Drug Media Survey needs your thoughts
From Caitlin Hughes at the University of NSW:
The Drug Policy Modelling Program at the University of New South Wales has been funded by the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing to conduct a study into Australian media reporting on illicit drugs. As part of the study we have developed a short online survey to examine youth attitudes to media reporting.
The survey is completely anonymous and we are targeting anyone aged 16-24 who lives in Australia. Our goal is to hear from a broad spectrum of youth: people from cities and rural Australia, from NT, WA, NSW etc and drug users and non-users. We’d appreciate your help to promote the survey in anyway you can: through blogs, email alerts, links on websites or word of mouth. This is the first major study of its kind in Australia and indeed it is also unique internationally and so we are seeking as broad and representative sample as possible.
The survey is available at www.drugmediasurvey.com.
ANCD National Drug Strategy: call for input
Via the ANCD:
As you would be aware there is currently a consultation process in place regarding the development of the next National Drug Strategy, with details on the consultation located at:
http://www.nationaldrugstrategy.gov.au/internet/drugstrategy/
To assist in any submission you may be developing I would also like to draw your attention to this new page on the ANCD website that provides a single point for easy access to all current and past national strategies and evaluation.
http://www.ancd.org.au/government-policy/government-policy.html
2010 National Drug and Alcohol Awards
I received the following info today. Although awards ceremmonies can be a little trite, the ability for all ATOD professionals to vote and the need for greater recognition of the work we all do, makes this a very worthwhile initiative.
Celebrate Your Success at the National Drug and Alcohol Awards 2010 in Brisbane:
Pencil Friday, 25 June 2010 in Your diaryThe Ted Noffs Foundation is pleased to advise that arrangements are well advanced for the staging of the National Drug and Alcohol Awards (NDAA) 2010 in Brisbane on Friday, 25 June 2010. Ted Noffs Foundation will be working with Drug Arm Australasia in hosting the awards.
Hosting the 2010 Awards on behalf of the Coordinating Committee comprising the Alcohol and other Drugs Council of Australia (ADCA), the Australian National Council on Drugs (ANCD), and the Australian Drug Foundation (ADF), Ted Noffs has secured The Sebel & Citigate Hotel in King George Square in Brisbane as the venue.
Now in its seventh year, the Awards not only honour the dedication and innovation within the Alcohol and Other Drug (AOD) sector, but also recognise excellence in a range of areas. In addition to the prestigious Prime Minister’s Award for Excellence, and the NDAA Honour Roll that recognises eminent Australians who have dedicated their lives to reducing harms caused by AOD misuse, a new Award Category “Excellence in Creating Healthy Sporting Communities” has been included for 2010, and is proudly sponsored by the Australian Drug Foundation.
This Award seeks to recognise best practice across the community sporting and recreation sector for the responsible management and prevention of harm relating to alcohol and other drugs. The Award is open to all community sports clubs, codes or associations.
Professionals and researchers will also be able to apply for recognition in the following AOD categories:
Excellence in treatment and support
Excellence in prevention and community education
Excellence in research
Excellence in services for young people
Excellence in law enforcement,
Excellence in alcohol and drug media reporting
Excellence in school drug educationFollow-up information regarding the updating of the NDAA website at www.drugawards.org.au will be advised in mid-January 2010. This will focus on the various Award Categories, a web-based nomination form, opening/ closing dates for entries, table reservations/ tickets for the Awards Dinner, accommodation options in Brisbane, and strategic sponsorship partnerships.
For more information contact either Jagdish Dua at Ted Noffs, Phone 02 8383 6621, Email duaj@noffs.org.au; or Brian Flanagan, Phone 02 6215 9802, Email brian.flanagan@adca.org.au.
Impact of methamphetamine price on use: new study
Saw this message from the NSW Department of Justice and Attorney General:
The Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research in collaboration with the Drug Policy Modelling Program, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre has today released the following report:
How do methamphetamine users respond to changes in methamphetamine price?
One of the core objectives of supply-side drug law enforcement is to reduce drug use by raising the cost of buying drugs.
The effectiveness of this strategy depends on how illicit drug users respond to the rise in costs. The aim of the current study was to estimate how methamphetamine users would respond to changes in the price of methamphetamine and heroin
using a scenario-based research design.
