David Nutt tells it how it is and is sacked

[Jux]

So the Government don't like it when one of their advisors actually takes notice of real evidence which doesn't quite accord with their stated policies (even though they say they want debate) and so sack the guy who says "but hang on...."

[southeastastralbeing]

agree madness

[cornsilk]

what did he do?

[MonsterousNasalPustule]

Fairly typical.

[ScummyMummy]

Agree- policy based on an "evidence base" is often such a myth, despite its chronic overuse as a term. Unless it chimes with what the politicians are already saying you can forget evidence all too often, especially when it comes to a sensitive issue like drug use...

[Ponders]

They had him on PM and he was incandescent.

Hope he continues to kick off now he's free to say what he likes

[Jux]

Wish I'd heard him Ponders. Agree, at least they can't muzzle him now.

[LynetteScavo]

Cornsilk, he was government advisor on drugs, who said Canabis and Ecstacy are less harmfull than cigarettes and alcohol. And was scacked for giving his opinion.

I think.

[Jux]

Well, it was his opinion, but it was actually evidence based, so rather more than a mere opinion, LynetteScavo, iyswim

[Ponders]

Try listen again here Jux.

He's at about 30 mins onwards

[Jux]

here a bit at 17:17; Mr Nutt is on at 30:30.

[Jux]

Thanks Ponders - x posted!

[pipWereRabbit]

I was so impressed by him on PM, made his points very well and is clearly hacked off at the government.
Quite agreed with him that it's fair enough for governments to make policy on the basis of moral arguments - just don't pretend it's science when it's not.

[Jux]

He's talking about fact as opposed to 'message'. It's worth listening to. He's not advocating taking drugs, he's merely trying to help to inform the public rather than misinform them.

[Jux]

Yup, pipWereRabbit. He is very good. Sadly, I think rather a lot of people prefer to believe the misinformation the Gov dishes out. (1984 where are you?)

[pipWereRabbit]

I was thinking about MN while he was talking, wondering how many parents here would be prepared to alter their own or their children's behaviour to reflect the scientific data that shows you are more likely to die/be seriously injured horse riding than you are by using canabis.

[Jux]

Hmm, I wonder ...




can't imagine it

[pipWereRabbit]

Get off that horse this instant, and if I ever catch you wearing jodpurs again, I'll ground you.

[CoteDAzur]

Well, in all fairness, death is not the only possible negative outcome when it comes to drugs.

Having said that, I don't understand what the big deal is about drugs like cannabis and ecstasy, which are not terribly disruptive socially nor do they seem to be terribly harmful to the user. In a world where cigarettes and alcohol are legal, I don't see why the hysteria surrounding their use.

My conclusion is that government is the enemy of fun

[SCARYspicemonster]

I am appalled by this. Sacked for having the temerity to suggest that drug classification is more about political expediency than truth. Well I never.

Why, on the one hand, are cigarettes banned pretty much everywhere and we're told that we can't drink more than 2 units a day (or none if you're pregnant), because they are so bad for you, and yet they're really not that bad for you?

No one has ever died from cannabis or ecstacy use as far as I know. Mind boggles

[Ronaldinhio]

have they no idea how to manage anything?

what is the dark lord mandelson doing with his time?

shurley common policy for disagreeing with da senior management is movement swiftly into a sideways role with no media mouthpiece pref in Siberia

not blardy sacking him so that he endlessly goes on about it, articulately, to everyone, freely and going against every policy you've written

[SCARYspicemonster]

Perhaps he'll be found hanging in the woods at the weekend ...

[Jux]

No, he'll go for a walk and be found sitting under a tree with a bottle of paracetomol.

[Heathcliffscathy]

have emailed him here

absolute disgrace this.

unfortunately it applies across the board: we're evidence based til we don't like the evidence.

particularly appalling within the realm of environmental research (mrsophable has much to say on this wrt impact of current UK fisheries legislation).

[tyres]

David Nutt is a prominent psychiatrist. He knows what he is talking about and it is not just 'his opinion'. It is shocking that the government has sacked someone who was on the telly the other day testing a new potential drug which it is hoped will simulate the effect of alcohol but is completely safe and has no side effects.

I had the pleasure of being in contact with him via my work on a number of occasions and although I didn't realise it at the time he is a 'maverick' indeed. Lets hope someone sometime soon in power will realise he is talking sense about drugs of all kinds.

[Ponders]

"No one has ever died from cannabis or ecstacy use as far as I know. Mind boggles"

people have died after taking ecstasy (eg Leah Betts) & presumably after cannabis too - they are not 100% harmless after all. But the direct link to horse-riding deaths is undeniable. ditto quad bikes, cycling without a helmet, driving after drinking - where do you draw the line between cause & effect though?