Drug driving new laws

Peregrinus

Not_A_Racist wrote: »

The reason the guards say they don't know is because they do know and they don't want to appear heartless. Forcefully taking medicines from children is simply wrong in my opinion.

There is an issue with policemen taking medicines from children but we prefer to ignore issues like this in Ireland don't we.

What is wrong with our country that laypeople prevent doctors from doing their job?

Actually, this is pretty standard in most or all countries.

No country that has a controlled drugs regime creates an exception for drugs that are controlled, but that are available on prescription in another country. To do so effectively gives legislators in another country the power to carve exceptions out of your own laws. There are obvious political objections to that, and in many countries (including our own) I think there would be constitutional objections. The legislature in Ireland can't give the legislature in (say) Belgium the power to decide whether and on what terms cannabis can be imported into Ireland.

The solution that practically every country has arrived at is to say that controlled drugs are, well, controlled drugs, and if they're available on prescription in some other country and a person to whom a prescription has been issued brings some in with him for his own therapeutic purposes, that's something that gets dealt with by exercise of discretion on a case-by-case basis.

This has worked perfectly well for years for drugs other than cannabis, and I don't see that the growing availability of medicinal cannabis on prescription is going to cause the system to fall in a heap.

Not_A_Racist

Our government lies and states that cannabis had no medical value.

That is a lie and we should be ashamed to base policies on lies.

Are you not ashamed?


Why do we allow laypeople to override doctors on medical matters?

That is cowardly and abusive towards people who require medical treatment and who are denied it. You can say that all governments mistreat their populations in the same way but that doesn't mean much to me. Can we not aim higher in Ireland?

Can we allow medical decisions to be made by doctors and not by politicans?

Mod deletion. Rant removed

Miike

Not_A_Racist wrote: »

Mod deletion. Rant removed

Heaven forbid someone had a rant on a forum, what a world we'd live in then.

Mod comment

Comment noted. We encourage civilised debate on this forum. There are many fora for ranting all over the 'net

Peregrinus

Not_A_Racist wrote: »

Our government lies and states that cannabis had no medical value.

When did they say this? Not doubting you; it's just that it has escaped my notice.

Not_A_Racist wrote: »

Why do we allow laypeople to override doctors on medical matters? . . . Can we allow medical decisions to be made by doctors and not by politicians?

Are you attacking the whole prescription system, or just the application of it to cannabis?

Not_A_Racist

Prescriptions are written by doctors and in most cases those prescriptions are not overridden by politicans. So in most cases I have no problem with prescriptions.

However, in some cases, despite prescriptions, doctors are prevented from prescribing medicines to sick children by politicans.

I have no problem with prescriptions. I have a problem with layperson politicans over riding doctors on medical matters.


Many drugs with medical value are listed as Class A or whatever, and are stated to have no medical value. That's a lie by our government. Drugs like LSD and e have medical value.

e is extemely good for post traumatic stress disorder and god knows we have a lot of that. E enables people to open up and to speak about their problems which is extremely beneficial for them. But e is outlawed despite doctors wishes.

LSD is the same.



What I'm doing here isn't ranting. I'm calmly presenting my opinion.

It is a fact that politicans are making medical decisions and preventing doctors from working.

The government should defer to doctors on all medical matters and all controlled drugs should be permitted to be prescribed. Doctors can be struck off if they mis-prescribe.

Peregrinus

Again, I'm looking for a cite that the state says that either cannabis or Class A drugs have no medical value.

As for the government overriding doctors on medical matters, don't all controlled drugs regimes do that? Indeed, don't all pharmaceutical licensing systems do that? Controlled drug or not, a doctor can't prescribe any drug that isn't approved as a medicine in Ireland.

Not_A_Racist

In the past drugs were often stated to have no medical value.

Nowadays.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_Drugs_Act_(Ireland)

Schedule 1
The substances (and certain derivatives thereof) considered by the state to have no medicinal or scientific value with consideration given regarding their likelihood of their being abused and thus would be considered illegal drugs.

There is then a long list which includes.

Cannabinol (except where contained in cannabis or cannabis resin)
Cannabinol derivatives
cannabis and cannabis resin (hashish)

along with lots of other stuff.

How do the government know that these substances have no medical value?
There has been no research in many cases.



Why did you ask me to give this information?

Peregrinus

Not_A_Racist wrote: »

Why did you ask me to give this information?

Because you're making the claim.

And the cite you've given me is just the author of a Wikipedia page claiming tht the state considers that Sch 1 drugs are considered by the state to have no medicinal or scientific value. But Sch 1, and the regulations that contain it, say nothing of the kind. They just say that the Sch 1 drugs are only to be supplied by licensed persons, and on certain conditions.

Really Interested

Not_A_Racist wrote: »

In the past drugs were often stated to have no medical value.

Nowadays.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_Drugs_Act_(Ireland)



There is then a long list which includes.


along with lots of other stuff.

How do the government know that these substances have no medical value?
There has been no research in many cases.



