And among other things, I wonder how exactly the regulation is going to stop children from smoking dope. Will it be more or less a cut and paste of the regulation currently in place to reduce alcohol harm on children?
The Canadian idea is control of the supply chain. Currently, any 15 year old in NZ who wants to buy weed can get it. With control of the supply chain, that gets harder. The question is whether that can be achieved.
As for alcohol regulations, we pretty much don't have any (apart from age of purchase, which is broken).
I see what you are saying. And controlling the supply chain makes sense,. That will take the criminal element out, which is itself not good for young people. Personally, I think it’s important not to let it be glamorous in the eyes of young people. That’s going to be something for adult dope smokers to be considerate about.
And as an example: "I smoked dope while I was at university"
I didn't. In fact, I never have used recreational drugs, but I am a strong believer in evidence-based research and public policy based on it across the board, as opposed to junk science. I believe in harm minimisation and risk reduction. When it comes to premature use, we will need to do considerably better than we have when it comes to preventing susceptible young folks preloading and binge drinking.
I’m less of a believer in anything than cynical, sceptical and inquisitive of nearly everything. But that doesn’t mean I don’t have a substantial believe system, just like everyone else, and I am aware it needs constant maintenance.
evidence-based research and public policy based on it across the board, as opposed to junk science.
I am starting to see this line of attack being used on twitter more frequently as a political tool. It’s an effective way to ignore the nuance of other points of view.
“Legalising, taxing and regulating," and if we all say that in concert, it becomes clearly and loudly what we all believe is the only correct thing, and anything else is wrong. Its a polarising style of politics and its counter productive in a referendum context.
I’d like to know what plan-B is if the polling booth says leave the law as it is, because the Greens or what ever just piss us off. Not everyone only thinks with their high level tertiary education Y’know, just saying.
Call it the Trump hypnosis, that has no rhyme or reason but yet it’s evidently real.
I think it’s important not to let it be glamorous in the eyes of young people.
Completely ban any advertising industry input funnel all information thru scientific channels and informed parents. TELL 'EM...Your messing with your minds, kids, try and show a bit of respect for yourselves, do that and you might be able to enjoy the mind altering aspects of the drug. And dont endanger others please.
the Trump hypnosis
Its going to take a while for that to peter out in society if ever. We're always going to have stupid with us
I never have used recreational drugs
Can you just clarify whether that includes legal psychoactive substances like alcohol and caffeine? Remember the laughter when the UK proposed to outlaw *all* psychoactive substances, and the horror when they did?
At this point I would like to direct you towards the episode of Andrew Maxwell’s Public Enemies on the drugs trade (first broadcast in 2013, but recently rebroadcast on BBC Radio 4 Extra, so currently available for streaming until the end of July 2019).
“I’m not going to ask if you’ve used drugs; I’ll just tell the jokes, and I’ll know from your reactions.”
On ignoring alcohol, Maxwell comments (9 minutes in): it’s like “a government [that was] officially vegetarian, [and] used all the power of the state to go after steak restaurants, but instead of shutting down meat, they had a war on condiments.”
Redlining. This is the graphic picture to help identify the “war on drugs”.
Point of information? Is the well known and popular celebrity psychotherapist, Kyle MacDonald, also a qualified psychiatrist?
The NZMJ has accepted our letter responding the FF's press release. If you'd like a copy email me at email@example.com. I can't post it here due to copyright restrictions.
In theory the “just consume less” thing works, but higher THC also tends to mean a lower CBD ratio. It would actually be really nice to have access to higher-CBD strains.
In theory, yes. And this is where we depart from alcohol as a comparison. The chemistry is different.
Is the well known and popular celebrity psychotherapist, Kyle MacDonald, also a qualified psychiatrist?
No. And I suspect he’d chuckle at ‘celebrity’. :)
Follow Follow @kylemacd
Replying to @publicaddress @David_Cormack and 2 others
A number of us have.
Fear is a powerful motivator though, and prevents facts having the impact they should, especially when deliberately enflamed by the hysterics of B*b McFamily and Hosking et. al.
I know, Twitter looks like machine code language when you take it out of the lab.
Whats happening here, is Kyle twittering his expert opinion as part of his campaign to legalise and regulate cannabis because thats his gig.
What he is saying is profound. Fear is a strong motivator.
I think he might also be saying that anyone with reservations about ticking the yes box in the up coming referendum, is not thinking rationally.
What I think is that machines operate on facts alone, Human beings are obviously more creative and intuitive. Which is what Kyle is also saying, but from a different platform and status.
My intuition tells me that B*b McFamily and Hosking et. al are to be ignored. I never ever fact check what these people say. I use my efficient internal bullshit detectors instead.
Regarding algorithms of facts, evidence-based decision making and “harm reduction”. Until I start reading tweets from high profile cannabis legalise and regulate campaigners talking about tightening up the regulations around the advertising and marketing of alcohol, I’m going to listen to my intuition, and call bullshit your not going to introduce another mind fucking addictive drug to the supermarket shelves.
Please convince me you truthfully care about harm reduction.
Follow Follow @_chloeswarbrick
Here’s the thing about common-sense, evidence based legal regulation: it means we have control over a substance, and can ensure community well-being.
But here's the thing. Why not have a read of this, real "evidence based" recommendation, and maybe explain why your “common-sense” approach to regulation can’t be applied to alcohol.