Scientific Research Proves Alcohol and Cigarettes More Dangerous Than Cannabis, Lsd or Ecstasy
Article Tools
-
13
Liked it 
Subscribe to RSS
One again, controversial UK drugs Tsar, Professor Nutt, caused panic and confusion by undermining current government advice. But, who’s telling the truth about the dangers of drugs? And why would anyone lie?
The UK government’s leading drug adviser, Professor Nutt – famous for his previous controversial statement that taking ecstasy was “no more dangerous than riding a horse” – has caused confusion once again, now claiming alcohol and cigarettes are more dangerous than cannabis, LSD, and ecstasy.
Professor Nutt, chairman of Neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College, London, and head of the Neuropsychopharmacology Unit at Bristol University, is now calling for the creation of an “index of harm,” to enable members of the public to compare the differences in danger levels between various drugs, both legal and illegal. In this index, alcohol would be considered the fifth most dangerous substance, after cocaine, heroin, barbiturates, and methadone. Cigarettes would be ranked number nine – higher than cannabis, LSD, and ecstasy, ranked respectively at 11, 14, and 18. Drugs in the index are scored and ranked based on the physical harm they may cause the user, the likelihood of dependence, and harm caused to society.
Professor Nutt criticised the government for providing mis-leading information, saying the artificial separation between legal and illegal drugs gives people the wrong impression about the dangers involved in the use of certain substances. He even went as far as saying smoking cannabis produces only a “relatively small risk of psychosis” – contradicting the government’s own advice, which claims it massively increases the risk of mental illness. He accused the former home secretary, Jaqcui Smith – famous for her porn-watching husband and shameful involvement in the MPs expenses scandal – of “distorting and devaluing” scientific research, when making the decision to reclassify cannabis as a class B drug. She accuses him of “trivialising” the dangers of drugs.
Professor Nutt has recently released a statement, saying: “No one is suggesting that drugs are not harmful. The critical question is one of scale and degree.” He added: “We have to accept young people like to experiment — with drugs and other potentially harmful activities — and what we should be doing in all of this is to protect them from harm at this stage of their lives. We therefore have to provide more accurate and credible information. If you think that scaring kids will stop them using, you are probably wrong.” Source
The first and most obvious problem glaring at us from this “index of harm” is the incredibly high placement of alcohol, at number five – something many readers will be very surprised to see. A huge number of us drink on a regular basis, and probably consider consumption of this perfectly legal substance far healthier and less dangerous than regular use of either cannabis, LSD or ecstasy. But, if there’s scientific evidence to prove this to be more than marginally inaccurate, don’t the government owe it to us to tell us so?
The second issue is the idea that cigarettes could be more dangerous than cannabis, LSD, and ecstasy, which is shocking, by anyone’s standards. Here in the UK, we’re bombarded with press releases about the dangers of smoking cannabis; parents up and down the country are terrified their spliff-smoking teens will almost certainly find themselves suffering from schizophrenia if they insist in continuing their illegal past-time. Equally, LSD and ecstasy are promoted as dangerous, even lethal drugs – and most parents would much prefer their children were just having a drink and/or smoking some cigarettes, than taking either substance. But what if they’re wrong?
From Professor Nutt’s above statement, we can see he openly accuses the UK government of scare-mongering tactics that he personally believes will never work. And he’s probably right, if previous campaigns are anything to go by. He’s also perfectly clear in his research-based, professional opinion as a scientist, that alcohol and cigarettes are far more dangerous than is currently admitted. So why are the government ignoring the evidence provided by his careful research and clinging to false statements made by politically-motivated individuals?
Could it be anything to do with the MASSIVE income they receive from the tax they charge on alcohol and cigarettes?
I don’t know about you, but as a parent – and regardless of any financial implications they may face as a result – I fully expect the government to provide me with the cold, hard facts about the dangers regarding drugs, as and when they discover them, so I can attempt to keep my children as safe as possible – as my job as a mother dictates. I simply cannot do so if they insist on lying to me.
LATEST NEWS: Government Sacks Scientist for Telling The Truth About Drugs
You might also like:
Why Line The Pockets of Dealers When There’s a Legal Alternative to Cannabis
43 Comments
Totally agree with your viewpoint.
interesting viewpoint. We were just taking at work about how harmful or not harmful that pot might be. Nowadays with everything laced with something else they all seem pretty dangerous to me!