Why did you ask me to give this information?

http://health.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/HPRA-Report-FINAL.pdf

"The scientific evidence, and the availability of an authorised medicine, support the use of cannabis in the treatment of spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis, where other treatments have failed."

http://health.gov.ie/blog/press-release/minister-harris-publishes-milestone-report-on-cannabis-for-medical-use/

"A five-year pilot programme that permits patients with the defined medical conditions (outlined above) to be treated with cannabis or cannabinoids prescribed by their doctors, under current legislation, should be conducted. Under the cannabis treatment programme:"

Not_A_Racist

I'm well aware that some government agencies state that cannabis is a medicine.

My problem is the inconsistency. Other government agencies describe cannabis as a problem.

It is a fact that medical doctors are prevented from prescribing what doctors consider to be medicines by layperson politicans.


It's not outrageous to suggest that doctors should exclusively make decisions on patients healthcare and politicans should butt out.

The cannabis debate will be like the abortion debate, drawn out for decades by derelict politicans while ordinary people suffer.

Really Interested

Not_A_Racist wrote: »

I'm well aware that some government agencies state that cannabis is a medicine.

My problem is the inconsistency. Other government agencies describe cannabis as a problem.

It is a fact that medical doctors are prevented from prescribing what doctors consider to be medicines by layperson politicans.


It's not outrageous to suggest that doctors should exclusively make decisions on patients healthcare and politicans should butt out.

The cannabis debate will be like the abortion debate, drawn out for decades by derelict politicans while ordinary people suffer.

The links I posted are from the only department that matter in this issue that being health. Do yo drny that ther is a report and a plan that based on studies and reports may allow the use of canabis.

Not_A_Racist

Are you aware of Vera Twomey?
She is a mother with a sick daughter. She cannot access cannabis for her daughter despite doctors wishes.

Vera began the 260km walk from her home to the Dail as a protest against decisions to restrict her daughter Ava, who has rare form of epilepsy called Dravet’s syndrome, from accessing medical cannabis which is a life saving drug for her daughter’s condition.


You can act as if these problems don't exist, or you can be happy with the idea of a committee taking ten years to reach decisions, but I'm not. Sick children should receive appropriate medical treatment. Doctors should decide on that treatment.

You are apologising for the failure to treat sick children.


The way Vera Twomey has been treated is a disgrace and I'm ashamed of this country.

Politicans should stop interfering with the work of medical doctors.

The cannabis issue has been ongoing for decades now. How much longer must people wait?

This intransience and obtuseness from the government is really damaging to society.

Really Interested

Not_A_Racist wrote: »

Are you aware of Vera Twomey?
She is a mother with a sick daughter. She cannot access cannabis for her daughter despite doctors wishes.

Vera began the 260km walk from her home to the Dail as a protest against decisions to restrict her daughter Ava, who has rare form of epilepsy called Dravet’s syndrome, from accessing medical cannabis which is a life saving drug for her daughter’s condition.


You can act as if these problems don't exist, or you can be happy with the idea of a committee taking ten years to reach decisions, but I'm not. Sick children should receive appropriate medical treatment. Doctors should decide on that treatment.

You are apologising for the failure to treat sick children.


The way Vera Twomey has been treated is a disgrace and I'm ashamed of this country.

Politicans should stop interfering with the work of medical doctors.

The cannabis issue has been ongoing for decades now. How much longer must people wait?

This intransience and obtuseness from the government is really damaging to society.

Yes I am aware of her, and due to persons like her attitudes are changing, thankfully.

Are you in favour of medicine being allowed on the market without any testing and systems to protect the consumer.

The very fact the 2016 Act allows a defence of having a prescription must mean that medical canabis is not far off.

There must be a system that protects the consumer and allows proper regulation.

Not_A_Racist

The system that protects the consumer could or should be the professionalism and the training and competence of doctors, along with insurance and registration with the medical council.

Are you suggesting that doctors would willy nilly prescribe dangerous drugs?
Do doctors willy nilly prescribe morphine now?

I believe that doctors are professional enough to only prescribe these drugs in the correct cases. And if the correct cases can't be determined with 100% accuracy I still think the doctor is better placed than a politican to decide on medical matters.


Politics and medicine do not mix well. Politicans should defer to doctors on all medical matters and they should do so publicly.

Medicines are not political footballs to be kicked around.

Really Interested

Not_A_Racist wrote: »

The system that protects the consumer could or should be the professionalism and the training and competence of doctors, along with insurance and registration with the medical council.

Are you suggesting that doctors would willy nilly prescribe dangerous drugs?
Do doctors willy nilly prescribe morphine now?

I believe that doctors are professional enough to only prescribe these drugs in the correct cases. And if the correct cases can't be determined with 100% accuracy I still think the doctor is better placed than a politican to decide on medical matters.


Politics and medicine do not mix well. Politicans should defer to doctors on all medical matters and they should do so publicly.

Medicines are not political footballs to be kicked around.

So you think the medicine system does not work currently.

From what I have read politicians are in support of medical use of canabis (example is the defence I mentioned) the department of health has commissioned and got a report on its use. My reading of the report is that the Department want to look at how best to introduce the system.