Needle exchange, prevention and return on investment
It’s been a substantive week for the ATOD sector from a government policy viewpoint, with the release of the Return on investment 2: evaluating the cost-effectiveness of needle and syringe programs in Australia 2009 report by the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aging and the steady progress towards realisation of a nationwide Preventative Health Agency.
For those working at the NSEP coalface the Commonwealth report doesn’t contain any great surprises: the program has saved hundreds of millions of dollars overs its lifetime (Alex Wodak has a спалниnice piece over at Crikey on the report). The challenge now falls to both the Commonwealth and State governments to follow-through and further entrench the validity of NSEP. Hell, they could even expand its reach. There’s a chance for some governmental innovation.
The Health Minister Nicola Roxon is enthused by the passage of the legislation supporting the formation of a preventative health agency. Not surprisingly, the pressure is already being applied to Senators in regards to its passage through that chamber. The press release in full:
Australia’s first ever Preventive Health Agency will soon be established following the passage of important legislation in the House of Representatives today. The Agency is a key part of the Rudd Government’s decision to invest more in preventative health measures than any other government in Australia’s history.
The legislation is now with the Senate for consideration. It is essential that this Bill be passed without delay so that the agency can commence work on 1 January 2010.
The creation of this agency responds to calls from health professionals for Australia to establish – as many other countries have done – a dedicated agency to focus exclusively on driving the prevention agenda and combat the complex challenges of preventable chronic disease.
The agency will guide health ministers in their task of curbing the growth of lifestyle risks driving chronic disease. It is a role requiring national leadership, capacity to work across sectors and portfolios, and an oversight role for surveillance and monitoring.
The agency will bring together the best expertise in the country and play a key role in gathering, analysing and disseminating the best available evidence and evidence-based programs.
Its prevention activities will engage all Australian governments as well as employers, businesses and other sectors, to benefit every community in the nation.
The new preventive health agency will concentrate on reducing the burden that preventable health problems are already placing on the workforce, and ensure Australia’s productive capacity is maintained.
The agency will receive $133 million over four years, from the Government’s record $872 million COAG Prevention Partnership funding.
Strong support for the agency has been expressed by key players in the preventive health field such as the Public Health Association of Australia, and this is important in ensuring the agency’s success in forging cohesiveness in national preventive health efforts.
The preventative health agency legislation holds some promise and it’ll be interesting to see how much ideology enters the debate. You can expect the AMA to go in hard on the issue of medical funding not beign sacrificed on the altar of prevention. There may also be some argy bargy over the taskforce being another incremental step toward Commonwealth takeover of health. Beyond that, it’s really hard to see any Senator taking a strong stand unless it’s to claim the model is wrong or that there’s not enough funding for it to work effectively.
Over to you: are you encouraged by the NSEP report and the taskforce legislation? Do you see it as a positive step toward better health services delivery?
NDARC seeks a new Director
It’s fair to say NDARC is one of the dominant ATOD research bodies in Australia, so the recruitment of a new Director is noteworthy at any time. Here’s the brief details:
Director, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre
Faculty of Medicine
REF. 6753UNSW is one of Australia’s leading research and teaching universities, with a particular commitment to fundamental and applied research, social engagement and an international perspective. The National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, located in the Faculty of Medicine is committed to providing a stimulating research environment that promotes excellence and innovation in drug and alcohol research. NDARC is a Commonwealth funded National Research Centre with an outstanding record of success in obtaining peer-reviewed research funding and an international reputation as a leading research centre in drug and alcohol related issues.
The Faculty is now seeking to appoint a new Director (at the academic level of Professor or Associate Professor) who will build on the impressive growth of the Centre over the past 5 years and raise its profile even higher on the National and International stage.
As an internationally recognized academic with an established research profile in drug and alcohol studies, you will bring the following to the role:
A breadth of vision that encompasses the diverse range of drug and alcohol research within the Centre;
A profile in the field that will attract outstanding talent to the Centre and inspire new approaches to drug and alcohol research;
Leadership and change management expertise to further develop what is already a dynamic and productive culture in the Centre, and to continue its growth trajectory;
Willingness and ability to actively promote the best interests of the Centre, Faculty and University; and
The communication and management skills necessary to take the Centre forward and to represent it and give it a prominent voice in domestic and international forums.The appointment will be for a full-time five year, potentially renewable term. The Director appointment attracts a salary supplement, and additional benefits may be negotiable.
