Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
How well do international drug conventions protect public health?
Turning Point Alcohol & Drug Centre, Centre for Alcohol Policy Research; and Melbourne University, School of Population Health.
2012 (English)In: The Lancet, ISSN 0140-6736, E-ISSN 1474-547X, Vol. 379, no 9810, 84-91 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs in 1961 aimed to eliminate the illicit production and non-medical use of cannabis, cocaine, and opioids, an aim later extended to many pharmaceutical drugs. Over the past 50 years international drug treaties have neither prevented the globalisation of the illicit production and non-medical use of these drugs, nor, outside of developed countries, made these drugs adequately available for medical use. The system has also arguably worsened the human health and wellbeing of drug users by increasing the number of drug users imprisoned, discouraging eff ective countermeasures to the spread of HIV by injecting drug users, and creating an environment conducive to the violation of drug users’ human rights. The international system has belatedly accepted measures to reduce the harm from injecting drug use, but national attempts to reduce penalties for drug use while complying with the treaties have often increased the number of drug users involved with the criminal justice system. The international treaties have also constrained national policy experi mentation because they require nation states to criminalise drug use. The adoption of national policies that are more aligned with the risks of diff erent drugs and the eff ectiveness of controls will require the amendment of existing treaties, the formulation of new treaties, or withdrawal of states from existing treaties and re-accession with reservations.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2012. Vol. 379, no 9810, 84-91 p.
National Category
Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology)
Research subject
Sociology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-85634OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-85634DiVA: diva2:585091
Available from: 2013-01-09 Created: 2013-01-08 Last updated: 2017-12-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Room, Robin
In the same journal
The Lancet
Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 74 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf