• Español
  • English
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • rss
  • Español
  • English
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • rss
TNI D&D
  • Home
  • About us
    • About us
    • People
    • Partners
    • Researchers
    • Contact us
    • In the media
    • Newsletter
  • Newsroom
    • Press contacts
    • Press releases
    • Resources
    • Drugs in the news
  • Issues
    • Drug policy debate in the Americas
    • Decriminalization
    • Proportionality of sentences
    • Harm reduction
    • Reclassification of substances
    • Safer crack use
    • Human rights
    • Regulation
    • Unscheduling the coca leaf
    • Ending the war on drugs
    • Alternative development
    • Cannabis
    • Producers of Crops
    • Law enforcement
    • ATS, Mild stimulants & NPS
    • European Drug Policy
    • Money Laundering
  • UN Drug
    Control
    • Conventions
    • UNODC
    • CND
    • INCB
    • UNGASS
  • Country
    information
    • Drug Law Reform on the Map
    • Central America
      • El Salvador
      • Guatemala
      • Honduras
      • Costa Rica
    • Latin America
      • Argentina
      • Bolivia
      • Paraguay
      • Brazil
      • Chile
      • Colombia
      • Ecuador
      • Peru
      • Uruguay
      • Venezuela
    • Mexico
    • Caribbean
      • Jamaica
      • Belize
    • Afghanistan
  • Events
    • Expert Seminars
    • Informal Policy Dialogues
    • Public Events
    • Judges for Law Reform
  • Publications
    • Drug Policy Briefings
    • Drug Law Reform
    • Legislative Reform Series
    • The Human Face
    • Drugs & conflict
    • Drugs and the Law (CEDD)
      • Systems overload
    • Drug Markets and Violence
  • Weblog

 

Washington Post Editorial on UN and harm reduction

The Bush administration is quietly extending a policy that undermines the global battle against AIDS. "The State Department's new leadership needs to end this bullying flat-earthism. It won't help President Bush's current effort to relaunch his image among allies. And it's almost certain to kill people."

Deadly Ignorance
Editorial
The Washington Post, 27 February 2005

The Bush administration is quietly extending a policy that undermines the global battle against AIDS. It is being pushed in this direction by Congress, notably by Rep. Mark Edward Souder (R-Ind.). But some administration officials zealously defend this policy error, claiming scientific evidence that doesn't exist.

The administration's error is to oppose the distribution of uncontaminated needles to drug addicts. A large body of scientific evidence suggests that the free provision of clean needles curbs the spread of AIDS among drug users without increasing rates of addiction. Given that addicts are at the center of many of the AIDS epidemics in Eastern Europe and Asia, ignoring this science could cost millions of lives. In Russia, as of 2004, 80 percent of all HIV cases involved drug injectors, and many of these infections occurred because addicts share contaminated needles. In Malaysia, China, Vietnam and Ukraine, drug injectors also account for more than half of all HIV cases. Once a critical mass of drug users carries the virus, the epidemic spreads via unprotected sex to non-drug users.

The administration claims that the evidence for the effectiveness of needle exchange is shaky. An official who requested anonymity directed us to a number of researchers who have allegedly cast doubt on the pro-exchange consensus. One of them is Steffanie A. Strathdee of the University of California at San Diego; when we contacted her, she responded that her research "supports the expansion of needle exchange programs, not the opposite." Another researcher cited by the administration is Martin T. Schechter of the University of British Columbia; he wrote us that "Our research here in Vancouver has been repeatedly used to cast doubt on needle exchange programs. I believe this is a clear misinterpretation of the facts." Yet a third researcher cited by the administration is Julie Bruneau at the University of Montreal; she told us that "in the vast majority of cases needle exchange programs drive HIV incidence lower." We asked Dr. Bruneau whether she favored needle exchanges in countries such as Russia or Thailand. "Yes, sure," she responded.

The Bush administration attempted to bolster its case by providing us with three scientific articles. One, which has yet to be published in a peer-reviewed journal, was produced by an author unknown to leading experts in this field who is affiliated with a group called the Children's AIDS Fund. This group is more renowned for its ties to the Bush administration than for its public health rigor: As the Post's David Brown has reported, it recently received an administration grant despite the fact that an expert panel had deemed its application "not suitable for funding." The two other articles supplied by the administration had been published in the American Journal of Public Health. Although each raised questions about the certainty with which needle-exchange advocates state their case, neither opposed such programs.

Evidence that the administration does not cite leaves little doubt about the case for needle exchange. A study of 81 cities published in 1997 in the Lancet, a medical journal, found that in cities without needle-exchange programs, HIV infection rates among injection drug users rose by nearly 6 percent per year; by contrast, cities that had introduced free-needle programs witnessed a decrease in infection rates of about the same magnitude. Elias A. Zerhouni, the director of the National Institutes of Health, wrote last year that exchange programs "can be an effective component of a comprehensive community-based HIV prevention effort," and a World Health Organization technical paper agreed that the provision of clean needles and syringes should be "a fundamental component of any comprehensive and effective HIV-prevention programme." Addressing legitimate methodological questions about the research favoring needle exchange, the WHO reasonably concluded that incomplete scient ific evidence does not confer the freedom to ignore the knowledge we do have.

Respecting science does not appear to be the administration's priority, however. Not only is it refusing to spend federal dollars on needle exchange, but the administration also is waging a campaign to persuade the United Nations to toe its misguided line. The U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, which is heavily reliant on U.S. funding, has been made to expunge references to needle exchange from its literature, and the administration is expected to continue its pressure on the United Nations at a meeting that starts March 7. The State Department's new leadership needs to end this bullying flat-earthism. It won't help President Bush's current effort to relaunch his image among allies. And it's almost certain to kill people.

