Khat ban going ahead despite lack of actual evidence of significant harm - Polidicks

[QUOTE=gary spivey;45174287]How kind of them to create a new market in the pusher business[/QUOTE] Indeed. What they should have done is use the tax collected from sale of khat to address the harms directly in the communities affected (if there even are any in the first place, considering the findings of the ACMD). Tax could have been raised if it wasn't enough to cover it but they've chosen to push it underground and eliminate all tax revenue from it instead.

Guys, is this real life? Are the British... banning [I]tea?[/I] All jokes aside, this is utterly a shit ban that isn't really founded in fact.

[QUOTE=PaperBurrito;45174371]Guys, is this real life? Are the British... banning [I]tea?[/I] All jokes aside, this is utterly a shit ban that isn't really founded in fact.[/QUOTE] Its as much based on fact as any other kinds of drug prohibition. Besides this is already an illegal substance in other parts of the EU.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;45173546]This is just smearing. There are likely other reasons that lead people to inactivity and khat use that will not be resolved by the ban or even addressed. I seriously doubt every khat user is bone idle and as I said this is probably just a smear similar to how people presume all stoners are lazy.[/QUOTE] Khat is a very strong stimulant and the users crash hard afterwards. A lot of men in Somalia have had trouble holding down what jobs they can get, because they start chewing khat around ten in the morning and by mid-afternoon are dead-tired and unable to continue working. Let's also not forget that khat has some significant withdrawal effects, including lethargy (again, relating to the whole not-working thing) and depression, and long-term use has been known to cause hallucinations, depression, psychosis, and occasionally death. There's a reason it has a negative stigma in east Africa, despite being legal in many of the countries there. When I lived in the area the people who used it definitely were viewed somewhere between 'dumb stoner' and 'coke addict', because many of them were not able to function normally in society, partly due to the psychoactive effects of the drug. You can make a different argument about how it stacks up to tobacco and alcohol but it's certainly not 'harmless tea'.

I wasn't trying to imply that it was harmless tea. More that prohibition will not help and will just result in a worse overall situation than targeting the harms and why people start using it in the first place with support, not punishment. There may be problem users but there are probably moderate users that we don't hear about too. The black market will just push prices up and involve criminals.

[QUOTE=Internet1001;45173428]If they're going to ban bloody tea they might as well go ahead and ban coffee, alcohol and tobacco.[/QUOTE] You can't ban tobaco! How are all those big execs gonna survive without poisoning people through a whole lifetime?

The problem with stockpiling khat would be that it deteriorates pretty quickly. [url]http://mykhat.co.uk/how-keep-khat-fresh-after-purchase[/url] [QUOTE]Khat can be stored and kept fresh for up to 7 - 10 days in the fridge door, to do this; just wrap the khat 'tightly in a tea towel', then place that inside a plastic bag, roll tightly. Place inside the fridge door section, and it will stay fresh.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;45174680]The black market will just push prices up and involve criminals.[/QUOTE] Except khat doesn't keep, it has to be chewed fresh, or the cathinone (active ingredient) decomposes rapidly, especially if dried. That's why it's only really popular in areas of the world where it can be grown locally, like northeast/east Africa, and amongst people from those places who are willing to pay a substantial amount to have it imported, primarily Somali, Yemeni, and Ethiopian immigrants. You can't sustain a black market on a product that has to be sold basically as soon as it comes off the boat, assuming you can even import it in profitable quantities in the first place, since khat leaves are not nearly as compact as hard drugs or even tobacco, and as you said users can't buy in bulk either. As far as drug bans go, a ban on khat would probably be far more effective than bans on any other drug.

What if they start consuming extracts of Cathinone instead? I mean I know that's already illegal but some of the khat users might see it as a viable alternative considering it doesn't spoil like the plant and comes in pill or powder forms so easier to smuggle.

Cathinone rapidly oxidizes to cathine, which is basically worthless as a recreational drug. I've never heard of anyone successfully extracting cathinone in a stable form from khat and I don't think that would be of interest to khat users.

[QUOTE=Knoxed;45173777]for some reason i have a feeling this chart is not correct because how can coke be so high.[/QUOTE] think about what happens when you put salt on a snail. that is exactly what you're doing when you're sniffing coke. its just so ridiculously overrated for what you're doing to yourself especially with the stuff it is cut with

[QUOTE=QwertySecond;45173463]To rate Khat's place amongst other drugs, here's some research carried out by David Nutt and published by the Lancet: [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Development_of_a_rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_of_potential_misuse_%28physical_harm_and_dependence%2C_NA_free_means%29.svg/380px-Development_of_a_rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_of_potential_misuse_%28physical_harm_and_dependence%2C_NA_free_means%29.svg.png[/img][/QUOTE] this chart is incredibly inaccurate, you can't just measure dependence or physical harm of a drug by putting a dot on a graph. i really wish people would stop posting this, it's just more drug misinformation

[QUOTE=Knoxed;45173777]for some reason i have a feeling this chart is not correct because how can coke be so high.[/QUOTE] Because coke is awful for you, what the fuck, it's so easy to decimate yourself on coke, it puts so much strain on your body it's unreal and it's super addictive.

