$1,000,000,000,000 spent on the War on Drugs since 1971

The team over at visualeconomics have put together a fantastic infographic, along with a explanatory article, detailing the scale of US spending on their 'war on drugs'.

The US has prosecuted the 'war' largely against its own citizens, many of whom have been locked up in federal prisons for drug offences, at a staggering cost of $450 billion to the taxpayer.

For more statistics, check out the awesome infographic over at visualeconomics.

'Research Chemical' market booming despite global downturn

The market for so-called 'Research Chemicals' (RCs) is bucking the global downturn, despite recent scare stories and bans on substances such as Mephedrone.

A raft of new products are available from internet retailers and 'head shops' throughout Europe. Dubious delights such as 6-APB, which has been irresponsibly branded 'Benzo Fury' despite bearing no relation to the benzodiazepine group of drugs, are being pushed heavily as the 'next big thing' in the synthetic recreational drugs scene.

Other compounds offered for sale at the moment include MDAI and 5-IAI (MDMA/MDA derivatives that promote serotonin and dopamine reuptake) and dimethocaine and 'synthecaine' (promoted as legal alternatives to cocaine with similar effects and chemistry) to name but a few of of the most popular 'products' on the market today.

The products are sold in capsule or powder form and prices start at around 15EUR per gram, depending on the supplier, chemical and amount purchased. Anyone thinking of road-testing an RC product does so on a 'caveat emptor' (buyer beware basis): many retail RCs turn out not to contain the advertised compounds when they are analysed and the industry is currently totally unregulated. In other words, the RC market is just like the illegal drug market; perhaps even more so, as anonymous internet vendors are in some cases demonstrating they have even less scruples when it comes to palming off 'bad shit' on their clients than their peers in the traditional (illegal) recreational drug market.

A closer look at the RC market

Although most RC vendors are reluctant to divulge much about their businesses, word from those in the know is that most of the RCs flooding the market right now are manufactured in China and the Far East. These are not clandestine drug labs, but rarther legitimate chemical companies who employ teams of chemists to come up with new and interesting products; often small tweaks on existing compounds. Once they have productized a new chemical, production is ramped up and samples are sent out to potential vendors around the world, just like product samples would be sent out from any other factory to interested parties. The product is shipped in large quantities (kilos or tens/hundreds of kilos) to wholesale clients, who then sell them on at a profit to other vendors in their home countries.

Legal Issues

Due to the suspect nature of importing kilos of white powder, there are relatively few importers of RCs in a given country (again mirroring the illegal drug market). Shipments can get held up at customs for quite some time (as was recently the case with shipments of 6-ABP bound for the UK), but typically they reach their destination.

Of course, vendors must adhere to the letter of the law in order to sell RCs to the public; in the EU, for instance, they must clearly be labelled as 'not for human consumption', although this is just a formality. In the US, the RC market is far more restricted due to the Federal Analog Act, which prohibits whole classes of chemicals of designer drugs. In Europe, there is no direct equivalent of the Analog act, although laws in some countries do prohibit or schedule a chemical and its associated analogs.

RCs hit the mainstream media in the UK most recently when the media caught Mephedrone fever earlier this year. As a result of this firestorm of coverage, not to mention the surge in youngsters administering themselves frightening doses of RCs, the UK parliament banned Mephedrone and as well as other cathinone-derived compounds. Naphyrone, the synthetic stimulant branded as NRG-1, and its analogs were also banned in the UK on 23rd July 2010 (Home Office Press Release).

There has been talk in the UK about changing the law to cover all new RCs as they pop up; the proposed new law would work on the assumption that new chemicals must be analyzed and OK'd by authorities before they are allowed on sale. However, it is unclear how such regulation would be implemented without disrupting the mainstream market in (non-recreational) industrial chemicals, particularly as RCs are not officially sold for human consumption and hence fall under the same regulatory guidelines as other chemicals imported for research or industrial uses.