EEO groups are encouraged to apply. The University reserves the right to fill the position by invitation. Applicants should systematically address the selection criteria contained in the Position Statement.
Membership of an approved University superannuation scheme is a condition of employment for this position. The successful applicant may be required to undertake a criminal record check.
Having read all the documentation you may then direct any enquiries regarding this position to Mr Wayne Bruce, Ccentric Health Executive Search on (612) 9232 8148; wayneb@ccentrichealth.com
Applications close : 30 October 2009
Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders
I couldn’t think of a more worthy piece to pass on, from Australia’s FASD advocacy body:
Today 9/9/09 is the 10th Anniversary of International FASD Awareness Day – The 9/9 was first choosen because 9 is the number of months of pregnancy when alcohol consumption can cause permanent brian damage. .
Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders is an umbrella term used to describe a range of adverse effects caused by prenatal exposure to alcohol, including Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS), Partial FAS (PFAS), Alcohol-Related Neurodevelopmental Disorders (ARND) or Alcohol Related Birth Defects (ARBD)
FASD is not a label – it is a medical condition and a serious lifelong disability. Prevention, diagnosis and intervention are critical public health issues that require a high degree of planned action at a policy and service delivery level in order to reduce harm.
While International Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders Awareness Day is recognised throughout the world NOFASARD would like to reflect on the current situation in Australia:
- Children, adolescents and adults with FASD have multiple and complex needs that are currently not being met and this is resulting in poor life outcomes including social exclusion
- FASD rarely appears in Australian research or policy documents where it should be receiving attention.
- FASD does not appear on the government list of registered disabilities?
- There are no Australian Clinical Guidelines for diagnosing FASD and there are no Government funded specially trained interdisciplinary diagnostic teams.
- There is no Medicare number for rebate for the diagnosis of FASD
- Despite having very similar needs, individuals with FASD do not receive the same level of care and funding as those with Autism Spectrum Disorders.
- Individuals with FASD will be over-represented amongst those with drug and alcohol dependency issues yet most treatment programmes offered by service providers are not appropriate for this population.
- There is no national standard of care for individuals of any age with FASD – they are seldom treated effectively or fairly and they are seldom connected to service dollars.
- FASD is NOT just an Indigenous issue – FASD will be find wherever alcohol is part of the culture and exists across all social groups – the majority of individuals with FASD who are on NOFASARD’S data base are non-Indigenous.Families with affected children have waited long enough – they are desperate and their children are suffering. Families are tired of their pleas falling on deaf ears and they are tired – they need action and they need it now.
- At a minimum there needs to be at least one specially trained interdisciplinary diagnostic team in each state of Australia
- Families want to see collaboration and a greater understanding of FASD in the education, disability, drug and alcohol, health, mental health and justice systems and they want these systems to work with them, instead of against them or separate from them.
- Families who have FASD want to be consulted – they have the benefit of the wisdom that comes from practice and they are the experts when it comes to knowing what are the current gaps and inadequacies in the systems and so if we are to have any chance of addressing the best interests of those who are directly impacted, there needs to be a government sponsored forum that enables wide consultation at the grass roots level.
- Families need policy makers to understand that their children with FASD don’t grow out of their disability as they get older – they grow up to be adults with FASD who will need targeted integrated support services throughout their whole life if they are to achieve any level of sustained function.
- Families need an immediate commitment from government to provide the same level of funding as has already been provided to support children with Autism Spectrum Disorder to enable children, adolescents and adults with FASD to have access to specifically targeted service delivery.
- FASD must be included under the Commonwealth list of registered disabilities so that families don’t have to continually fight for services from the education, health, disability, social service and justice sectors.
John Della Bosca: another angle
I noticed this letter from Tony Trimingham yesterday, which sums up perfectly the other side of politics: the part that actually makes a difference:
Whatever you think of Della Boscas personal indescretions I want to record my thanks and appreciation for all the good work he did as Special Minister of State and then Health Minister especially in regard to the problems of drugs and alcohol. Here was a man who took a deep personal interest in these issues and who was always open to listen to the concerns of those affected. No other Minister in this portfolio showed the same interest and concern as he did over his years involved. ‘He also made real and effectective changes. This is a loss that all my colleagues in the sector are now feeling. I also feel that at the moment he must be feeling friendless and isolated and just want him to know that many in the field are feeling sadness at his going in this way.
