I don't know if this has been posted, but every festival should offer this - Class A drug testing

[mike86]

http://www.efestivals.co.uk/news/16/160725b.shtml

I know this is pretty popular around Europe already, hopefully the government gets on-board. 

[Platt073]

What a good idea, such a high percentage on it, no one really knows what they got.

Shame it's not legalised and tested properly. 

[balti-pie]

Revolutionary idea I have here: how about people actually refrain from doing drugs? 

 

I know, it's leftfield, but damn it might just work 

[arcade fireman]

11 minutes ago, balti-pie said:

Revolutionary idea I have here: how about people actually refrain from doing drugs? 

 

I know, it's leftfield, but damn it might just work 

Yeah true, it's not like those stupid druggies have contributed anything to the contemporary performing arts which are at Glastonbury. 

 

[russycarps]

5 minutes ago, balti-pie said:

Revolutionary idea I have here: how about people actually refrain from doing drugs? 

 

I know, it's leftfield, but damn it might just work 

Presumably you include alcohol, nicotine, caffeine in that statement?

Where do you stand on paracetamol and aspirin?

 

 

 

 

[balti-pie]

*pops fishing rod away*

 

so touchy, these junkies 

[wwinstanley]

There will always be a drug culture at music festivals. Drugs helped create some of the music, and are used when listening to it.

There should be testing facilities at all festivals to ensure those who are taking drugs are doing so in the safest way possible.

 

[eFestivals]

55 minutes ago, russycarps said:

Where do you stand on paracetamol and aspirin?

I think I need smaller feet. Every time I try to find out where they crumble.

Edited July 27, 2016 by eFestivals

[DeanoL]

26 minutes ago, wwinstanley said:

There will always be a drug culture at music festivals. Drugs helped create some of the music, and are used when listening to it.

There should be testing facilities at all festivals to ensure those who are taking drugs are doing so in the safest way possible.

 

Why just festivals though?

I'm pro legalisation of all drugs but less convinced by these half measures - they almost seem like a step away from that and not towards.

[wwinstanley]

3 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Why just festivals though?

I'm pro legalisation of all drugs but less convinced by these half measures - they almost seem like a step away from that and not towards.

I agree, it shouldn't be limited to just festivals, I only mentioned festivals as they were the main topic. 

 

[Muppetmark]

does the Manchester warehouse project still do this?

[stuartbert two hats]

2 hours ago, balti-pie said:

Revolutionary idea I have here: how about people actually refrain from doing drugs? 

 

I know, it's leftfield, but damn it might just work 

Depends on your goal. If the idea is to get battered on high quality drugs, then testing might help, but abstinence would be useless.

[arcade fireman]

49 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Why just festivals though?

I'm pro legalisation of all drugs but less convinced by these half measures - they almost seem like a step away from that and not towards.

Not really. It's a tried and tested way to reduce harm. This will save lives. Festivals and other similar events are notorious as people buy from untrusted sources inside the fence, whereas often those who buy in their home town know people who know people - and generally the dangerous stuff happens less often. 

"Legalisation" of all drugs isn't a black and white thing. IMO you never could - or should - get into a situation where you can buy most recreational drugs like you can a packet of cigarettes or alcohol. As much as morally I agree with the idea of alcohol being a drug too, it is physiologically different to a lot of hard drugs in the fact its got a much more incremental nature to it, that its ill effects are built up through chronic use and acute usage very rarely kills and there are very few underlying conditions where you'd come to serious harm from drinking it in moderation. Most drugs used for non-recreational purposes are prescription so some sort of regulation should be needed for recreational drugs. 

Whereas the way things need to go is legalisation of some drugs with tight regulation/taxation and decriminalisation of possession for others with a heavy emphasis on safe usage measures. This should be done using a strict evidence base of harm. But certainly this strategy is compatible with decriminalisation. 

Edited July 27, 2016 by arcade fireman

[zero000]

2 hours ago, balti-pie said:

Revolutionary idea I have here: how about people actually refrain from doing drugs? 

 

I know, it's leftfield, but damn it might just work 

Well we all know how well abstinence only sex education works right?