Safety

Many of the RCs currently on the market are untested and potentially highly dangerous, even in the cases where they are uncontaminated and correctly labelled. Anecdotal evidence on forums suggests that many recreational users are experiencing unpleasant or even downright scary reactions to RCs in some cases. Of course, anecdotal evidence does not constitute rigorous medical testing or chemical analysis and there are also plenty of reports of people having had a great time on RCs; 'your mileage may vary' is probably a very appropriate adage here.

Those seeking to learn more about RCs are suggested to check out two of the more respected sources of drug information on the internet: Erowid and BlueLight (note: NarcoTrends takes no responsibility for the veracity or otherwise of information found anywhere on the internet - including the NarcoTrends site!).

What Next for RCs?

A few things seem clear; whilst the market in RCs remains largely unregulated, some people will suffer from adverse reactions, overdoses, etc. and healthcare professionals will be ill-informed and ill-equipped to deal with the fallout. RC vendors will continue to make massive profits; sometimes even by knowingly mis-labeling their products to cash in on the latest much-hyped RC brand, but most of them acting perfectly legitimately, trading in legal substances in good faith.

Old-time proponents of RCs are currently bemoaning the 'commercialization' of the industry, with all the associated media hype, irresponsible users ingesting dangerous doses, and tightening of regulation. Elsewhere, users of illegal recreational drugs, point to the 'dangerous RC scene' as evidence for sticking with well-known and 'reliable' old standards such as ecstasy, cocaine and amphetamines. Summing up this attitude, David, a recreational drug user, told NarcoTrends:

"I'd much rather take speed than some of these new and untested legal highs such as NRG-1. At least I know what I'm getting and the side effects are well known."

What David and others like him often fail to appreciate is the bleed-over between the commercial RC scene and the illegal drug market; always on the look out for cheap ways to bulk up their illegal product with cheap and legal active cutting agents, many dealers are now adulterating their speed, coke and MDMA with RC chemicals that cost less and can be warehoused with no risk of prosecution.

Proposition 19 debate heats up online

Proposition 19, the proposed legislative changes that would legalize and tax cannabis in the state of California, is generating waves on the web, with some large media companies becoming embroiled in the debate by blocking certain advertisements relating to the issue.

First up, social networking site Facebook recently banned ads from both the Just Say Now campaign group and the Libertarian party; advertisements which in both cases were supporting proposition 19. Facebook denies that it is taking a political stance on the issue and instead claims that the use of marijuana leaf images is against its policies. The groups involved have argued that use of the instantly-recognisable leaf in their adverts is not intended to encourage users to smoke or take drugs. Despite some groups claiming evidence of an anti-prop19 stance at Facebook, at the time of writing there still exist numerous prop 19 pages on Facebook, representing both the for and against camps.

Secondly, social news site Reddit clashed publicly with owners Condé Nast over adverts from the Just Say Now campaign. According to an account published on the site, Reddit staff were incensed when they received an edict from the 'highest levels' of their parent company, indicating that they should not run paid ads from the campaign group. By way of a response, they decided to run the ads for free instead, generating no end of publicity in the process (some good coverage at Wired).

Whilst the Reddit debacle may not have helped Condé Nast keep a low profile on this issue, the incident has shown just how fearful large corporations are of getting involved in the legalization debate. Facebook, for example, is hardly a conservative old-world company and it may seem incongruous that it should care enough to block adverts supporting contentious or sensitive issues. But large corporations such as Facebook also represent large, easy targets for media bile, blamed for everything from suicide to anorexia. Perhaps they just want to sit this one out and avoid getting blamed by the approximately 50% of the Californian electorate that are against prop 19.

Political campaigns have been using the media to broadcast their message since long before the web existed. TV channels in the US are full of poltical advertisements in the run up to elections. Media companies generally make a pretty penny from hot issues.

