Drugs ban is ‘scientific censorship’, says paper

The banning of psychoactive drugs amounts to one of the worst cases of scientific censorship in modern times, researchers have argued.

June 12, 2013

Possession of cannabis, MDMA (ecstasy) and psychedelics are stringently regulated under national laws and UN conventions dating back to the 1960s.

But in a paper published today in Nature Reviews Neuroscience, a group argue that banning of the drugs has not only compounded their harm but also set back research in areas such as consciousness by decades, and effectively stopped the investigation of promising medical treatments.

This hindering of research and medicine has been motivated by politics, not science, said co-author David Nutt, the Edmond J Safra professor of neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College London.

“The outlawing of psychoactive drugs amounts to the worst case of scientific censorship since the Catholic Church banned the works of Copernicus and Galileo,” said Professor Nutt.

“The ban on embryonic stem cell research by the Bush administration is the only possible contender, but that only affected the USA not the whole world.”

The researchers argue that the illegal status of psychoactive drugs makes research into how they work and might be used, for example in depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, difficult and in many cases almost impossible.

“The decision to outlaw these drugs was based on their perceived dangers, but in many cases the harms have been overstated and are actually less than many legal drugs such as alcohol,” said Professor Nutt, who co-authored the paper with Leslie King, a retired analytical chemist and former member of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, and David Nichols, adjunct professor at the Eschelman School of Pharmacy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

“The laws have never been updated despite scientific advances and growing evidence that many of these drugs are relatively safe. And there appears to be no way for the international community to make such changes,” said Professor Nutt, who was controversially sacked as chairman of the ACMD in 2009 for “campaigning” against government policy on drugs.

The use of drugs in research should be exempted from severe restrictions, with regulation taking a more “rational approach”, the paper argues.

The case should be made for revising the status of these substances under UN conventions, the paper adds, while individual countries should seek to exempt hospitals and other research organisations from the need to apply for the most restrictive licenses.

The call for reform has been endorsed by the British Neuroscience Association, of which Professor Nutt is immediate past president, and the British Association for Psychopharmacology, of which he is also a former president. 

elizabeth.gibney@tsleducation.com

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 6 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Most Commented

question marks PhD study

Selecting the right doctorate is crucial for success. Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O'Gorman share top 10 tips on how to pick a PhD

India, UK, flag

Sir Keith Burnett reflects on what he learned about international students while in India with the UK prime minister

Pencil lying on open diary

Requesting a log of daily activity means that trust between the institution and the scholar has broken down, says Toby Miller

Microlight pilot flies with flock of cranes

Reports of UK-based researchers already thinking of moving overseas after Brexit vote

Portrait montage of Donald Trump and Nigel Farage

From Donald Trump to Brexit, John Morgan considers the challenges of a new international political climate