By SHAUNA ANDERSON
If you knew there was a drug out there that was 1000 times stronger than marijuana, would you be concerned? That your teenager might find it easy to obtain. That it was marketed as “safe legal high”. But that, in reality, it can cause psychosis, heart attacks, liver damage, cardiovascular problems and – just recently – the death of a much-loved 19-year old man.
If you knew this drug was around, would you talk to your kids about it? Well, of course you would, but the scary thing is that more than 60% of parents haven’t heard of this drug – and more than 40% of those who have, think it’s safe.
Synthetic cannabis is making headlines around the world after the death of 19-year old Connor Eckhardt, who fell into a coma and died after smoking one hit of a brand called “Spice”. Mamamia reported on the tragic circumstances surrounding his death.
“Connor did not want to die,” his mother said. “Connor very much wanted to live. He had everything to live for.”
Connor’s family have embarked on a crusade to raise awareness of the dangers of synthetic cannabis.
I spoke to Professor Jan Copeland, the Director of the National Cannabis Prevention and Information Centre at UNSW to help answer some questions around this drug.
As the mother of three kids, the first thing she told me sent a jolt though me. Teenagers as young as 13 and 14 are smoking synthetic cannabis – and frighteningly, they think it is safe.
What is synthetic cannabis?
Professor Copeland told me that this stuff is not actually anything to do with what you know as marijuana – the only thing they have in common is that they stimulate the same part of the brain. She says it was never designed for human consumption.
“There are hundreds of these chemicals now, there is at least one coming out every week in Australia.”
What does it look like?
According to Professor Copeland, they will look like colourful foil packages with branding such as room freshener or incense on it. She says it will smell like mild incense. Inside they it have a herbal material with flowers or other bits of colouring in it. It will often be marked “not for human use” or as “research chemicals.”
Synthetic cannabis comes under many brand names such as “Spice”, “Kronic” “ Buzz” “Caution” “K2”. She says it is “so important parents talk to kids so that they are aware if they come across drugs marketed as room fresheners, incense or not for human use then they know they are in fact very risky drugs.”
What is in it?
That’s the problem. Of all drugs, this is the one that experts have trouble with – they have no idea what is in it.
Professor Copeland says that the manufacturers spray chemicals on any herbal material they can find.
“The reason it is so unpredictable and potent is because we not know what chemical is in that particular package. When they spray, it some parts of it get a big dose and other parts of it get very little chemicals. So even two kids sharing the same packet get a very different experience.”
How are teenagers getting it?
Mainly the same way they get other illicit substances, but there are shops that still sell this stuff under the counter as potpourri or incense.
In 2011, the Government started cracking down on it and there is now a catchall legislation that encompasses anything that mimics the effect of cannabis. This means that police can seize it if they have a reasonable suspicion about it. Professor Copeland says it is not supposed to be sold over the counter anymore, but it is.
What harm can it do?
A lot. A few weeks ago two American parents made one of the most heartbreaking statements you could ever read. “This is our son, Connor Reid Eckhardt,” said Veronica Eckhard. “He made the deadly choice to use a product called K2, or spice, and Connor is completely brain-dead… This is not a game, it is totally real, please help us fight his fight.” Connor had smoked “Spice” with a friend and fell into a coma.
Professor Copeland said that these products can lead to psychosis, heart failure, kidney damage and tragically, death.
What should parents do?
Talk to their kids about it. “From a survey we did recently 66% of parents were unaware of what synthetic cannabis was and 40% believed it was actually safer than herbal cannabis.” Professor Copeland said parents are not confident about what to say about it so they don’t initiate conversations around that drug group. She says to try asking: have you heard of it? Do your friends talk about it?
Overall she says, “Parents should say it is not safe, it is not legal and it is not cannabis.”
For more information on synthetic cannabis, see the National Cannabis Prevention and Information Centre – visit here.
Top Comments
There was much hyperbole, scare-mongering and several factual errors in the 60 Minutes report. http://allthingsvice.com/20...
I wonder is the Sex Party/ Eros Association still in favour of keeping these sorts of synthetic drugs legal?
The Sex Party is in favour of evidence informed policy top tackle novel psychoactive substances. We suggest further investigation into the New Zealand model.
The story about the young man has one primary source, a tabloid newspaper from the west coast of the U.S.
It is tragic that this young man died, but the details of his death are scant. I have sent an email to the U.S. coroner to try and get some toxicology but so far have not heard from them. Spice and K2 are two different products and have not been sold in Australia for years. I doubt these brand names are available in the U.S. still. There have been reports from the U.S. of opioid analogues being sprayed onto damiana and sold in a similar way to the 'synthetic cannabis' type substances. In the initial report of Conor's death, it was noted that he had struggled with opiate dependency and had been through rehab recently. The boy was more troubled than this, "One puff and he's brain dead" version that's being conveniently passed around.
Jan from NCPIC should be investigating things she is going to comment on a little more before she does. The reason why substances are still sold over the counter is not because they are illegal and shops are doing the wrong thing - it's because of arbitrary, broad and difficult to enforce laws that aren't worth the paper they're written on. The broad legislation Jan talks about has seen no prosecutions and only exists in several Australian states.
I don't know where the figure of "1000 times stronger" came from, but in my experience with drug reporting, it is probably from the same place a lot of journalists pull their drug facts from - Straight from their bums.
Some of the synthetic cannabinoids will bind with the endocannabinoid receptors more-so than the naturally occurring cannabinoids in cannabis. Some of these may be dangerous and this is exactly why the market needs to be regulated, rather than poor attempts at wide-reaching prohibition. There were over 200,000 synthetic cannabis smokers in Australia last year (NDSHS 2013) and very, very few reported incidents. Most health incidents people have with these products are mild to severe anxiety issues, but few people report this and this is the sort of experience that puts those people off trying them again. Other people report on enjoying them for a variety of reasons, including pain relief and mild enjoyment.
The law can't ban everything that is 'psychoactive' because psychoactivity is one of those strange phenomenas of the human mind that we haven't quite unlocked yet. Many foods and drugs create alterations in consciousness but sometimes, merely the suggestion that something can have a psychoactive effect is enough to create it, even when only placebo is administered.
Luxxe - To answer your question - as one of the policy writers of the Sex Party's drug policies and someone keenly interested and involved with drug law reform and drug culture in Australia - We are for the regulation of all low-risk psychoactive substances. NPS are untested and would not be regulated until testing were complete, under a scheme similar to NZ.
It is not the Sex Party that creates the framework that brings these drugs into existence... it is the supporters of prohibition... those who keep amending drug control Bills with the naive belief that... maybe a little more prohibition will solve everything... it is those people you can blame. ie. Labor and Liberal.
How's that for an answer?
That was the best comment I think I have ever seen on this site. Any chance you could submit a full article explaining your position.
EDITORS. Please give this person some column space.
Thanks John!
I wanted to apologise to Shauna for suggesting she pulls statistics out of her bum. But I still think that "1000 times stronger" is purely hyperbole.
The evidence and data on the topic is quite interesting - Hyperbole is pointless and annoying in the conversation. It takes things off track needlessly.