Copyright 2005 The Washington Post

 
  • Labels
    2005 CND debate | HIV/AIDS | CND | harm reduction

Drugs in the News

  • Is France moving towards legalising cannabis for recreational purposes?
    18.01.2021
  • How some THC is legal — for now
    18.01.2021
  • Is the world running out of Ayahausca?
    18.01.2021
  • France launches public consultation on legalising cannabis
    17.01.2021
  • Drug deaths: ‘Scotland should decriminalise and dare Westminster to block it’
    15.01.2021
  • 2020 was S.F.’s deadliest year for overdoses, by far
    15.01.2021
More news

Weblog

    A new EU Drug Strategy is being repared by the German presidencyA new EU Drug Strategy is being repared by the German presidency
    08.10.2020
More weblog

Hilites

Balancing Treaty Stability and Change

balancing hilite

Inter se modification of the UN drug control conventions to facilitate cannabis regulation


Connecting the dots...

connecting dots hilite

Human rights, illicit cultivation and alternative development


Morocco and Cannabis

morocco cannabis hilite

Reduction, containment or acceptance


The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition

rise decline hilite

The History of Cannabis in the UN Drug Control System and Options For Reform


Tags

10-year Review  20 1998 UNGASS  26 2005 CND debate  8 2016 UNGASS  126 2019 HLM  5 activism  19 afghanistan  24 show all

Tags

10-year Review  20 1998 UNGASS  26 2005 CND debate  8 2016 UNGASS  126 2019 HLM  5 activism  19 afghanistan  24 hide
africa  7 albania  11 alternative development  113 alternatives to policing  2 amnesty  62 appellation of origin  3 argentina  32 asean  9 ATS  15 australia  93 ayahuasca  6 bahamas  4 ballot 2012  155 banking  43 barbados  11 belgium  32 belize  10 bermuda  4 bolivia  115 brazil  93 brownfield doctrine  24 burma  42 california  201 cambodia  12 canada  492 cannabinoids  89 cannabis  2759 cannabis clubs  185 cannabis industry  362 caribbean  134 caricom  33 cbd oil  1 central america  5 chile  21 china  46 civil society  37 CND  126 coca  212 cocaine  59 coffee shop  210 cognitive decline  30 colombia  147 colorado  159 compulsary detention  19 conflict  3 conventions  249 corporate capture  6 costa rica  10 crack  51 craft cannabis  27 crime  67 czech republic  30 dark net  4 death penalty  2 decertification  1 decriminalization  816 deforestation  8 denmark  119 drug checking  35 drug consumption rooms  179 drug courts  22 drug markets  133 drug testing  7 drug trade  48 e-cigarettes  1 e-joint  2 ecstasy  59 ecuador  22 egypt  16 el salvador  2 environment  14 eradication  126 essential medicines  25 estonia  1 eswatini  4 european drug policy  67 expert advisory group  9 extrajudicial killings  92 fair trade  13 fentanyl  75 france  99 fumigation  25 gateway theory  29 georgia  2 germany  151 ghana  16 global commission  46 greece  18 guatemala  31 guatemala initiative  47 harm reduction  329 hemp  39 heroin  126 heroin assisted treatment  77 HIV/AIDS  61 home cultivation  73 honduras  3 human rights  246 incarceration  51 INCB  135 india  87 indonesia  34 informal drug policy dialogues  22 inter se modification  13 iran  14 ireland  15 israel  55 italy  34 jamaica  161 japan  2 kava  3 kazakhstan  5 ketamine  27 khat  36 kratom  26 kyrgyzstan  1 laos  2 latin american debate  115 law enforcement  378 lebanon  41 legal highs  63 legalization  1350 lesotho  6 luxembourg  32 malaysia  7 malta  13 medical cannabis  596 mental health  43 methamphetamine  40 mexico  201 Mid-Term Review  1 mild stimulants  37 money laundering  53 morocco  88 naloxone  13 nepal  6 netherlands  285 new york  20 new zealand  64 NIDA  5 nitrous oxide  6 norway  15 NPS  10 opinion polls  115 opioids  131 opium  90 oregon  29 overdose kits  4 pakistan  9 panama  5 paraguay  4 pardon  2 patents  18 peace  22 peru  42 peyote  3 philippines  85 pleasure  5 police pacification  18 portugal  66 potency  2 precursors  6 prevention  3 prison situation  92 producers  117 prohibition  140 proportionality  110 psychedelics  11 psychosis  53 puerto rico  3 racism  24 reclassification  116 recriminalisation  36 regulation  1187 russia  36 sacramental use  11 safe supply  18 safer crack  28 scheduling  24 scientific research  135 sdg  2 security  14 senegal  1 sentencing  65 singapore  6 social justice  48 south africa  63 spain  76 st lucia  7 st vincent and grenadines  29 substance-use disorder  18 substitution treatment  30 sweden  26 switzerland  133 synthetic cannabinoids  30 taxation  38 teen use  43 thailand  52 thresholds  37 tramadol  17 treatment  22 trinidad & tobago  15 tunisia  5 UK  248 UN drug control  422 UNGASS  58 UNODC  107 uruguay  143 US drug policy  1108 vaping  2 venezuela  5 vietnam  5 violence  131 WHO  60 world drug report  11

This website

UN Drug Control

In 2011 the 1961 UN Single Convention on drugs will be in place for 50 years. In 2012 the international drug control system will exist 100 years since the International Opium Convention was signed in 1912 in The Hague. Does it still serve its purpose or is a reform of the UN Drug Conventions needed? This site provides critical background.

Drug Law Reform on the map

dlronthemap_und

Copyright © 2016 Drug Law Reform in Latin America

Website by WebWolf