This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to theechidna.com.au
Create a free account to read this article
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The first time I dropped acid the results were almost immediate. As it was pumped through the system, a new clarity emerged. Sunlight sparkled off the impossibly vivid blue expanse before me. Colourful dragonflies skimmed across the water. There was an irresistible urge to leap into the middle of it.
The pool had never looked better.
The dose of hydrochloric acid had been prescribed - along with salt and some extra chlorine - by the good people at the pool centre after testing a sample of water. The regular test is a summer routine, ensuring we won't get sick enjoying a swim. We think nothing of it.
But testing another summer pastime - illicit drugs - seems beyond us, even if the evidence shows it saves lives. Only two jurisdictions in Australia have permanent drug testing services. The ACT has led the way and Queensland has followed, opening its first drug-testing service last month.
Elsewhere, governments trot out tired ideological reasons to oppose pill testing. No drug is safe to use, they say, and pill testing only condones the abuse of illicit substances. But telling young people over and over that they shouldn't use illicit drugs is like shouting at clouds. It gets you nowhere. And it ignores some of the nasties turning up when drugs are tested.
A couple of weeks ago, Nitazene, a synthetic opioid 300 times stronger than heroin, showed up in an ACT drug test. The CanTEST facility which detected the Nitazene immediately issued a red alert, warning of a potential spike in overdose deaths. If similar drug-testing centres operated around the country, and people knew what they were ingesting, the risk of fatal overdoses would be reduced.
Despite calls to adopt pill testing from medical experts like the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, which says it's a no-brainer, most state governments remain resolutely opposed. Not even multiple overdoses at a Melbourne music festival in January managed to budge the Victorian government. Instead, it promised to beef up the police presence at future festivals.
Something will have to give, however, as more synthetic drugs make their way onto the black market.
Synthetic opioids such as Nitazene are particularly concerning. With the Taliban outlawing opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan, synthetics offer an easy but far more dangerous alternative for the drug cartels. A recent spate of overdoses in western Sydney was blamed on Nitazene and in the UK, even black market vapes have been laced with the synthetic opioid. British authorities have linked 180 drug deaths to Nitazene. The alarm has also been sounded in the US, where the trauma of the oxycontin epidemic is still raw.
The governments resisting pill testing are correct when they say people shouldn't use illicit drugs but they're deluded if they think repeating that message it will make one iota of difference. If that were the case, there'd be no drug problem. But there is.
With these new and dangerous drugs being detected, it's past time governments realised that zero-tolerance shouldn't mean zero common sense and that allowing drug users to test the rubbish for which they're paying top dollar might act a better deterrent than simply saying no.
HAVE YOUR SAY: Should all governments allow confidential testing of illicit drugs? Would testing encourage more drug use? Or would it minimise harm by altering users to dangers? Email us: echidna@theechidna.com.au
SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
- Journalist Lisa Wilkinson is seeking Network Ten pay more than $1.8 million to cover her legal bill following Bruce Lehrmann's failed defamation action, a court has revealed.
- Regional property prices have soared to record highs, as Australia's housing crisis continues to hit across the nation. And just three of the 50 non-capital city areas studied by CoreLogic haven't posted a rent increase in the last three months, with 37 of those at record highs.
- Ancient bones found in opal fields have given scientists a first-ever insight into a "civilisation" of echidna and platypus-like creatures that roamed Australia 100 million years ago. The opalised jaws, unearthed in the NSW outback town of Lightning Ridge, date back to when monotremes inhabited the continent, research published on Monday suggests.
THEY SAID IT: "For every prohibition you create, you also create an underground." - Jello Biafra
YOU SAID IT: We've been hearing about it for decades - often from Anthony Albanese in the lead-up to elections - but very fast rail seems to get nowhere.
"I worked in the privately funded VFT Joint Venture in 1987 with Dr Paul Wild and Dr John Nicholson," writes Mal. "The magic formula for financial viability of a very fast train is a minimum 1000km distance between end points to exploit the train's ability to sustain its top speed; end points each of about three million people to assure patronage; a travel time no greater than three hours, being the psychological difference between a passenger choosing a train seat ahead of a plane seat; a moderate fare of about $150; and a dedicated track with minimum radius curves of 7km and maximum grade 3.5%. The proposed VFT service would have 30 trains per day in each direction, with the non-stop service departing each end at 6am offering travel times of one hour from Sydney to Canberra, and two hours from Canberra to Melbourne. Bob Hawke had cold feet then, as Albo seems to be having now."
Nigel writes: "Spot on, John. Fast rail, other public transport and proper road maintenance would be a much better investment than nuclear powered subs which are a crazy idea on so many levels - too costly, probably not fit for purpose, counter-productive for our security, unresolved nuclear waste issue etc. Agree, too, that we need to wean ourselves off big cars/utes (and oversized houses)."
"Ah, the ute problem; problem it is," writes Tony. "Pouring out noxious gases and breaking up our fragile roads. My wife and I went to Sydney on the train a few years ago - it was still the old Southern Cross which ought to have been in a museum years ago. You are right, we'll get nuclear submarines which we don't want or need long before high-speed rail, which we do. Melbourne to Sydney on high-speed rail would conceivably beat the airlines or come close to doing so because there would be little or no security issues and both ends the stations are in the cities. London to Paris is like that and the trip is oh so comfortable. If only."
Lai writes: "Governments of both stripes hate trains. There's no fuel levies to be ripped from us. One train can move more freight than about 150 odd trucks. Big business, to whom governments are obliged at all times, hate trains too. Not so many dealerships, not so many tyres sold, not so many imports to monopolise, the list goes on."
"I live in Braidwood, halfway between Canberra and the coast," writes Sandra. "We suffer really badly in our small town, with large trucks transporting everything through our main street, including fumes, dust and vibrations. Then the blue platers (ACT drivers) heading to their empty house down the coast every weekend. And don't get me started on the large yank tanks pulling the huge caravans or boats. They looked at putting in a bypass 50-odd years ago and now it is over 50 years harder. All that heavy transport should be on rail, and fast rail should be standard in our vast country, imagine what stress that would take off our sad road situation."
Greg from Armidale writes: "Nuclear subs or high-speed rail? Any rail up this way would be welcome."
"A no-brainer," writes John. "Definitely high-speed rail over AUKUS. However, I think your last paragraph sums up why we'll never have high-speed rail in this country - can't have Qantas losing its market dominance of the east coast travel routes."