My own view is that Canabis should be made totally legal for any person to use. In relation to medical use I think any medicine should comply with best international practice. And any medicine must be tested and prescribed correctly.

In relation to doctors prescribing meds currently I from experience tell that there is over prescribing of many drugs and the most dangerous drugs from court experience is benzodiazepines taken to excess with Drink.

Yachtcarpenter

reading the paper some time back and it seems 46 people (first 3 months) have been tested with a handful testing positive (no details) I recall the article mentioning issues with devices and been looked into in the new year.. seems the so called drug driving problem is not so big a problem after all, or the device is actually comparable to the breath test for drink?

Would be interested to know if anyone has experienced these devices yet?

Boater123

46 people in the first 3 months tested.

Going by the figures the Gardai supplied in the past for drink driving tests conducted, the real figure is more likely to be 0.78 of one person tested.

Pixie Chief

My apologies if it has been already mentioned in the thread but my own personal concern with this new testing is the sheer volume of prescribed medications that can, on both saliva and urine tests, give false positives for other substances. I'm not sure about blood tests.

I have an autoimmune condition controlled by a wide variety of medications none of which impair driving in any way. Some of them are well-known to cause false positives for cannabis and opiates. In circumstances where I meet a roadside check, I may well test positive for opiates and cannabis. Then be brought to police station (I'm not sure what happens to car/passengers/children) for further testing. If further false positives are given, I may well find myself arrested and charged when I have done absolutely nothing wrong.

I'm aware of the statement that people taking prescription drugs will not be persecuted however, the Gardai at the side of the road will only know that I have tested positive and proceed accordingly. The whole issue of false positives has not yet in any way been addressed?

Really Interested

Pixie Chief wrote: »

My apologies if it has been already mentioned in the thread but my own personal concern with this new testing is the sheer volume of prescribed medications that can, on both saliva and urine tests, give false positives for other substances. I'm not sure about blood tests.

I have an autoimmune condition controlled by a wide variety of medications none of which impair driving in any way. Some of them are well-known to cause false positives for cannabis and opiates. In circumstances where I meet a roadside check, I may well test positive for opiates and cannabis. Then be brought to police station (I'm not sure what happens to car/passengers/children) for further testing. If further false positives are given, I may well find myself arrested and charged when I have done absolutely nothing wrong.

I'm aware of the statement that people taking prescription drugs will not be persecuted however, the Gardai at the side of the road will only know that I have tested positive and proceed accordingly. The whole issue of false positives has not yet in any way been addressed?

The road side test can not be used in evidence at a court trial, hence why there is a blood test at the station. I have seen no evidence that such tests can provide false positives. Blood tests for drink and drugs have been used for decades, and no one has successfully raised a false positive defence.

Johnboy1951

Really Interested wrote: »

The road side test can not be used in evidence at a court trial, hence why there is a blood test at the station. I have seen no evidence that such tests can provide false positives. Blood tests for drink and drugs have been used for decades, and no one has successfully raised a false positive defence.

What about the inconvenience, upset and disruption to one's life and the lives of the passengers in the event of a roadside false positive?

What do you imagine would be the effect on business if a person collected a customer from the airport, was stopped and produced a false positive?
Would the customer be impressed by the driver being taken away by the police; being abandoned on the side of the road etc etc?

Something needs to be in place to prevent the innocent from suffering from the consequences of false positive responses at the roadside.

Really Interested

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

What about the inconvenience, upset and disruption to one's life and the lives of the passengers in the event of a roadside false positive?

What do you imagine would be the effect on business if a person collected a customer from the airport, was stopped and produced a false positive?
Would the customer be impressed by the driver being taken away by the police; being abandoned on the side of the road etc etc?

Something needs to be in place to prevent the innocent from suffering from the consequences of false positive responses at the roadside.

The same happens with roadside breath test for drink, in fact AGS can and do have the power of arrest without any roadside breath test.


The question for society is the inconvenience of a driver a price we in society are willing to pay, for intoxicated driving prosecutions. Do you have the same issue with breath tests for drink driving?

Have you any evidence that false tests are actually happening in any great numbers. Also it is worth noting that driving intoxicated on legal drugs may still be an offence, if impairment proved, carrying 4 year minimum ban. That includes many over the counter meds.

Peregrinus

Really Interested wrote: »

. . . Also it is worth noting that driving intoxicated on legal drugs may still be an offence, if impairment proved, carrying 4 year minimum ban. That includes many over the counter meds.

Possibly, but that's a separate matter. The fact that a therapeutic drug can give false positives in roadside tests for cannabis and opioids doesn't mean that the same therapeutic drug can impair, or has impaired, driving.

Really Interested

Peregrinus wrote: »

Possibly, but that's a separate matter. The fact that a therapeutic drug can give false positives in roadside tests for cannabis and opioids doesn't mean that the same therapeutic drug can impair, or has impaired, driving.

I have done a lot of research on this issue and as of yet have found no evidence that any other product can give a false positive for cannabis. if anyone has such evidence I would love to see it.

The only one I could see giving a false positive is some opiod canaboid based meds, which some do lead to impairment cases.