Across the spectrum of legality: The market activities of influencers specialized in steroids and other performance and image enhancing drugs.

BACKGROUND: Like many other goods and services, performance and image enhancing drugs (PIEDs), and particularly androgenic anabolic steroids (AAS), are increasingly discussed and promoted by social media influencers. Little, however, is known about the influencers specialized in PIEDs and which drugs and services they promote and sell. AIMS: Against this background, the study has been intended to identify prominent influencers specialized in PIEDs, examine the market activities they engage in, and assess the latter's legality. METHODS: We first searched the clean internet to identify prominent PIED influencers. Second, we conducted a six-month-long, non-reactive digital ethnography of the social media accounts of 20 influencers and, via a content analysis, identified the market activities they engage in. Third, we assessed the latter's legality, primarily using the EU legislation as a benchmark. FINDINGS: The selected influencers are all current or former bodybuilders, predominantly male and from the United States. Many of them have developed a considerable number of followers, in three cases exceeding one million. They engage in various market activities that span the whole spectrum of legality, from legal to illegal, with many activities having an uncertain, but often dubious, legal status. CONCLUSIONS: Though they may promote harm reduction for some users, PIED influencers also promote the public acceptance of PIED use beyond the bodybuilding community and enhance access to PIEDs for millions of people. Multifaceted policy interventions are required, aiming at preventing influencers from becoming a major source of information on, and route of access to, PIEDs.

Monitoring quality and coverage of harm reduction services for people who use drugs: a consensus study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite advances in our knowledge of effective services for people who use drugs over the last decades globally, coverage remains poor in most countries, while quality is often unknown. This paper aims to discuss the historical development of successful epidemiological indicators and to present a framework for extending them with additional indicators of coverage and quality of harm reduction services, for monitoring and evaluation at international, national or subnational levels. The ultimate aim is to improve these services in order to reduce health and social problems among people who use drugs, such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, crime and legal problems, overdose (death) and other morbidity and mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: The framework was developed collaboratively using consensus methods involving nominal group meetings, review of existing quality standards, repeated email commenting rounds and qualitative analysis of opinions/experiences from a broad range of professionals/experts, including members of civil society and organisations representing people who use drugs. Twelve priority candidate indicators are proposed for opioid agonist therapy (OAT), needle and syringe programmes (NSP) and generic cross-cutting aspects of harm reduction (and potentially other drug) services. Under the specific OAT indicators, priority indicators included 'coverage', 'waiting list time', 'dosage' and 'availability in prisons'. For the specific NSP indicators, the priority indicators included 'coverage', 'number of needles/syringes distributed/collected', 'provision of other drug use paraphernalia' and 'availability in prisons'. Among the generic or cross-cutting indicators the priority indicators were 'infectious diseases counselling and care', 'take away naloxone', 'information on safe use/sex' and 'condoms'. We discuss conditions for the successful development of the suggested indicators and constraints (e.g. funding, ideology). We propose conducting a pilot study to test the feasibility and applicability of the proposed indicators before their scaling up and routine implementation, to evaluate their effectiveness in comparing service coverage and quality across countries. CONCLUSIONS: The establishment of an improved set of validated and internationally agreed upon best practice indicators for monitoring harm reduction service will provide a structural basis for public health and epidemiological studies and support evidence and human rights-based health policies, services and interventions.

Research as due diligence: What can supply-side interventions accomplish and at what cost?

Supply-side interventions, which we define as laws, regulations, enforcement activities, and other measures that extend from drug production to dealing, feature prominently in drug policy and related expenditures internationally, but have undergone relatively little rigorous, empirical evaluation. We argue for filling the knowledge gap and highlight three areas of particular concern: first, the policy community knows less than it should about the efficacy of supply-side interventions; second, it lacks sufficient understanding of the scope, magnitude, and practical implications of adverse consequences that accompany such interventions; third, it lacks tools to gauge the balance of benefits and costs, both monetary and non-monetary. Our interest has been in developing a harm-based approach to address these concerns and we put forward a "harm assessment framework" for that purpose.

Assessing the harms of cannabis cultivation in Belgium.

