|
Anti-alcohol campaign 'failing' |
Those of you reading this, who have an allergy to hypocrisy may wish look away now as the Telegraph, one of the leaders in publicising the anti-cannabis debate which has raged throughout the UK recently, tells today of how the "anti-alcohol" campaign is failing. Has there been one? For decades the cannabis community has told legislators the prime mover in the high numbers of people turning to illicit drugs is prohibition; the government's own message which tells how dangerous cannabis is, and how using the drug will surely lead to mental health issues later. And yet everyone has a friend or two who has used cannabis for 20, sometimes 30 years with seemingly no ill-effect, which just goes to dilute the tails of woe the government serve up daily. Well surprise surprise, they've used the exact same argument with alcohol. It may have only been four lines of "news" but it was deemed important news and perhaps unsurprisingly, the Telegraph has run with it. | The constant emphasis on the dangers of alcohol by the Government is doing nothing to deter people from drinking too much, says a study.
| |
| Young people particularly are ignoring advice about the number of units they should drink each week because they find the figure unrealistically low, it concludes.
Ministers should stop labelling Britain a nation of binge drinkers and accept that people enjoy going out and getting drunk, said Dr Andrew Bengry-Howell, an expert in young people's behaviour who conducted the research at the University of Bath.
| 
| "A more sensible approach would be to say to people, 'We know you are going to drink to get drunk – so make sure you do not do it very often'," he said, ahead of conference in London this week about young people's health.
|
|
| | http://www.telegraph.co.uk
|
Trackback(0)
 |
Cannabis News 
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
Surely if they changed the text to add cannabis instead of drinking, and used that as the basis of a national drugs policy, the government would be able to "brag" of acting in the best interests of harm reduction, and we would then be able to advise people on the "safest" ways to consume cannabis.
It doesn't have to be smoked lets face it?
But if we were to advise people on how to consume cannabis, that would be incitement in the eyes of the law, which is punishable by prison sentence.
Where's the sense?
RD