[QUOTE=polarbear.;45175973]this chart is incredibly inaccurate, you can't just measure dependence or physical harm of a drug by putting a dot on a graph. i really wish people would stop posting this, it's just more drug misinformation[/QUOTE] The chart is part of a detailed study and is not standalone. If you've found this study to be bogus then please share your evidence to the contrary.

Time for criminal gangs to flourish with another source of income from a tradition driven group wanting to continue using the substance they have always used from generations past.

[QUOTE=Knoxed;45173777]for some reason i have a feeling this chart is not correct because how can coke be so high.[/QUOTE] Seriously? Is it not common knowledge that cocaine is really, really fucking bad for you? Because that's pretty scary.

Didn't khat give Somali militants superpowers to be hit several times with .50 and survive?

[QUOTE=polarbear.;45175973]this chart is incredibly inaccurate, you can't just measure dependence or physical harm of a drug by putting a dot on a graph. i really wish people would stop posting this, it's just more drug misinformation[/QUOTE] I gotta agree there, it does come down to mental and physical health. Its a good graph to compare the drugs to each other in terms of lethality and addiction but not the effects on people.

[QUOTE=Midas22;45179049]I gotta agree there, it does come down to mental and physical health. Its a good graph to compare the drugs to each other in terms of lethality and addiction but not the effects on people.[/QUOTE] Why is it that people fail to understand the concept of average (or, if you've ever learned maths beyond a freaking primary school level you'll also know it more properly as the 'mean') population measurements? Yes, you're right, drugs effect different people differently. Just like differing quantities of fat, sugar, sodium, etc, etc effect different peoples health differently. Just like different amounts of SLEEP effect different peoples health differently. That's reality in a nutshell - statistics. Variation. Things are rarely ever clear cut, but there's always an average value, and that's what that graph is getting at.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;45176190]The chart is part of a detailed study and is not standalone. If you've found this study to be bogus then please share your evidence to the contrary.[/QUOTE] on a subject polluted with tons of bias and misinformation, "detailed study" can still be pretty far from the truth. the graph itself? i don't want to say it's wrong directly, but like i said you just can't measure harmful effects by plotting a dot on a graph. the way this picture does it is just stupid. Dependence? does it cause physical withdrawal? psychological dependence? availability, route of administration plays a factor. "Dependence" is way too broad. heroin is classed up as the most dependent, but waaay more people have died from benzo withdrawal than heroin withdrawal. the physical harm is just stupid. you can't even measure that accurately with street drugs. Ecstasy could have anything from pure MDMA to fucking rat poison in it. cocaine is one of the most adulterated drugs on the street, and heroin is placed higher than it? heroin, in it's pure form, along with pretty much any other opiate isn't very physically damaging. hard stimulants like cocaine or amphetamines are waaay harder on your body than any opiate. and really. street methadone? [I]what the fuck[/I] is street methadone? how is that different from any other pharmaceutical being given to someone it's not prescribed to? i don't know about the study, but this picture is bad; it just spreads more misinformation.

They didn't "just plot dots on a graph" - the study was done by leading experts in the field of psychopharmacology as far as I know and provides the complex background to it which is why it doesn't seem to make much sense on its own. The graph it seems is just to show a general idea of the cumulative findings and the fact it doesn't differentiate between different individual types of physical harm and dependence doesn't make it wrong. Street methadone could be contaminated just like many of the others. I'm guessing the harm is based on a meta-analysis of available figures and data and that contamination etc. were controlled for. Unless of course they just wanted to know the harms of use and dependence including those things. A regulated market could certainly reduce the potential harms of many of the substances (if not all) shown.

[QUOTE=sltungle;45180548]Why is it that people fail to understand the concept of average (or, if you've ever learned maths beyond a freaking primary school level you'll also know it more properly as the 'mean') population measurements? Yes, you're right, drugs effect different people differently. Just like differing quantities of fat, sugar, sodium, etc, etc effect different peoples health differently. Just like different amounts of SLEEP effect different peoples health differently. That's reality in a nutshell - statistics. Variation. Things are rarely ever clear cut, but there's always an average value, and that's what that graph is getting at.[/QUOTE] Averages are a poor measure of anything when there's so much variation. In something like this, there's going to be a lot of variation and a lot of outliers. Too much for a reliable average to be taken. Don't get me wrong, I think the graph is useful, but the people who don't like it totally have a point from a statistical point of view and I wouldn't take it 100% seriously.

This just smacks of some sort of punishment towards East African migrants

[QUOTE]Chewed for a few hours it leaves users with a feeling of calm, described by some as "blissed out". The drug could make pre-existing mental health problems worse and it can provoke feelings of anxiety and aggression. It can also inflame the mouth and damage teeth, and there are concerns about the long-term risk of mouth cancers.[/QUOTE] Meanwhile [IMG]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Society/Pix/pictures/2009/6/30/1246364935651/Alcohol-fuelled-violence--001.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Viper_;45182056]Meanwhile [IMG]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Society/Pix/pictures/2009/6/30/1246364935651/Alcohol-fuelled-violence--001.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] yes but the taxation of alcohol allows the government to buy their second houses and claim expenses

Plenty of people do use alcohol responsibly but there are quite a lot who don't too.