Very valid point, Martie – even cigarettes are laced with multiple poisons. If they all legalized drugs they could eliminate that problem entirely. In Holland you can take your ecstasy tablet to the staff in a club and they’ll test it for you and tell you exactly what it contains. I bet there are far fewer deaths out there…
I am behind you 100% on this one! Thanks for a terrific share!
I agree with you, there were so many valid points. Thank you for sharing. We should do everything in our power to protect our children.
It’s good to see people agree, if only we were able to have more of a say in the way they run everything, we might just hear the truth more often, instead of their outright lies.
Thanks for your comments!
A really good argument about this much debated problem, fantastic article and I too am with you 100%
And they sacked him! Can you even believe the lengths Labour will go to, in order to keep the truth from the people. I think they must all be suffering from a contagious lying disease or something. They have to be the most dishonest government the UK has ever seen!
On the lighter side: Professor “Nutt”? Is his name for real?
On the not so lighter side: I’ve been a smoker for several years, I drink only socially and just a drink or two. I’ve tried cannabis once or twice, and I wouldn’t even think of driving after smoking a joint or tripping on LSD, while I would safely drive after smoking a cigarette!
I totally agree on the fact that quitting smoking is the hardest to quit, but I’ve never heard of anybody dying from a smoking driver, or getting violent on cigarette and ending up blacking out.
However, I’ve seen people getting violent after heavily drinking or using coke, getting stupid after smoking a joint (me included), or just becoming a danger to themselves and others b/c they’re doing drugs.
It’s not that I’m defending nicotine, not at all, but information should be taken more cautiously, specially regarding our children.
That’s a very valid point, Evviesands. However, in defense, this research was carried out for health purposes and the drugs on the index were scored firstly for their impact on the health of the user – although social implications were also considered. Also, it would be assumed any reasonable person wouldn’t drive whilst under the influence of any drug that impairs their senses, be it cough medicine or cannabis. That’s where they need to educate people not to take stupid risks with other people’s safety. I’ve taught my children that already.
There’s CYANIDE in cigarettes and people don’t think they’re dangerous????
Hi, nicotine is very, very dangerous. Of course people don’t get violent after smoking a “cigarette”, but they do tend to die a horrible and painful death from cancer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_Calment#Health_and_lifestyle
This woman is another statistic. She \”died from smoking\”.
Very informative. I, of course, agree with you. I hope a lot will read your article!
I have never heard such complete cock waffle that has come from some of the commentators on this article, most of the scare mongering surrounding cigarettes has come from one man an American named Stanford Glanz virtually all of his so called studies have been discredited and yet governments around the world have taken on board his pseudo science as if it is fact ,to the point that non smokers now believe they will die after just one wiff of a cigarette, the Labour government pay false charities like ASH UK and ALCOHOL CONCERN to pedal lies and falsehoods to push forward their plans which really have nothing to do with health but everything to do with control. 52 British pubs close every week mainly to do with the smoking ban. Smoking bans are not about health they are about who can sell the most nicotine, big tobacco or big pharma. FACT an average serving of potatoes contains more nicotine than a packet of cigarettes.FACT no animals in laboratory experiments have ever caught cancer from smoking cigarettes.FACT cigarettes contain 100s of harmful chemicals, so does coffee! Beware when any government start lecturing on health, its not their buisiness,as an adult make your own choices on whats good for you and your children, its called liberty.
@Frosty Johnson – They add the really harmful stuff to cigarettes during production, to make them burn to the end and also to make them more addictive. It’s crazy…
My grandma and grandpa smoked forty filter-less cigarettes a day each from the time they were teenagers. My grandma died this year in her nineties, nothing to do with smoking, and my grandpa is still puffing away! They are/were stubborn and always insisted smoking wouldn’t hurt them. Personally, I think you drastically increase your chances of developing cancer if you actually believe you will.
