Former government adviser says regulations make it too difficult to research psychoactive drugs with potential medical uses
The classification system that makes
drugs
such as cannabis and MDMA (ecstasy) illegal has prevented scientists
from properly researching their possible therapeutic uses for conditions
such as schizophrenia and depression, according to the government's
former chief adviser on drugs.
Professor
David Nutt
said the UK's laws on misuse of drugs needed to be rewritten to more
accurately reflect their relative harms and called for a regulated
approach to making drugs such as MDMA and cannabis available for medical
and research purposes.
"Regulations, which are arbitrary,
actually make it virtually impossible to research these drugs," said
Nutt. "The effect these laws have had on research is greater than the
effects that [George] Bush stopping stem cell research has had because
it's been going on since the 1960s."
Almost all the drugs that
could help scientists to understand brain phenomena such as
consciousness, perception, mood and psychosis are illegal, including
ketamine, cannabis, MDMA and psychedelic drugs such as magic mushrooms.
Nutt said there had been almost no work in this field because the
government made it difficult for scientists to access the drugs.
A
Home Office spokesperson told the Guardian: "The Home Office licensing
regime enables bona fide institutions to carry out scientific research
on controlled substances while ensuring necessary safeguards are in
place."
Nutt, who is professor of neuropsychopharmacology at
Imperial College London, made his comments at a briefing in London on
Wednesday to mark the launch of his book,
Drugs Without the Hot Air.
He is used to being a thorn in the side of the authorities when it comes to drugs regulation. In 2009, he was
sacked by the then health secretary, Alan Johnson,
from his post as chair of the government's Advisory Council on the
Misuse of Drugs for publicly stating that alcohol and tobacco were more
harmful than LSD, ecstasy and cannabis.
Researchers who want to
experiment on illegal drugs, which come under the schedule 1 list of the
Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001, must apply for a licence from the
Home Office. This takes a year to approve and costs thousands of pounds.
Researchers are also required to have secure storage facilities and are
subject to random inspections by police.
"[The rules] completely
limit research at the real cutting edge of science," said Nutt. "I
wonder how many other opportunities have been lost in the last 40 years
with important drugs like MDMA, with its empathetic qualities, drugs
like LSD in terms of treating addictions, cannabis for all the possible
uses and insights which it might have for things like schizophrenia. All
of those opportunities have been wasted because it is virtually
impossible, when a drug's illegal, to work with it."
One of the
best treatments for people with post-traumatic stress disorder is to get
them to relive their trauma and then teach them how to delete or
somehow control the memories. "But many people are so traumatised that,
once the memories come back, they just dissociate and can't hold it long
enough in order to deal with it," said Nutt.
"There's been one
study in the US showing that MDMA, by damping down the negative emotions
associated with the trauma, allow people to get into the therapy and
get better. We're very keen to set up a similar trial in the UK. The
paradox will be that, even if we can show it could work, no one could
use it in the UK because no doctor would have the licence.
"LSD
was trialled as a treatment for alcoholism in the 1960s and Nutt said
the "evidence is that it's as good as anything we've got, maybe better.
But no one's using it because it's too difficult."
Nutt said that
the lack of scientific research was a direct result of the UK's
arbitrary classification of drugs. "Drugs are drugs – they differ in
terms of their brain effects but, fundamentally, they're all
psychotropic agents and it is arbitrary whether we choose to keep
alcohol legal or ban cannabis or make tobacco legal and ban ecstasy.
Those are not scientific decisions, they're political or moral or
religious decisions."
According to Nutt, research into the effects
of drugs would lead to a more rational approach. He said the laws
around the misuse of drugs needed to be rewritten, after a thorough,
independent review of the harms involved.
"I'm not in favour of
legalisation, a free open market of all drugs – that does lead to more
use," he said. "We need regulated access across the board."
This
would mean drugs such as cannabis, MDMA or PZP being made available for
treatments through a pharmacy. Patients could be issued with a card and
given access to an annual supply, he said. "Then at least you would know
what you were getting."
Ecstasy and cannabis should be freely available for study, says David Nutt