Pubdate: Fri 17 June 2005
Source: Listener, The (New Zealand)
Copyright: 2005 Wilson & Horton
Contact:  http://www.listener.co.nz/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/241
Author: Sally Blundell
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?158 (Club Drugs)

POP TILL YOU DROP

We're a risk-taking culture, say drug experts, and new laws
restricting the sale of party pills will not stop their use.

The timing was perfect. The day the Press ran a front-page story on an
18-year-old admitted to hospital after taking 10 party pills, the
government's health committee proposed a new drug classification to
regulate the sale of low-risk drugs.

The decision won a wave of approval. Teenagers at emergency clinics,
dairies advertising "energy pills", suburban outlets selling party
pills have outraged whole communities. Even some in the industry have
complained about a cowboy mentality that sees pills sold to any age
without any advice.

According to Ross Bell, executive director of the NZ Drug Foundation,
a new classification that restricts age and regulates supply is a
sensible step. "Although we can't regulate against personal stupidity,
we can regulate against unsafe marketing practice and ensure that the
consumer is given sufficient information about the risks and effects
of party pills."

But legislation will only go so far. The young woman who went into
seizures after taking 10 pills will still be able to take 10 pills,
even after a new classification.

Professor David Fergusson at the Christchurch School of Medicine and
Health Sciences says it is a complicated debate that has been
completely botched.

"It's completely predictable - young people between 18 and 25 are at
their peak potential for taking risks. There is probably good reason
to regulate sale, supply and delivery, but if laws aren't reflected in
people's belief system, they will never work. Look at cannabis - if
you pass a law saying no smoking of cannabis and most people ignore it
and police don't enforce it, it's not really a law, is it? If young
people don't believe [in these proposed regulations] and parents give
them freedom and they have purchasing power, the law will be
completely irrelevant to how young people take drugs."

Fergusson points to the panic surrounding nitrous oxide (nos). Unlike
other inhalants such as sprays and cleaning fluids, nitrous oxide has
little effect on critical body function (the main risks result from
woeful misuse, such as filling a rubbish bag with the stuff and
putting it over your head). It has been used as a recreational drug
since the 1700s, and its harmful effects, says Fergusson, are "close
to zero". This year, it was recognised as falling under the Medicines
Act. It is now illegal to sell it or even possess it without
reasonable excuse.

"The fervour did more harm than the actual drug. Everyone learnt about
it."

And enforcement is an issue. A walk through Christchurch on a Friday
night shows that the trade in nos is still alive and laughing.

Are party pills a health risk?

The active ingredient is benzylpiperazine (BZP), a synthetic central
nervous stimulant originally developed to treat cattle parasites.
Users describe feelings of euphoria, energy and heightened senses. BZP
became popular in the dance-rave scene of Europe as a positive
alternative to alcohol or illegal drugs.

"That scene was rarely associated with alcohol. One or two beers
maybe, but because alcohol makes you dehydrated and because it
interferes with your dancing, that concept of getting plastered just
wasn't there," says emergency medicine consultant Dr Paul Quigley.

On its own and in restricted quantity, there are few negative effects.
There is no evidence of physical dependence and there have been no
fatalities (the death of a European woman in 2001 was found to be
related to Ecstasy, and not BZP as initially claimed). But taken in
large quantities, or taken with alcohol or other drugs, legal or
illegal, it can cause symptoms of extreme agitation.

Christchurch naturopath Michael Woods stresses that drugs like BZP
react differently in different people.

"They are not for everybody - this is the dilemma with drugs in
general. My suspicion is that there's a group of people who are
vulnerable to that stimulation, who will react badly. And if you
haven't eaten well, if you're dehydrated or tanked up on caffeine or
sugar all day, and you go out at night and take party pills, then
there could be problems. It's a gamble."

At Auckland City Hospital, the number of those arriving with BZP
overdose symptoms rose from three in 2002 to 23 in 2004. Of these,
five had taken other illegal drugs, 10 had consumed alcohol, three
felt better before they saw a doctor. In the end, two needed relaxants
and one vomited and was admitted with reflux oesophagitis. In the same
year, 809 were admitted with problems of excess alcohol.

Dunedin and Waikato hospitals see an average of up to one a week with
overdose symptoms, with most having also had alcohol. Christchurch
averages one a day, with most occurring in the weekends. Again,
although seizures and anxiety are consistent with BZP toxicity, many
of those appearing at A&E clinics are either not sure what pills they
have taken or have taken party pills alongside alcohol.

At Wellington Hospital, BZP barely figures - drug presentation is 99
percent dominated by alcohol.

Shouldn't we be campaigning against the local bottle store rather than
the suburban party-pill outlet?

"Our binge-drinking culture interferes with our recreational drug
problem," says Quigley. "The combination is not good. You will always
get users who are stupid users, who mix drugs or who have a dangerous
attitude, who'll take 12 tablets when you're supposed to take two. And
when they say my friend gave me two red tablets, you have no idea
where it was cooked up."

We are, says Fergusson, a risk-taking culture. "We'll get stuck into
stuff with greater vigour than other cultures, and we'll pay the bill
for it. Look at the wowser tradition - six o'clock closing made
drinking very difficult. There was a lot of law-breaking; sly grogging
was almost a virtue. We have an essentially anti-prohibitionist
tradition and people will try to subvert drug rules. This is a waste
of time. If you take a moral position, you might as well say it should
not be available at all."

Last year, the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs concluded that there was
insufficient information on which to recommend banning BZP. They did,
however, suggest partial control through a classification controlling its
manufacture and sale. Dr Ashley Bloomfield, Chief Advisor Public Health: "In
the absence of research, it was felt there was enough community concern for
there to be some regulation. It's a substance that alters the mind, and
other substances like that, such as alcohol, we do regulate."

Bell says there should be restrictions on the sale of BZP, but there
must be a rational basis for such rulings.

"If you make drug policy in response to short-term community concern
or political opportunism, you run the risk of having bad drug policy.
We're not pro-drug - we believe in the golden rule that young people
shouldn't do drugs, because they're at a vulnerable age when drugs
will have an impact - but we want to make sure we use evidence and
science when developing drug policy."

Good legislation, he says, helps people make good decisions. And to
make good decisions, we need information.

"Government agencies should be addressing this," says Woods. "You
can't just legislate all these things all the time. Education has got
to play a key role."

Legislation is not the only answer. Recreational drug use isn't going
to go away. As Bell says, if we see less BZP on the streets, it will
be because chemists have come up with something else. And whatever the
latest concoction, it will come down to education as to how many end
up at A&E.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin