Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
It is somewhat disconcerting to see the advice given by the recent
International Narcotics Control Board report [1] advocating a generic ban
to control substances used to create designer drugs. These recommendations
seem to be lacking a robust scientific evidence base and instead mirror
the panicked response seen also in April last year to ban the synthetic
stimulant mephedrone despite a paucity of evidence regarding its ill
effects.
The advice is given alongside the affirmation of increasing cocaine
trafficking and use throughout Europe [1]. This should perhaps serve as a
pertinent example of why simply banning a substance does not always
guarantee control its use.
Rigorous scientific research and not impulsive prohibition is
required to inform drug policy decisions. Otherwise we are liable to group
substances with vastly different risk profiles together, leading us to
lose focus on the drugs, such as cocaine, proven to cause significant
morbidity and deserving of our greater attention.
Blanket banning: are we covering over evidence-based drug policy making?
It is somewhat disconcerting to see the advice given by the recent
International Narcotics Control Board report [1] advocating a generic ban
to control substances used to create designer drugs. These recommendations
seem to be lacking a robust scientific evidence base and instead mirror
the panicked response seen also in April last year to ban the synthetic
stimulant mephedrone despite a paucity of evidence regarding its ill
effects.
The advice is given alongside the affirmation of increasing cocaine
trafficking and use throughout Europe [1]. This should perhaps serve as a
pertinent example of why simply banning a substance does not always
guarantee control its use.
Rigorous scientific research and not impulsive prohibition is
required to inform drug policy decisions. Otherwise we are liable to group
substances with vastly different risk profiles together, leading us to
lose focus on the drugs, such as cocaine, proven to cause significant
morbidity and deserving of our greater attention.
1. INCB. International Narcotics Control Board Annual Report 2010.
www.incb.org/incb/en/report_launch_2011.html.
Competing interests: No competing interests