Professor David Nutt, a British mental health researcher, surveyed addiction experts for their views on the risks of various drugs. Dividing the issue into personal risk (i.e. harm to self) and social risk (harm to others), they assembled the results into a paper published in The Lancet in 2010. The graphs below summarize the results.
Examining such a subject shouldn’t be a big deal right? Well, Dr Nutt’s Wikipedia entry notes that:
“…Nutt published a controversial study on the harms of drug use in The Lancet. Eventually, this led to his dismissal from his position in the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD)… Subsequently, Nutt and a number of his colleagues who had subsequently resigned from the ACMD founded the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs. “
The Guardian newspaper published an article on the work titled Alcohol ‘more harmful than heroin or crack’.
Professor Nutt challenged conventional thinking in pointing out that:
“We saw no clear distinction between socially acceptable and illicit substances. The fact that the two most widely used legal drugs lie in the upper half of the ranking of harm is surely important information that should be taken into account in public debate on illegal drug use. Discussions based on a formal assessment of harm rather than on prejudice and assumptions might help society to engage in a more rational debate about the relative risks and harms of drugs”
Others have replicated Nutt’s survey and come up with their own graphs that differ slightly. A Scottish group did a similar survey and their graph looks like this:
Dr. Nutt has been an outspoken advocate for medicalizing drugs of abuse. In a blog entry a few years ago he writes:
“I strongly believe that we should focus on public health approaches to the drug problem, and decriminalise the possession of drugs for personal use, for the following simple reason;- If users are addicted then they are ill, and criminal sanctions are an inappropriate way to deal with an illness.”
How should this information affect and inform how ACT clinicians approach their clients? Will ACT teams in the future be providing certain clients with methadone? With needles for injection drug users? Should they? If they did would they risk consequences such as losing funding?
What do you think?
Shalom Coodin MD