[zero000]

33 minutes ago, Muppetmark said:

does the Manchester warehouse project still do this?

They only tested the drugs they seized and reported about any bad batches they found on Twitter. As far as I'm aware this was a much better approach where they tested the safety of the substances so people knew exactly what they were taking.

[Yoghurt on a Stick]

I'm happy that the police and the council agreed to allowing SGP to provide this service via the organisation The Loop. If people are desperate enough to buy drugs within a festival setting then they need to know what it is that they are intending to consume.

[russycarps]

3 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I think I need smaller feet. Every time I try to find out where they crumble.

That was absolutely terrible!

[Quark]

4 minutes ago, russycarps said:

That was absolutely terrible!

But in a good way. A worryingly good way.

[DeanoL]

3 hours ago, arcade fireman said:

Not really. It's a tried and tested way to reduce harm. This will save lives. Festivals and other similar events are notorious as people buy from untrusted sources inside the fence, whereas often those who buy in their home town know people who know people - and generally the dangerous stuff happens less often. 

I'll be honest - my goal isn't to save lives. I'm in the "legalise it all and let them kill themselves if they want" group. If people are correctly educated on the dangers and there's a guarantee that what they're buying is what they say it is, then if some people want to be idiots that's their business.

This sort of thing essentially protects people from something that wouldn't be a problem if you just legalised it all.

[ivan]

1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

I'll be honest - my goal isn't to save lives. I'm in the "legalise it all and let them kill themselves if they want" group. If people are correctly educated on the dangers and there's a guarantee that what they're buying is what they say it is, then if some people want to be idiots that's their business.

This sort of thing essentially protects people from something that wouldn't be a problem if you just legalised it all.

[___S_o_m_a__]

1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

I'll be honest - my goal isn't to save lives.

Nice.

1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

I'm in the "legalise it all and let them kill themselves if they want" group.

Daily Mail readers [if not actual, then in spirit] each and every last one of you.

1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

If people are correctly educated on the dangers and there's a guarantee that what they're buying is what they say it is, then if some people want to be idiots that's their business.

Sometimes the dangers come about directly because of the illegality - unknown dose / contaminated / substituted substances.

1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

This sort of thing essentially protects people from something that wouldn't be a problem if you just legalised it all.

Yes. Exactly. Looking after people is a good thing.

[EasyUserName]

18 hours ago, russycarps said:

 ... Where do you stand on paracetamol and aspirin? ...

Those two are not generally recreational though ...

[frostypaw]

13 hours ago, DeanoL said:

"legalise it all and let them kill themselves if they want"

That's kinda the reason these schemes are such a great idea - people (in the vast majority) don't want to and would much rather just have a good time.

I suspect the vast vast majority of drug related medical problems at festivals (and in general) would evaporate if people could know what they were taking. From knowing to take a smaller amount because it's just very strong, or avoiding something genuinely hazardous to finding out it's something different that takes longer to take effect thus avoiding any dangerous double dropping it's incredibly easy to imagine a lot of situations where this can avoid a horrible outcome

Current measures at most festivals just make the situation worse with a thriving market for dealers who can sell just about anything with no one knowing what they end up with. This is I think trivially obvious and is increasingly honking of intentional fishing for newsworthy incidents - several young people's lives could have been saved this year alone if this service was rolled out at all the big events. We are past the point where the burden of evidence lies with those against this

[Tuna]

16 hours ago, Yoghurt on a Stick said:

I'm happy that the police and the council agreed to allowing SGP to provide this service via the organisation The Loop. If people are desperate enough to buy drugs within a festival setting then they need to know what it is that they are intending to consume.

Yep, my first reaction was 'good on the police for allowing this too'. Steps in the right direction for sure.

[russycarps]

1 hour ago, EasyUserName said:

Those two are not generally recreational though ...

what difference does that make? 

Are you a Puritan?

Perhaps you need reminding what happened to oliver cromwell's corpse? It was dug up, hung by chains from tyburn gallows, and had it's severed head displayed on a pole for 25 years.

That's what people think of the likes of you.