BACKGROUND: Since the 1990s, a shift from the importation of foreign cannabis to domestic cultivation has taken place in Belgium, as it has in many other countries. This shift has prompted Belgian policy-making bodies to prioritize the repression of cannabis cultivation. Against this background, the article aims to systematically map and assess for the first time ever the harms associated with cannabis cultivation, covering the whole spectrum of growers. METHODS: This study is based on a web survey primarily targeting small-scale growers (N=1293) and on three interconnected sets of qualitative data on large-scale growers and traffickers (34 closed criminal proceedings, interviews with 32 criminal justice experts, and with 17 large-scale cannabis growers and three traffickers). The study relied on Greenfield and Paoli's (2013) harm assessment framework to identify the harms associated with cannabis cultivation and to assess the incidence, severity and causes of such harms. RESULTS: Cannabis cultivation has become endemic in Belgium. Despite that, it generates, for Belgium, limited harms of medium-low or medium priority. Large-scale growers tend to produce more harms than the small-scale ones. Virtually all the harms associated with cannabis cultivation are the result of the current criminalizing policies. CONCLUSIONS: Given the spread of cannabis cultivation and Belgium's position in Europe, reducing the supply of cannabis does not appear to be a realistic policy objective. Given the limited harms generated, there is scarce scientific justification to prioritize cannabis cultivation in Belgian law enforcement strategies. As most harms are generated by large-scale growers, it is this category of cultivator, if any, which should be the focus of law enforcement repression. Given the policy origin of most harms, policy-makers should seek to develop policies likely to reduce such harms. At the same time, further research is needed to comparatively assess the harms associated with cannabis cultivation (and trafficking) with those arising from use.

Change is possible: the history of the international drug control regime and implications for future policymaking.

The article, based upon an extensive literature review, reconstructs and analyzes the parallel evolution of the international drug control regime and the world opiate market, assessing the impact of the former on the latter until the rise of present-day mass markets. It shows that, since its inception, the regime has focused almost entirely on matters of supply. However, that focus has not always meant "prohibition"; until 1961, the key principle of the regime was "regulation." Given the different forms drug control policy has taken in the past, the authors conclude it may be amenable to new forms in the future.

If supply-oriented drug policy is broken, can harm reduction help fix it? Melding disciplines and methods to advance international drug-control policy.

Critics of the international drug-control regime contend that supply-oriented policy interventions are not just ineffective, but, in focusing almost exclusively on supply reduction, they also produce unintended adverse consequences. Evidence from the world heroin market supports their claims. The balance of the effects of policy is yet unknown, but the prospect of adverse consequences underlies a central paradox of contemporary supply-oriented policy. In this paper, we evaluate whether harm reduction, a subject of intense debate in the demand-oriented drug-policy community, can provide a unifying foundation for supply-oriented drug policy and speak more directly to policy goals. Our analysis rests on an extensive review of the literature on harm reduction and draws insight from other policy communities' disciplines and methods. First, we explore the paradoxes of supply-oriented policy that initially motivated our interest in harm reduction; second, we consider the conceptual and technical challenges that have contributed to the debate on harm reduction and assess their relevance to a supply-oriented application; third, we examine responses to those challenges, i.e., various tools (taxonomies, models, and measurement strategies), that can be used to identify, categorize, and assess harms. Despite substantial conceptual and technical challenges, we find that harm reduction can provide a basis for assessing the net consequences of supply-oriented drug policy, choosing more rigorously amongst policy options, and identifying new options. In addition, we outline a practical path forward for assessing harms and policy options. On the basis of our analysis, we suggest pursuing a harm-based approach and making a clearer distinction between supply-oriented and supply-reduction policy.

The global diversion of pharmaceutical drugs. India: the third largest illicit opium producer?

AIMS: This paper explores India's role in the world illicit opiate market, particularly its role as a producer. India, a major illicit opiate consumer, is also the sole licensed exporter of raw opium: this unique status may be enabling substantial diversion to the illicit market. METHODS: Participant observation and interviews were carried out at eight different sites. Information was also drawn from all standard secondary sources and the analysis of about 180 drug-related criminal proceedings reviewed by Indian High Courts and the Supreme Court from 1985 to 2001. FINDINGS: Diversion from licit opium production takes place on such a large scale that India may be the third largest illicit opium producer after Afghanistan and Burma. With the possible exceptions of 2005 and 2006, 200-300 tons of India's opium may be diverted yearly. After estimating India's opiate consumption on the basis of UN-reported prevalence estimates, we find that diversion from licit production might have satisfied a quarter to more than a third of India's illicit opiate demand to 2004. CONCLUSIONS: India is not only among the world's largest consumer of illicit opiates but also one of the largest illicit opium producers. In contrast to all other illicit producers, India owes the latter distinction not to blatantly illicit cultivation but to diversion from licit cultivation. India's experience suggests the difficulty of preventing substantial leakage, even in a relatively well-governed nation.

What does it mean to decriminalize marijuana? A cross-national empirical examination.

Although frequently discussed as a singular policy, there is tremendous variation in the laws and regulations surrounding so-called decriminalization policies adopted by Western countries, with many jurisdictions adopting depenalization policies rather than policies that actually change the criminal status of cannabis possession offences. This paper provides a discussion of the liberalization policies being adopted in Western countries, highlighting distinct elements about particular policies that are important for proper analysis and interpretation of the policies. It then discusses some of the environmental factors that also shape these policies, and hence influence their potential impact, using data from the U.S.A. as a particular example. The results clearly show that researchers should be careful conducting intra- or international comparisons of policies because important aspects of these policies are frequently ignored.