Narcotrends suspects that media companies would do better to stick to what they do best - serving up content and selling advertising space - rather than embarking on misguided damage-limitation exercises. Any decent media capitalist who had just taken money from a pro-legalization group for an ad campaign should go straight to the anti-pot groups and offering them an advertising slot? Unbiased coverage and profits. Let the voters decide on the issues whilst squeezing profit from both sides of the argument; it's the only way to be fair.

Dutch coffeeshop owner jailed and fined €10m for overstocking cannabis

(Photo: ANP)

The owner of a coffeeshop in the Netherlands has been jailed for 16 weeks and fined a massive €10million after a court found him and other staff guilty of keeping too much cannabis on the premises.

Under Dutch 'tolerance' rules, coffeeshops must keep their stock below 500g (18oz) at any given time, regardless of how much cannabis they might sell in a day. This typically necessitates frequent 're-ups' throughout the day if a shop is doing brisk business.

It seems Meddie Willemsen flouted this arrangement; police busted the coffeeshop with 200kg of dope on two occasions. Willemsen and his fellow staff were convicted of exporting drugs and membership of a criminal organization as well as hosting too much cannabis at the shop. The coffeeshop, 'Checkpoint', was located close to the Belgian border and reputedly served up to 3000 customers per day.

The prosecutor in charge of the case summed up the reasons for the case like this:

"In short, a well-oiled machinery was ready at the back door to sell the largest possible quantity of drugs. Many dozens of kilograms a day. Each member of the team had a separate role to play. The team included a purchasing department, a transport department and a processing department. We regard that as a criminal organisation, because crimes were committed. The volume of drugs being sold there was absurd, annual turnover was nearly 30 million euros."

In the Netherlands, small scale dealing of cannabis in licensed coffeeshops is permitted. However, when businesses get too greedy, or take on an international perspective (deliberately targeting customers from outside Holland's borders), they risk incurring the wrath of the authorities, which is what happened to Checkpoint.

Read more at Radio Netherlands Worldwide

Guatemala drug czar and police chief both arrested over 'stolen cocaine'

Two of Guatemala's leading figures in the fight against the cocaine trade have been arrested for alleged involvement in a bloody drugs heist in which 700kg of cocaine was stolen from a criminal gang.

National police chief Baltazar Gonzalez and anti-drug czar Nelly Bonilla were both arrested, along with another police officer, by government agents working with the International Commission Against Impunity, a UN-sponsored anti-corruption agency in Guatemala. The arrests follow an incident in April last year in which five police officers died in a fire-fight with drug traffickers. The gun battle is thought to have taken place after the officers - acting as part of a larger group - stole 700kg of cocaine from a warehouse used by the traffickers and had returned to collect more cocaine and a stash of automatic weapons. The group were allegedly ambushed by the drug gang upon their return, resulting in the deaths.

Guatemalan anti-narcotics agents allegedly prevented federal prosecutors from accessing the crime scene and the deaths of the five officers were never investigated internally, leading prosecutors to suspect that something was awry. Their investigations led them to uncover a well-organised crime syndicate within the anti-narcotics force which sought to profit from intercepting shipments of drugs and weapons. The corruption seemingly went all the way to the top.

Despite the arrests on Tuesday, no formal charges have yet been brought against the men.

Guatemala is a strategically important part of the trafficking route for cocaine as it transits from Columbia to Mexico on its route to the US and beyond. Mexican cartels are understood to operate widely within neighbouring Guatemala and corruption is rife within the country.

Read more at the Miami Herald and BBC News

Mephedrone floods the UK collective conciousness

Mephedrone, MMCat, Miaow, Bubble... Call it what you will, the UK's must-have narcotic accessory this season, for better or worse, is most definitely Mephedrone.

As predicted, the UK press coverage of this new and currently legal high is now in full-swing, with Mephedrone stories in every corner of the media, from music magazines, through hyperbole-prone tabloids, to the more respectable newspapers.

Adding his 2-cents to the press free-for-all is Professor David Nutt, the renegade former government drugs advisor who was sacked for making some fairly innocuous statements comparing the relative danger of consuming ecstasy versus riding horses (statistically, equine encounters are far more likely to cause injury or death, though tend to make for less embarrasing Facebook photographs).

Writing in the Guardian, Professor Nutt calls for a 4th classification - Class D - for substances which are known to be being abused but have not undergone sufficient research to be properly classified, such as mephedrone. Substances in this cateogry, Nutt Argues, should be made available to adults under controlled conditions, with suppliers regulated and warnings coming with the product to let users know they are consuming an untested and potentially dangerous drug.

The article cites the arrest of 7 students in Lancaster, allegedly picked up in a club with a drug which they claim was Mephedrone. In such cases, suspects are arrested and released on police bail while the suspicious substances they were caught with are tested. It is unclear how classifying Mephedrone as a Class D substance would change this; Police are more or less duty-bound to arrest anyone they encounter carrying a bag of white powder, since it may well be a controlled substance such as the Class-A cocaine. Seizures sent to the lab for analysis will typically be away for weeks, during which time the arrested person remains a suspect. On-the-spot tests do exist for some drugs but they typically only indicate the presence of a specific substance. Just because mepehedrone doesn't show up positive on an on-the-spot cocaine test doesn't mean it isn't ketamine, speed, heroin, or any number of other controlled substances. As such, the police are pretty much obligated to arrest in situations where a white powder is discovered in suspicious circumstances.

A point made in this article in the Metro - and in much of the more thoughtful press coverage of mephedrone - concerns why users feel willing to turn to a relatively untested compound to get high. 'The Recession' and consistently falling cocaine purity, are singled out as the two biggest factors. The article find some suitably middle-class mephedrone users and cites David, a graphic designer:

'David pays £45 for five grams; in comparison, cocaine costs an average of £50 per gram.'

Paul, an osteopath, elaborates:

‘The problem is that people are sick and tired of spending high amounts on rubbish drugs ... You don’t even know what’s in them'

Paul then goes a bit off-track by suggesting:

'At least with meow [mephedrone] you know what you’re getting and it also gives you the impression you’re not funding the wrong people; some sites are run by people who are genuinely selling it for plants.’

This is wrong on both counts; whilst many (and to NarcoTrends' current knowledge, most) online suppliers of Mephedrone seem to be supplying a pure product, there is absolutely no regulation of the purity of mephedrone bought online or anywhere else. This, of course, is much like the illegal drug market.

In addition, Narcotrends has yet to find a single online mephedrone supplier that seems to be genuinely retailing/wholesaling fertilizer to the horticultural sector, though we could cite many examples of so-called 'plant-food' sites which retail a single product - mephedrone - in quantities too small to be of much use to all but the most amateur of gardeners.

Of course, we are happy to be corrected on such assumptions. If there are any mephedrone suppliers out there selling to the agricultural/horticultural sector, we'd love to hear from you.

US to ban alcoholic energy drinks?

The US may be on the verge of banning alcoholic drinks that include added caffeine, guarana, or other stimulants.

The Food and Drug Administration has been petitioned by the co-chairs of the 'Youth Access to Alcohol Committee' of the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG), who argue that alcoholic energy drinks (AEDs) have not been proved to be safe and may cause users to become more reckless than those containing the same amount of just alcohol.

In their letter to the FDA (PDF), the authors say:

"As set forth in published studies, scientific research demonstrates that there is no common understanding or consensus among qualified scientific experts supporting the safety of adding caffeine to alcoholic beverages"

The letter goes on to urge the FDA to remove all AEDs from the US marketplace unless the manufacturers of such drinks can prove that they are safe.

It is unclear at this stage how seriously beverage firms are taking this threat to the lucrative AED market, or indeed how the FDA is likely to respond to the petition. NarcoTrends would suggest that the combination of caffeine and alcohol is not a new phenomenon (liqueur/'Irish' coffee, anyone?) and that any serious side-effects resulting from the combination would likely have made themselves apparent before now. Perhaps this is a case of a committee looking for a purpose?

Read more at New Scientist