I have always considered alcohol far more harmful than cannabis. Not just from the health point of view, but also the effects that it has on society. More violence, road accidents, and family breakdowns are the result of alcohol than any other drug. I have never heard of anyone who has been smoking cannabis causing any violence unless there has been alcohol consumed as well. I think that you are right that is because the government rake in so much money from the taxes on alcohol and cigarettes that they would rather deny the facts presented by the scientists who are paid to advise us.
Sometimes Cannabis is laced with the pshyco active plant Datura, which might give the user a pshychosis. But this wares off after 4 or more weeks. However most people who do use drugs use it regularly. And therefor the brain gets a dose every weekend or more. Two simple ways to avoid this are; not use cannabis or grow your own. Actually there are 3 options; make cannabis legal and sell it only at the pharmacies. The government can put taxes on it as well. One needs a chipcard from the doctor, so you get the right dose for your weight, size etc.
It are the cigarettes that makes people addicted to the stuff. One guess where I am from.
not really new info but informative nonetheless
All I can say is my alcoholic husband has emphysema and still smokes and drinks. I’ve seen this first hand and I know what alcohol and tobacco can do-any other stuff-I do not have data. Thanks for a very enlightening aticle!
Alcohol and smoking kill a hell of a lot of people. I still can’t figure out the cigarette thing, e.g., kids actually taking up the addiction. The price of cancer sticks should scare away most, but if that doesn’t do it there’s always lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, high blood pressure, COPD…On another note, CaSundara, ask a Triond editor to manually fix your title. “Lsd” should be “LSD.” It’s a glitch in their system, and something I’ve been complaining about for a while. You get the drift: TV becomes Tv; JFK becomes Jfk; World War II becomes World War Ii.
Very interesting article. I’m sure most people will have their own opinions on which abuses are the most dangerous.
leave smoking
please
very nice thread:)
I think prohibition has had it’s day. Portugal has legalised all drugs. It won’t be long until anti-prohibition sweeps the world.
Thorough write – j
Great write. Our governments are supposed to be our allies not of drug companies. If they are steer clear of commercial interests, they would provide us with hard facts, and then we can decide what’s good for us.
@Katien – A very valid point, which I agree with entirely. Of course, were there places we could go to legally smoke cannabis then I’m sure there would be more cannabis-related accidents, but that is the result of people’s poor judgement, or worse, total lack of morals.
@ WilliamJ Felcher – It’s been driving me mental – I’ve changed it so many times… will contact them directly, thanks.
@Uma Shankari – If only they would do the sensible thing and educate people properly and given them responsibility for their own lives. If only…
A great article for all to read. A must for teenagers.
Continued heavy/regular use of alcohol can result in brain & other nervous systems damage..heart..pancreas..stomach & liver damage & sometimes death. Good on ya CaSundara..finally..someone who actually knows what the frig they’re talkin’ about!
Excellent article!
Didn’t even know it was in doubt, most people should know that alcohol and cigarettes are more dangerous than drugs such as cocaine and ecstacy.
Did you know that there has never been a case ever of anyone dying just from the effects of hash?
Did you know that there has never been a case ever of anyone dying from pure ecstacy?
The problems arise when the drugs are cut in with other stuff to boost the dealers profits.
@Alistair Briggs – I assume you meant cannabis when you said cocaine (which was placed at number two on this index of harm). Yes, I agree with you – even paracetamol is more dangerous than ecstasy – but most people DON’T know it, because those in power lie. If you’ve regularly taken drugs then you’re able to make the comparison, but many haven’t. They have to go with official guidelines, which are currently that cannabis is very dangerous – even lethal. This bullshitting has to stop. If they want us to accept facts and figures when they present them then they have to make them entirely accurate.
One of the problems is it’s rare for the Government to give any information without some form of political spin on it.
Tobacco products should have been made illegal many years ago. I’m sure it’s the huge tax revenue that makes the Government want to keep it legal.
At last a good article on this topic, thank you!
For people who want to read more unbiased scientific information on psychoactive substances, check out http://www.erowid.org
Nice article CaSundara. Nutt’s sacking (no pun intended) has become a shot in their own foot by the government as the media attention has highlighted their deliberate misinformation campaigns, cover ups and hypocrisy in general.
On the other hand, I’m saddened by the fact that many people now think it’s OK to do cannabis, LSD and ecstasy because, “hey, it’s less dangerous than smoking or drinking!”
