By DANCONQUER
Added: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 02:47:10 UTC

Professor David Nutt is a scientist who last year was sacked from his UK governmental advisory position for daring to challenge the cosy orthodoxy as to which drugs are the most/least dangerous.

He has now co-authored a new study being published in The Lancet which makes the eyebrow-raising claim that overall, taking into account harm to both the individual and society, alcohol is the most harmful of all substances; more so even than heroin and crack... While ecstasy (currently a Class-A drug) is rated as only one eighth as harmful as booze! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11660210

I admit to feeling a little bit uncomfortable at the potential implications of this latest research, as I'm sure many evidence-oriented followers of RDF are! But if one accepts that there needs to be some sort of catergorisation/criminalisation of drugs based on harm, then surely it is the scientific evidence which must set the standards.

Why are politicians rigidly wedded to the ridiculously and demonstrably irrational rankings which they currently follow? Is it simply a case of pandering to the tabloid mob mentality, or is something else going on?

TAGGED: --, CHEMISTRY, LAW, POLITICS, SCIENCE