I tend to agree with the line former premier Bob Carr and many others took this week: a minister’s personal issues aren’t necessarily a hanging offence from a ministerial or policy perspective. That said, the NSW Labor government is so past its use-by date that nothing surprises anymore. Unless they parachute Barrie Unsworth into the premiership – then I’d be truly gobsmacked.
Why medical marijuana could be a good thing
I saw the piece reproduced below on the ADCA Update list, and it’s quite a comprehensive look at the opportunities medical marijuana provdes and deconstructs some of the misconceptions around the use of medical cannabis in the USA. It was originally published at the excellent MAPINC:
THE CASE FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA
In a piece published [1] here last week, Rachel Ehrenfeld reports with dismay that the National Institute on Drug Abuse is presently soliciting proposals from contractors to grow marijuana for research and other purposes. Unfortunately, Ehrenfeld’s misunderstanding of this request for proposals is so monumental that one doesn’t know whether to laugh or cry.
Ehrenfeld suggests that this is some sinister part of “ObamaCare.” “For the first time,” she writes, “the government is soliciting organizations that can grow marijuana on a ‘large scale,’ with the capability to ‘prepare marijuana cigarettes and related products … distribute marijuana, marijuana cigarettes and cannabinoids, and other related products’ not only for research, but also for ‘other government programs.’”
Ehrenfeld spends several paragraphs explaining how this is all the evil brainchild of George Soros, the pet villain of prohibitionists. After all, “Since when is the U.S. government in the business of distributing marijuana cigarettes?”
Since 1978, actually. The federal government has been distributing medical marijuana to a small group of patients for more than [2] three decades via a program known as an IND (for “investigational new drug”). This program has been covered in the media from [3] time to time, and still exists, although it was closed to new enrolment by President George H.W. Bush in 1992. It’s not exactly a state secret.
In addition, under present (thoroughly dysfunctional) rules, scientists doing clinical research on marijuana must obtain the marijuana for testing [4] from NIDA. Since the 1970s, the government has contracted with the University of Mississippi to produce marijuana for this purpose, and all expectations are that the university will get the contract again. In other words, there is nothing new here.
Having completely misconstrued NIDA’s request for proposals as something new and sinister, Ehrenfeld proceeds with a selective, wildly distorted description of research on medical marijuana, claiming, “The evidence about the harm caused by marijuana to the individual user and society is overwhelming.”
In fact, there is a wealth of research that documents marijuana’s medical [5] efficacy and safety, and a vast array of medical and public health organizations that have recognized marijuana’s [6] medical potential.
For the record, let’s consider a bit of what’s been said about medical marijuana by organizations that are presumably not part of the Evil Soros Conspiracy. Bear in mind that this is just a tiny sampling of the material that’s available from respected medical organizations.
. From the 124,000-member [7] American College of Physicians:
“Given marijuana’s proven efficacy at treating certain symptoms and its relatively low toxicity, reclassification [out of Schedule I of the federal Controlled Substances Act] would reduce barriers to research and increase availability of cannabinoid drugs to patients who have failed to respond to other treatments. …
“Evidence not only supports the use of medical marijuana in certain conditions but also suggests numerous indications for cannabinoids.”
. From the [8] American Nurses Association:
“There is a growing body of evidence that marijuana has a significant margin of safety when used under a practitioner’s supervision when all of the patient’s medications can be considered in the therapeutic regimen. …
“There is significant research that demonstrates a connection between therapeutic use of marijuana/cannabis and symptom relief. The American Nurses Association actively supports patients’ rights to legally and safely access marijuana/cannabis for symptom management and to promote quality of life for patients needing such an alternative to conventional therapy.”
. From the Lymphoma Foundation of America, HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America and others (in a [9] brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court):
“For certain persons the medical use of marijuana can literally mean the difference between life and death. At a minimum, marijuana provides some seriously ill patients the gift of relative health and the ability to function as productive members of society.”
And finally, from a study of smoked marijuana as a treatment for HIV-related nerve pain, published in the February 13, 2007, issue of the journal [10] Neurology:
“The first cannabis cigarette reduced chronic pain by a median of 72% vs. 15% with placebo … No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusion: Smoked cannabis was well tolerated and effectively relieved chronic neuropathic pain from HIV-associated sensory neuropathy.”
