Pubdate: Sat, 07 Mar 2015
Source: Independent  (UK)
Copyright: 2015 Independent Newspapers (UK) Ltd.
Contact:  http://www.independent.co.uk/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/209
Author: Janet Street-Porter

THE 'WAR ON DRUGS' CONSISTENTLY IGNORES ITS GREATEST ENEMY: 
OVER-THE-COUNTER PAINKILLERS

Isn't it about time we acknowledged that 99 per cent of us take 
drugs? It's just that some are legal and therefore "acceptable". But 
if all drugs were defined by the harm they can cause, then the 
current rankings and legal penalties would be pointless.

Dealing with the long-term effects of alcohol and tobacco costs the 
NHS far more than dealing with those addicted to class-A drugs. Apart 
from liver disease and heart failure, alcohol abuse causes death on 
the road, domestic violence, murders and absenteeism from work. Not 
to mention the damage to family life and relationships. Can we put on 
a price on all of this and be sure it's less than the cost of illegal drug use?

The Lib Dems have made a brave attempt to define a sensible drug 
policy, proposing that anyone possessing illegal substances for 
personal use should not be prosecuted. It's hardly rocket science. 
The "war on drugs" will never be won, no matter how many penalties are imposed.

The Home Office published a report last October concluding that tough 
laws have little effect. In countries such as Portugal where it's not 
an offence to own a small amount of drugs for personal use, the 
number of users hasn't increased. In short, legislation makes no 
difference to personal choice.

There will always be more or less the same number of people who want 
to try drugs. Over the years I've dabbled. Back in the 1960s, I 
planned to put dope in my wedding cake, but the dealer didn't show up 
and the cake was clean. Nevertheless, the police raided my flat, 
impounded my cake and submitted it to forensic testing. A few months 
later they returned, and I was charged with possessing a small amount 
of hash and fined UKP10. It wasn't my hash and it wasn't there 
earlier in the day, but I didn't contest the case because I wanted to 
minimise bad publicity.

Over the years, I have taken mescaline (once) and MDMA (ecstasy) half 
a dozen times. I've had fun, but it's risky. You never know the 
quality of any drug, which is why they should be legalised, sold in 
government-controlled shops and produced to safe standards. Cannabis 
as the Lib Dems have proposed  should be available on prescription 
for medical reasons.

Now the Government wants to crack down on legal highs. More than 350 
different substances were reported in 2013, and there are at least 
250 head shops in the UK and God knows how many online. Some councils 
are talking of closing them down. Banning these substances will just 
encourage a black market, or result in users switching to illegal 
drugs, booze or prescription painkillers.

Which brings me to another huge drug problem, one the Government 
seems reluctant to acknowledge  the rampant misuse of 
over-the-counter painkillers. Does it think limiting the sale of 
Nurofen Plus and other pills containing codeine (which the liver 
converts to morphine) to 32 tablets at a time stops long-term abuse 
and addiction?

I know plenty of people  alcoholics, for example  who need the buzz 
from high doses of codeine. A US study found that half of the people 
who took codeine-based medication for three months were still taking 
it five years later. Another study concluded that, over time, codeine 
becomes less effective and actually increases sensitivity to pain. So 
you are taking it only for the high.

More than 32,000 people are addicted to codeine in the UK  another 
cost for the NHS to mop up. In the US, legal painkillers cause more 
deaths than guns or car accidents. And a new study says that 
paracetamol can double the likelihood of an early death if taken 
daily over a long period of time.

There are plenty of paracetamol addicts, and the drug can cause 
stomach bleeds and ulcers if misused. You'll never find an honest 
politician who says they took recreational drugs and it was fun. I 
just can't be a hypocrite. I am not an addict and I haven't taken any 
drugs for a long time now. But I don't want the nanny state to decide 
that some are "safer" for us than others. Anyway, if the Government 
legalised dope, think of the money it'd make in tax.

Beauty and the beast in one fashion package

The hype surrounding the V&A's Alexander McQueen exhibition opening 
next week grows. A preview on Radio 4's Front Row was a sycophantic 
chat with stylist Katy England and photographer Nick Knight. This is 
the second show devoted to Lee's work; I loved the exhibition Daphne 
Guinness curated at Somerset House. Will anyone have the guts to say 
that these clothes might be sculptural but some are unwearable and even ugly?

Andrew Wilson's new biography of McQueen is a sensitive portrait of a 
very difficult character. After reading it I had nightmares for 
several days. It reminded me of all the chaos, the tantrums and the 
madness of the fashion business which I worked in for years.

He made me a boldly striped suit for the opening of Elton John's Aida 
in New York. As I arrived, Elton's mother said in a very loud voice, 
"What's Janet come as, a fucking deck chair?" I never wore it again. 
Lee gave me a wonderful long leather coat with a train, which I wore 
to a party at the Tate. I fell over on the way in (always a risk with 
his creations) and then an elderly posh bloke in pinstripes begged me 
to go back to his flat and perform unspeakable things for him.

A welcome addition to the dominatrix's wardrobe

Forget Fifty Shades of Grey: the most erotic (and touching) new film 
about sex is the intriguingly named The Duke of Burgundy, by British 
director Peter Strickland. In a crumbling grand house somewhere in 
Eastern Europe, two women act out their S&M fantasies in a series of 
bizarre rituals. It has a cracking soundtrack I couldn't forget (by 
Cat's Eyes), and moments of pure genius, as well as gentle comedy.

Afterwards, I realised there hadn't been a single man in the movie, 
and it's not often you can say that. It stars Sidse Babett Knudsen, 
of Borgen fame, as a middle-aged dominatrix who rebels by donning 
pyjamas because they are "comfortable". I know where she's coming from.

Empower the young, not middle-class gender worthies

All week London's South Bank centre has been hosting Wow, celebrating 
what it is to be a woman in 2015, with live broadcasts, mass 
mentoring sessions, uplifting speeches and comedy nights. Men get 
their own gig in November, at Bam (Being a Man).

I'm not a curmudgeon, but both reek of middle-class worthiness. I'd 
rather money was spent on "empowering" events for young people all 
around the country  in Rochdale and Rotherham, for example, where 
recent court cases indicate that some sections of the population 
desperately need support and encouragement to achieve their dreams 
and understand what is appropriate behaviour.

Paloma puts her faith in rock'n'roll politics

Singer Paloma Faith has decided that fans coming to see her on tour 
should get the benefit of some political rabble-rousing. She's hired 
lefty columnist Owen Jones, once of this parish, to come on stage as 
the warm-up act. He says she's worried that her fans might be seduced 
by Ukip or, even worse, not bother to vote after Russell Brand told 
them it was pointless.

I've got my doubts about Owen's chances of success. I hope he's 
polishing his put-downs for hecklers.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom