Drug Rehab and Alcohol Rehab

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21244194

As the debate about minimum pricing of alcohol rages on can we look abroad for an indication of its potential impact?  The experience of Saskatchewan, a Canadian prairie province, suggests that minimum pricing can lower alcohol consumption and in turn reduce the number of alcohol related deaths.  However there still remains an opinion that minimum alcohol pricing will not effectively tackle problem drinking.

What do you think?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8500285.stm

Read the above article for a review of the controversial American organisation, Project Prevention, run by Barbara Harris, whose aim it is to provide drug users with long term contraception or sterilisation to prevent them having children she believes they are unwilling or unable to care for. Who do you agree with?…. Barbara or her critics who claim that her non for profit organisation is a form of social engineering?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12204010

The above link refers to a news story called ‘Should alcoholics be given drinking zones?’. The link describes a trial that may be conducted in Essex that will see the creation of designated drinking areas in which heavy drinkers are allowed to drink without being moved on the police. Public opinion seems to be mixed about the benefits of this trial; with many reporting that this will create a safe environment for street drinkers and many feeling that designating areas will not help the individuals or the over all problem of alcoholism. This drinking zones trial follows the controversy regarding the decision to create wet day centres around the country. The aim of these wet centres is to ‘provide support, help and treatment for severely disadvantage and chaotic people, including street drinkers…..and to tackle the anti-social behaviour problem for city centres in a constructive, non-criminalising way”. What do you think, are wet day centres and designated drinking areas helping the individuals or just moving the problem?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11719594

The above link refers to the MSPs Alcohol Bill aiming to tackle Scotland’s historical alcohol problems.  Key measures including a minimum drink price and raising the purchase age for off licence sales have not been included in the bill.   It aims to end the sale of alcohol at heavily discounted prices, as well as offers such as buy on get one free.   It is hoped that the bill with ‘pave the way for the introduction, in future, of a “social responsibility fee” on retailers who sell alcohol.

Do you think that these measures will significantly impact the social and health damage caused by alcohol consumption in Scotland or will they just stratch the surface?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11138535

Research is demonstrating that problem drinking is more prevelent in some parts of the country compared with others (see above link to BBC news article).   Recent research published by the North West Public Health Observatory has found some stark regional divisions, with two thirds of alcohol related harm occuring in the north. 

Health minister Lord Howe said the government was already taking action to stop the sale of alcohol below cost and to review alcohol taxation and price.  However he acknowledged that increasing the cost of alcohol alone will not tackle the huge amount of alcohol related health problems and crime our nation is experiencing:

“Supply and price are not the only factors fuelling misuse though, attitudes are crucial. We need to understand better the psychology behind why different groups of people drink too much. Legislation or initiatives will not work unless we have a better understanding of what drives people’s decisions.”

What are your thoughts?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10664537

The above link refers to a story published on the BBC website that describes the UK as ‘floundering’ in its attempts to control the online mephedrone market.

Mephedrone and other similar drugs are a thriving trade – as is the case with mephedrone and Naphyrone, once one substance is banned there is another waiting to takes its place. So what is the answer? The quicker one drug is banned and replaced the less we know about the new transient chemical – surely this is increasing the health risk? Most of the time experts advise that users don’t even know what chemical they are taking, let alone the sort and long term consequences of the drug? In fact it is unlikely that the internet dealers that are selling the drugs know exactly what it is that they are selling.

So what do we do about this problem? If all new chemicals are banned (think about the logistics of actually doing this!) will it make any difference or will it just increase the health risk people know less and less about what they are taking?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8625840.stm

The link above refers to a BBC news story about ‘Tanorexia’ - people who are addicted to sun beds and sun lamps.  The story comes from a study conducted by researchers in the US that have found that ‘around a third of people who use sunbeds may become addicted to the tanning effects’.

Valid piece of research or lacking in scientific merit?… you decide…

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7018190670?Researchers%20In%20Spain%20Validate%20Scale%20To%20Judge%20Work%20Addiction

The above link takes you to a news article about the development of the DUWAS (Dutch Work Addiction Scale) created by researchers in Spain.  It is estimated that work addiction currently effects up to 12% of the population of Spain.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/7499937/Liverpool-John-Moores-University-students-in-mephedrone-experiment.html

As the debate about mephedrone rages on, 50 students attending Liverpool John Moores University have taken part in an experiment - the idea is to hold structured interviews with the subjects to record how they feel after taking the drug.

Dr Cathy Montgomery, the psychology lecturer behind the research said: “During these tests, the university makes it clear they do not condone drug use.

“Until now, most evidence comes from people anecdotally. We will be holding structured interviews with users, asking them how they feel at different time points.

Whilst Liberal Democrat MP John Pugh, who represents Southport, Merseyside has branded the study “highly irresponsible”, the question remains, should we be taking more steps to understand more about mephedrone as oppose to simply banning it?  Would banning it alone prevent any more people using it?  Should we concentrate our resources on researching effects of legal highs so at least people are informed?

What do you think of the university experiment??