Marijuana has been used as a medicine for some 5,000 years–maybe longer, actually, but written records only go back that far. In the world of scientific reality–not to be confused with the BizarroWorld inhabited by certain prohibition ideologues–it is both effective at treating a number of troubling symptoms and safer than the pharmaceuticals taken by millions of patients every day. Indeed, as a “recreational” substance it’s vastly safer than booze. But it’s much easier to imagine conspiracies run by billionaires with foreign-sounding names than it is to read and understand the actual research.
This article first appeared at forbes.com. Bruce Mirken, a longtime health writer, serves as director of communications for the [11] Marijuana Policy Project.
REFERENCES
1. http://drugsense.org/url/hrqFXWxS
2. http://drugsense.org/url/EmG1kbx7
3. http://drugsense.org/url/HE4Hi7XI
4. http://www.maps.org/sys/nq.pl?id=1921
5. http://www.mpp.org/assets/pdfs/library/MedConditionsHandout.pdf
6. http://www.mpp.org/library/medical-marijuana-overview.html
7. http://drugsense.org/url/RTJp0V7l
8. http://drugsense.org/url/sPuJf8tI
9. http://drugsense.org/url/bplTeMy6
10. http://www.neurology.org/cgi/content/abstract/68/7/515
11. http://www.mpp.org/
What are your thoughts? It seems a fairly straight down the line treatise to me. It’s a shame this level of defense still needs to be put up against misinformation.
Alcopops tax finally passes
It’s unlikely you missed it, but this week saw thr Senate pass the legislation related to raising taxes on pre-mixed alcoholic beverages, commonly called ‘alcopops’ (I bet alcohol industry marketing people still lose sleep over what a double-edged sword that term has become). It’s hard to disagree with ADCA’s viewpoint :
Alcopop Tax – The first step to reforming harmful drinking
The Alcohol and other Drugs Council of Australia (ADCA) congratulates the Senate for passing the alcopop taxation legislation, but is calling for taxation reform to go even further.
“This issue has been delayed too long. There is no doubt that targeting these pre-mixed high-alcohol sweetened drinks is an important part of addressing issues of national binge drinking, ” ADCA’s Chief Executive Officer, Mr David Templeman, said today.
“We appreciate the Rudd Government continuing to fight for this tax, given the evidence from the Australian Taxation Office showed since the new tax rate for Ready-To-Drink spirits (alcopops) has been in effect, total spirits consumed decreased by 8 per cent.” he added.
ADCA believes that the tax will discourage underage drinking and delay the onset of drinking by some young people. This is imperative given the 2007 National Drug Strategy Household Survey showed more than 20% of 14-19 year olds consume alcohol on a weekly basis and the risk of accidents, injuries, violence and self-harm are high among drinkers aged under 18.
“One of the recently revised alcohol guidelines specifically targets children and young people under 18 years of age – advising that NOT drinking alcohol is the safest option. We know that these alcopops are particularly attractive to young people, and so raising the tax level is part of addressing that problem,” he added.
Such a move also fits with the announcement in October 2008 by the National Preventative Health Taskforce Paper Australia: The Healthiest Country by 2020 setting a target to reduce the prevalence of harmful drinking for all Australians by 30%.“The annual cost to the Australian community from harmful drinking is estimated to be almost $15.3 billion, and we have recognised there is a national health issue at stake here,” Mr Templeman said. “We must be prepared to legislate in order to create healthier communities and to give our young people every incentive not to get involved in harmful drinking patterns.”
ADCA as the national peak non-government (NGO) body representing the AOD sector, will continue to strive to engage with Government to deliver the National Binge Drinking Strategy and Preventative Health Taskforce priorities aimed at creating a healthier Australia. This will require significant investment in prevention and treatment.
“ADCA looks forward to seeing additional Government funding directed to short and long-term prevention measures in order to significantly reduce alcohol-related harm. This includes management of responsible drinking, product branding, outlet density, marketing and advertising, opening hours, alcohol awareness projects for communities, and most importantly, investment in standardised and consistent data collection to plan for the future.”
Mr Templeman said that statistical data supplied by the alcohol industry must be consistent across all States/ Territories. Accurate data collection had now been confirmed by the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs as a crucial element to properly understand and address alcohol-related harm.
The point raised over data collection is incredibly valid – the only excuse left for inferior data collection is a lack of will and funding across the government and non-government sectors to tackle the issue.