Rather, we should be concentrating on the fact that the legal, government money-spinners of alcohol and tobacco are far more dangerous and detrimental than we think and their use should be legislated accordingly.
Yes, they say he was naive in his actions, but perhaps he knew what would happen and didn’t care because he was employed in a pointless post. Any passionate scientist would be demoralised being ignored about such important information. Perhaps he predicted the worse that could happen would be for him to be ignored, which was already the case. He certainly isn’t camera-shy…
Personally, I think the government need to stop acting like a religion or our parents and allow us to make choices, based on accurate facts. Sure, we shouldn’t encourage people to take anything harmful, but most humans like to take substances to alter their moods or experiences, and they shouldn’t be incriminated for doing so. Given the hard facts very few people would try the more dangerous and addictive drugs – they’d choose one with lower risks, unless they were fairly stupid. Someone once showed me a paper that concluded paracetamol was more dangerous than pure ecstasy. If they’d legalised it and made sure it was pure the majority of the VERY FEW people who’ve ever died as a result of taking it wouldn’t have done so.
The main reasons for legalising all drugs would be to charge a reasonable tax, relative to the harm caused to society and the likelihood of future medical treatment, and to cut crime by who knows how much. They’re fighting a losing battle and they’d do far better to implement a system that could work; “Just say no” doesn’t.
I also wouldn’t be surprised if he planned this. Seems like his ‘death’ has already done more for the cause than all those years of being ignored by the government.
Personally, I disagree with you wholeheartedly about legalising these drugs.
Sure, taxation would help to recover the financial costs to society caused by drug use but there are other, more serious, intangible costs which would only increase with their legalisation.
I see those costs everyday when it comes to alcohol.
I guess you and I would use this index to support our equal but opposite views
Yes, no matter which side of the fence you’re on, the most important thing is accurate information – although i didn’t think that index went far enough: I’d like to see the three separate indexes, and I’d like more drugs listed. We have a right to it, IMO. This is another reason why legalising (or at the least, decriminalising) drugs would be helpful: many drugs are relatively new and we don’t now enough about them to accurately classify them. If people were able to freely admit to drug use, without fear of incrimination or smearing their character (university lecturers and other professionals take drugs, too), we could better trace which drugs cause which medical problems, now or in later life. By forcing people to keep quiet about their substance use, you’re affecting the possibility of accurate research being undertaken. It makes no sense.
I don’t think it’s ever been difficult to extract information from drug users in the interests of research. Conditions of anonymity have always applied under which they are happy to share
Professor Nutt and others have been producing reports into drug usage since the 70s and these reports are available in their hundreds if not thousands in various journals.
The relevant information is all there (decriminalisation wouldn’t help in that sense) it’s just that the government refuses to make it appropriately available.
Thanks for a very unique article, was very informative and very well written.
How iresponsible this article could be.I myself is a 1 pack a day smoker and I know smoking kills .To tell me that I should be smoking canabis or taking in ecstacy instead of smoking cigarret is somewhere in between death and more deaths.
They should stop manufacturing those toxic produce to save all the next generations to come.Science should develop real medicine for smokers and businessmen must quit business with clear health issues until further studies.If humankind are healthy enough the biggest world issue can be solve..food productions.
I’ve been a long time user and fan of MDMA, but I don’t like the negative side effects and health problems that are associated with it; so I was in route for a legal healthier alternative. I tried a lot of legal products on the market, but it was all hype. The closest thing on the market is a product called, Trip2Night that can give you similar euphoric effects and lasts around 5 to 6 hours.
No need to blame the government. Most people should be able to think through what they are doing. The government can spew whatever facts/false facts they want, but it is ultimately a person’s judgment that matters. They’re all harmful, ’nuff said.
Making cannabis legal for the use of everyone is… foolish. Alcohol is enough of a problem, although I wouldn’t propose to make it illegal. Cannabis, however, should not be legal unless for medical purposes. Why? People would be high all the time. That would negatively effect society. More people would high on the job, high during school, high during social events… high for their whole lives if they could get away with it.
@noob2Epic i agree!!people who are taking should be blame and not the government..they are responsible from themselves..