested if the Government was going to appoint scientific advisers it had a duty to listen to them.

The 51-year-old former deputy chief constable of North Wales said: "The whole issue is ripe for an independent Royal Commission to look at the science, look at the risks, examine the issues of legality and point a way forward for the next 30 years.

"It's about 40 years now since the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act and it's probably run its course in terms of setting a platform for setting a sensible way forward."

Mr Wolfendale, who during his 34 years as a policeman spent much of his time investigating drug-related gang warfare in Manchester, said there is little doubt that alcohol and tobacco are "very damaging drugs of misuse".

"If it wasn't for the fact they've been around for centuries then they'd be categorised in the way narcotics are now."

Mr Wolfendale said though he would be against a "free for all" by legalising all drugs, ways of taking the supply of narcotics out of the hands of "evil" dealers must be looked at.

"Because of the way the thing's set up there's a huge incentive for very evil people to make huge amounts of money out of peddling other people's misery.

"So what we end up with is a small number of very evil, very rich drug dealers and thousands and thousands of victims.

"While I'm not in favour of a free-for-all on drugs policy we need to look at other ways of controlling the supply rather than handing the entire business over to evil criminals."

One Ecstasy and cannabis user from Newport, who did not wish to be named, believes Professor Nutt lost his job for daring to tell the truth about drugs.

The 25-year-old man, who has been a user for seven years, said: "I've had friends who have had major accidents through the use of alcohol, and tobacco-related illness is a well documented fact.

"The only death you can have from cannabis is if it falls on you from a great height, but I understand there's an inherent health risk for people who smoke tobacco with cannabis."






URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v09/n996/a09.html
Newshawk: Herb
Pubdate: Tue, 03 Nov 2009
Source: Western Mail (UK)
Copyright: 2009 Media Wales Ltd
Contact:
readers@mediawales.co.uk
Website: http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2598
Author: Darren Devine, Staff Writer















home remedies for passing drug tests
natural ways to pass drug test
tips on passing a drug test
how long does marijuana stay in your system
how long does marijuana stay in your system

DRUG EXPERTS RALLY ROUND SACKED DAVID NUTT

David Nutt Receives Support Over Alan Johnson Row

Members of the drugs advisory body have demanded showdown talks with the home secretary after his sacking of Prof David Nutt.

Scientists said they had 'serious concerns' about Alan Johnson's decision to remove their colleague and questioned whether they could continue to work with the government.

In a letter to Mr Johnson, members on the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs threatened to quit and called for 'clarity and assurances' from ministers about how their advice would be treated in future.

Earlier, Mr Johnson escalated his criticism of Prof Nutt, accusing him of breaching the official code of conduct for advisers.

Prof Nutt had failed to give advance warning of last week's paper in which he said alcohol and tobacco were more dangerous than ecstasy and LSD, and questioned the decision to downgrade cannabis, Mr Johnson said.

Mr Johnson, called to the Commons to answer an emergency question from the Tories, denied a review of the body - announced two weeks ago - was linked to the row over Prof Nutt.

While praising the work of the ACMD as invaluable, and agreeing to meet its remaining members in person, he stated again he had lost confidence in the professor.

Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said the decision was 'the right one'.

Two other scientists quit over the weekend. Last year, alcohol directly caused 7,341 deaths, while cigarettes led to 114,000.

There were 12 deaths from ecstasy and none from cannabis, according to the University of London.






URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v09/n996/a08.html
Newshawk: Herb
Pubdate: Tue, 03 Nov 2009
Source: Metro (UK)
Copyright: 2009 Associated Newspapers Limited
Contact:
mail@ukmetro.co.uk
Website: http://www.metro.co.uk/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/4714
Author: John Higginson, Staff Writer















how long does marijuana stay in your system
how to pass a drug test
how to pass a drug screen
how to pass a drug test
how to pass a drug test