An article in Yesterday’s Townsville Bulletin gives the reader some basic information on a new drug.

My housemate objected strongly to this sort of information being made readily available in a newspaper. He thinks that it could lead to an escalation in experimentation and usage.

I think that this sort of information is perfectly reasonable for a newspaper article and that we should all be informed about this sort of thing in the media.

So I was wondering which side of this debate the good people of OLO might back.

Here are some quotes from the article:

< …little is known about a new recreational drug hitting Australian streets, other than it prompts acts of horrendous self-mutilation by some users. >

< The drug in question is 4-methylmethcathinone… more commonly known as 4-MMC, MMCAT, bubbles, megatron, bath salt or miaow miaow. >

< continuing to prove hugely popular on the UK clubbing scene, the drug is believed to be partly responsible for the deaths of a woman in Sweden….and a …. Girl in England… >

< The psychoactive drug creates a state of euphoria….with an ecstasy-like hit at the end. >

< Since September 2008, the Australian Federal Police, along with Australian Customs and the Border Protection Service, have detected 25 attempts to import …the drug. >

Not much you can do to stop it. The majority percentage of the population ARE actually smart enough to figure out that filleting yourself is bad and won't use it.

There's a minority of munters that will quite happily do the opposite. Luck to them.

Well isn’t this thread the lead balloon of the century!!

By way of the lack of response, the answer to my question appears to be pretty conclusive: people don’t have a problem with basic information about drugs appearing in our newspapers and other media.

I’m sure they’d have an issue if details such as how to make or where to obtain illicit drugs was printed. But apart from that, no worries.

Presumably the good people of OLO don’t feel as though this sort of publicity about new drugs will lead to any increase in usage by the ‘munters’ above what would happen anyway.

Thanks for your comments StG.

This type of drug is on the streets here in my capital city. Young kids 15+ have commenced using it. Under a different name yet similar ingredients. The first symptom is eating the inside fleshy part of their cheeks tongue etc. Tip off received on this drug a fortnight ago.

Escalation in my city over the past 2-3 years in girls taking drugs. Previously, the male teenagers and young male adults intake [of drug useage] was high, with the girls preferring a high intake of alcohol.

Over the past 12 months here, the current situation is now equal: 50/50 which is extremely sad.

I am hoping that major Sydney and Melbourne drug busts impact upon the situation in my city. However, concoctions are made up everywhere, costing lives and impacting upon many families' lives including siblings of drug users.

Ludwig,
I think the drug-savvy probably know more about when new drugs hit the streets than the media has time to print it.

I don't think publication of new drugs will increase the take-up rate, but hopefully publishing the adverse effects might prevent an experimenter from trying it

Ludwig - I don't think your thread was a bomb. I looked at it earlier and needed time to weigh up the issue. I could see it was important; just needed time to think.

I came to a realization much like Pelican's.

I was also thinking of the matter of legalizing drugs and it seems to me to be an example of where, although legalizing (even government distribution) of drugs appeals to me, the underground industry would always be producing some thrill thing that a responsible government just couldn't distribute amongst the population. There would always be people stupid enough or self destructive enough to want to try the new and more dangerous substance.

Not sure that in the end we can do much more than what we are re: try to construct opportunities for alternative choices; hope they are willing to accept help before they decline into hopeless addiction or meet a fatal end. Otherwise, I'm afraid we are just going to have to watch the Darwin effect taking place amongst us.

Ludwig,
Sorry to be a bore.
The problem with the media (and consequently public opinion) is that it tends to be sensationalised, by definition is about focusing the *extreme* end (sexy end). It works on sales but is catastrophic to cerebral issues.

On one hand it gets the sales interest rapidly but also engenders an equally aggressive and often equally unreasoned push back (denial of the real substance).
e.g. AGW where the focus is now on the conflict rather than the issue.

I would suggest that the reality is probably far more tragic if less dramatic.

2 dead is hardly a major problem but what probably goes unreported to GPs, hospitals and even less by the media, would be the real numbers of victims.i.e. we read or hear about the spectacular motor vehicle accidents but all the injuries(suffering) unless they are horrific.

I think your flat mate is thinking on this topic is a bit unrealistic and dare I say, superficial.

I think if he contacted the emergency intervention services they would have a better idea of the real depth suffering of the issue.
Also one needs to take into account natural propensities to sensitives to the drug.

The reporting (all media) is naturally geared more to selling copy than real information.
My literal answer would be yes it is the job of the down to the media however, economics often preclude them doing it properly.

And yes it is an important issue.