Mephedrone and the Frankenstein syndrome

The demands that mephedrone be banned, following the deaths of two young men after taking it, remind me of last week’s story of Peter Chapman, the rapist who murdered Ashleigh Hall. Both are examples of a Frankenstein syndrome - a disproportionate fear of new technologies relative to old ones.
The thing is, many more young people die from taking alcohol than mephedrone - 5000 a year on one estimate. If we were serious about protecting youngsters from dangerous drugs, we would clamp down more upon alcohol. But we don’t. One reason for this is that alcohol is a known quantity and we have become accustomed to deaths from its misuse. Mephedrone is relatively unknown and unfamiliar, so it is more feared even if it is, objectively, speaking, no more dangerous than other substances.*
Which brings me to a link with Peter Chapman. He has been called the “Facebook killer” because he used Facebook to contact his victim, thus kicking off a panic about the safety of social networking sites.
But, Chapman could equally be called the “Ford Mondeo killer” or the “Murderer who killed because of police incompetence.”
Why bring Facebook into it? Why not have a moral panic about Ford Mondeos?
It’s because Facebook is relatively new and unfamiliar, at least to trash papers’ target audience. So it’s easier to have a moral panic about it than about Ford Mondeos.
Now, if these were just two isolated cases, we could ignore them.
But I fear they might not be. This Frankenstein syndrome is closely related to several other cognitive biases (bias is, I think the right word rather than error).
One is ambiguity aversion; we fear unknown unknowns, such as new drugs, more than risky knowns such as alcohol. Others are loss aversion and the status quo bias: we tolerate existing certain evils much more than potential new ones.
The combined effect of these biases can be pernicious. They can lead to an unwarranted hostility to innovation - how many people have been killed by Frankenstein foods? - an excessive illiberalism** and, perhaps, to undue opposition to radical new policies in general.
* Note that the claim that mephedrone use is widespread is actually evidence of its relative safety - otherwise there would be many more deaths than have been reported.
** It’s claimed that Wainwright and Smith might have taken contaminated mephedrone. It’s unclear that criminalizing the drug would reduce such dangers in future.

Comments

[Phil]

Your footnotes are on the money. Back in 1995 the initial police reaction to the death of Leah Betts was to assume that she'd had a contaminated pill and ask somebody to inform on her supplier ("there's a dealer out there selling poison") - this in itself attests to the fact that ecstasy is known not to kill people, by and large. Of course, what killed her was bad health advice - MDMA has anti-diuretic properties, so drinking large amounts of water after taking it is the last thing you should do, unless you're dehydrated. I've heard horror stories about mephedrone, but there again it's hard to see how restricting the availability of advice on how to take it safely is going to help matters.

[Adrian]

Couldn't have put it better myself. You are spot on mate.

[John Terry's Mum]

Is mephedrone any good?
Worth coming out of drug retirement for?

[Trevor Brown]

this is much a knee-jerk response from the blogging chattering classes as it is from the daily mail readership and other lumpen masses.

but how can it ever change if neither side speak to the other - and they probably never will, but don't we secretly like it that way?

it is cosy feeling superior.....if we really cared about all these issues we would stand for partliament or launch a new political party.....none of us does though.

[Rory]

This is exactly what I was thinking listening to this on radio 4 this morning. As well as myself I know about 20 occasional users of meph, the most worrying side effects I've heard of are a high heart rate - yet the amount of shit I've read about it is ridiculous.

The last party I was at, one girl nearly died from alcohol poisoning and 6 people were throwing up in the bathroom. It's not so much the availability of alcohol that makes it popular among teens, but the fact that it is accepted in our society - kids see their parents drinking and they think it's OK, then the next day they wake up lying in a hospital bed.

Just like you say, people are scared of what they don't know.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/humber/8573051.stm

'Police believe they had been drinking and had also taken the heroin substitute methadone.'

I'm not doubting that mephedrone has the potential to be fatal, but mixing drugs brings a whole new level of danger. My point is people don't see the true dangers of these new substances in comparison to what they consider safe.

BTW John Terry's Mum - mephedrone is pretty fucking good....in moderation.

[Staceinspire.wordpress.com]

I think I love you. In an appropriate way!

It's all scaremongering. You're right that if they really cared about risks to young people then they would do more about Alcohol. They just can't see the irony of it all. Thanks for that estimate too, good one to use.

Trevor you are right too. Now how do I start a new party? I'd like to think that even though I am one of the blogging chattering classes you mentioned I do speak to a lot of different people from all sides of the debates. Fortunately my work allows me to try and get people over to the sensible way of thinking so I do my bit.

[charlieman]

CD: "One reason for this is that alcohol is a known quantity and we have become accustomed to deaths from its misuse."

That doesn't necessarily lead to a logical argument. Most of us drink alcohol provided by controlled authorities. And we understand that (legally) home brewed beer, cider and wine may be a bit rough or it may be gloriously good (even when starting from sober). We also understand that drinking similarly produced spirit is a dumb idea. cf vodka prohibitions in Russia.

We can assume similarly that home brewed anydrug will carry greater risks than legally produced anydrug. Junkies acknowledge this: granny's prescription for diamorphine is more valuable than anything sold on the street. And the health risks are lower.

Is there is an ambiguity aversion when consuming unofficial drugs? Consumers do not know who made it, what is in it or whether it is the same next week. If MDMA consumption sets a pattern, next week's dose of Mephedrone will be cut with some nasty ingredients. Supply and demand also apply.

[Laban]

5,000 a year on one estate ! That's terrible ...

[dskj]

I myself have seen the affects of mephadrone first hand.The feeling you get from drone is addictive and I've seen lots of perfectly smart fun loving people, reduced to dribbling gurning idiots as they start to become reliant on the drug. Over the past few months It seems as if lots of the original mephadrone takers are beginning to wise up, even dealers refusing to touch the stuff themselves. I do personally believe that mephadrone should be banned, yet it would be stupid to think that this would solve the problem entirely. Drugs are always going to be in demand no matter if they are illegal or not, what we need is some form of legal drug which is regulated just like alcohol and cigarettes. This would eliminate the risk of contaminated batches, cutting the number of drug related deaths considerably. A legal, researched, tested and regulated alternative to illegal clubbing drugs would allow teenagers to be educated about the risks of these chemicals(just like alcohol and cigarettes) while removing the taboo around them.

[hair loss treatment]

I've given up on any mainstream party ever coming to their senses.

More and more, I tend to believe the conspiracy theory, that governments are pandering to the UN and big interests such as drug companies and big business.

What other explanation can there be to rejecting logic, time and again?

Or don't you think that the way these media stories spring up and there is a rapid fervour - too many coincidences.

Chris

[RH]

The argument is being peddled that banning the drug would send it underground where criminal elements would push it. Is it no different to the argument about bankers and their bonuses- that they would take to their heels if you ban them. In Europe too this bogey that bankers would go elsewhere is being used to justify big bonuses. Where will they all end up?

[alanm crisps]

They are right about the internet though.

I expect to be killed (and eaten?) by one of you.

[Calum]

mmm, crisps

[Belstaff Blouson moto]

I follow you VIA GFC and I love your blog!