Roar Mikalsen - HUMAN RISING - radiofri..

Dette er marginalt i forhold til dødsraten forbundet med bruk av alkohol og tobakk,
og vi må huske å ta med i regnestykket at en viss prosent av dødsfallene nevnt her er et
resultat av forbudet. James Ostrowski skriver: ”The medical literature affords abundant
evidence that a large number of cocaine-related deaths are traceable to the side effects of
drug prohibition: On the street, [cocaine's] purity is highly variable (up to 95 percent) and
reflects 'cutting' with various sugars, local anesthetics, caffeine, amphetamines, heroin,
phencyclidine, and quinidine. . . . Most of these [77 cocaine] fatalities were due to
nonspecific pulmonary edema believed secondary to either an anaphylactic reaction to
impurities or rapid absorption of the drug. . . . Either cocaine or one of its contaminants
could contribute to [coronary thrombosis]. No cases were encountered where sudden death
occurred following the medical administration of cocaine. Hence, cocaine, in this
presentation, actually refers to the illicit street drug of variable purity and usually diluted
('cut') with mannitol. The preparation may also contain other additives such as procaine,
lidocaine, or amphetamine. The purity of cocaine purchased on the street may vary from
25% to 90%, with unpredictable effects.[T]he relative purity of street cocaine has increased
from about 10% to nearly 35% over the time when these cases [cocaine deaths] were
identified. As with heroin, it appears that adulterants and uncertain potencies play a major
role in cocaine-related deaths, a thesis that is strongly suggested by the sporadic outbreak of
"epidemics" of cocaine-related deaths, such as a 1985 epidemic in Utah.” (James Ostrowski
Thinking about Drug Legalization Policy analysis nr 121 Cato institute. Funnet på
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=981.)
Mange av dagens narkotikadødsfall er derfor snarere en konsekvens av forbudet, enn av de
illegale rusmidlenes iboende kvaliteter. Så hva innebærer det egentlig å være
kokainavhengig, og hva er de reelle farene forbundet med det? Andew Weil forteller: “In
their enthusiasm to fight cocaine (…) crusaders often exaggerate (…) its dangers, at least its
physical toxicity. Both powder and crack cocaine can increase the workload of the heart and
cause irregular heartbeats, but death from cocaine is rare, and the body has a great capacity
to metabolize and eliminate the drug from its system. (…) Occasional snorting of powder
cocaine in social situations is probably not harmful for most people, but everyone should be
aware that the possibility of using this drug to exess is very real, and that excessive cocaine
use can wreck a person’s life. (…) Actually, what drug education should emphazise are the
psychological and social dangers of cocaine.” (Andrew Weil & Winifred Rosen, From
Chocolate to Morphine; Everything You Need to Know About Mind-Altering Drugs (Houghton
Mifflin 2004), s 52.)
Med ”psykologiske og sosiale farer” mener Weil først og fremst avhengighetspotensialet
(han sammenligner å røyke crack som omtrent like avhengighetsskapende som å
røyke sigaretter), og på det faktum at kokainavhengighet har en tendens til å prege
brukerens sosiale og økonomiske liv uheldig. Som han sier videre: ”Cocaine addiction almost
always interferes with social and economic functioning, since addicts often alienate their
408