Drugs

Self Administering Principles

1) Agency, Volition and Self-Control

if the substances limits or reduces one's ability of autonomy over one's actions, the person needs certain safety measures in place like an adult, sound minded shaman guide/ baby sitter.

some drugs are not worth doing because of this criteria or limitations on certain drugs like alcohol to maintain self-control .

some drugs, like marijuana, can induce schizophrenia in some people so proceed with caution.

2) Toxicity

some drugs can lead one to an overdose and death. It is vitally important one understands the nature of tolerance to substances and overdose limitations. Self-control is essential for awareness of toxicity and subsequent actions are taken safely.

Substance quality control is also essential. Drug testing kits is advisable.

Damage to the organs needs to be taken into account. Prolonged use to certain drugs will cause damage to areas of the body like the liver degrading from alcohol exposure. Meth and heroin affects the nervous system which causes serious withdrawal symptoms.

3) Addictiveness

depending on how addictive a drug is will have an effect on one's well being. Becoming functionally dependent on a substance is not good. Certain drugs, like cocaine, are not good simply because of their high level of addictiveness.

4) Hedonism or Enlightenment

doing drugs for debauchery is not advised. Celebration is important for one's well being. When we observe the reason we decided to do the drug it may be to relax, socialize, get away from something, not think about stress, etc.

if drugs are being used to avoid one's problems, one's problems will only increase through this practice. Using drugs as an escape is not advised. Psychedelics have shown that they can help people with mental illnesses like depression, OCD, anxiety, etc.

There are different ways we can categorize drugs.

Stimulants - cocaine, caffeine

Opiates - heroine, codeine

Methamphetamines

depressants

psychedelics

pharmaceuticals

The Mental Health Benefits of Psychedelics

The media recently discusses how psychedelics like mushrooms are beneficial

for mental health. A recent CTV news article (LaMatte, 2022) discusses how

mushrooms rewire the brain to help depression and anxiety. Is it true that the

psychedelic drugs LSD, psilocybin, MDMA, and ketamine are beneficial for mental

health? After a small 10 article literature review, it is true that these drugs have shown

benefits for mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, obsessive compulsive

disorder, alcoholism, smoking, and do not show any substantial risk of causing mental

health issues.

Daws et. al. (2022) did a double blind randomized controlled trial comparing

psilocybin to the SSRI, Escitalopram, and found that psilocybin was more effective than

the SSRI. (p. 846) The evidence for this was a decrease in brain modularity when under

the influence of psilocybin which was evidence of an increase in global brain network

integration. (p. 848) Psilocybin was able to increase network flexibility in the executive

network which was correlated with improved depressive symptoms. (p. 847)

The issue in depression is the rumination symptoms. Under the influence of

psilocybin, patients report an ‘emotional release’, showing signs of behavioural

optimism, cognitive and psychological flexibility after the psilocybin administration. (p.

849) The executive and salience networks are used in cognitive flexibility when learning

and task switching. The effect of psilocybin to decrease modularity in the default mode

network and increase flexibility is the primary element in its therapeutic effects. (p. 849)

The mushrooms break you away from rigid thinking and allow different parts of the brain

to process and switch to different ways of thinking and emoting.

Anderson et. al., (2019) found that microdosing LSD or psilocybin was beneficial

for depression, anxiety, obsessive compulsive disorder, alcoholism and smoking. (p.

732) This was due to a reduction in dysfunctional attitudes, lower negative emotions, an

increase in wisdom, open-mindedness and creativity. (p. 737) Essentially, the substance

increases understanding of the self and world which grants insight and personal growth.

(p. 733)

Carhart-Harris and Goodwin (2017) looked at the context of treatment resistant

depression and determined that psilocybin is the safest, highest in effectiveness, and easier to administer. (p. 2109) It is also applicable in terminally ill patients who experience existential or spiritual distress in the form of end of life anxiety. (2108)

Lea et. al., (2020) did a study on psilocybin and LSD microdosers and found that

nearly half stopped using pharmaceutical antidepressants (p. 1526) and 79% found that

they perceived a beneficial effect on their mental health. (p. 1527) Microdosing was

essentially a replacement for therapy and medication.

Barrett et. al. (2020) did a study determining that a single high dose of psilocybin

reduced negative moods, increased positive mood and had an effect reducing the

amygdala’s negative affect to stimuli. The anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) monitors

cognitive conflict, appraises and expresses negative emotion and responds to distress

associated to pain and negative social affect. This region of the brain has been linked to

the rumination of negative thoughts in depression. (p. 1) The study found that psilocybin

reduced activity in the amygdala when showed emotionally negative facial expression

and decreased the ACC’s activity during a resting state. (p. 2)

A bottom up reactivity modulated the amygdala’s emotional response to negative

affective facial expressions. (p. 2) There was also a top-down increase in modulation of

the person’s affect through neuroplasticity in higher ordered brain network functions. (p.

2) Working memory, decision making, and emotional regulation were all involved in

reducing symptoms of major depressive disorder seen in processing emotionally

conflicting information. (p. 6)

People also experienced an increase ‘connected to life, ’ meaning-making, and

musical engagement while influenced by psilocybin. (p. 2) There was a reduction in

stress, negative affect, state anxiety, tension, depression, mood disturbance up to 1

week after administration and changes in neural responses to affective stimuli. (p. 2)

Brain connectivity was sustained a week and months after the administration of

psilocybin. (p. 7) It was also found that the personality domains of openness,

extraversion and conscientiousness increased whereas neuroticism decreased. (p. 8)

All of these factors means that the reduction of negative affect disrupts the

ruminative symptoms of depression. There was also an effect on the components of

craving and withdrawal seen in alcoholism and smoking. The positive changes in mood,

attitude and well-being were seen long-term due to the neuroplastic effects of psilocybin

increasing functional connectivity. (p. 8)

David et. al., (2021) contrasted the use of psilocybin to treat major depressive

disorder in contrast to ketamine. This is because psilocybin has lower addiction and

toxicity than ketamine. (p. 482) Psilocybin was 2.5x greater than psychotherapy and 4x

better than pharmacological interventions for depression. (p. 487) There was high

effectiveness and low risk in psilocybin as a treatment for depression.

de Gregorio et. al., (2021) reviewed the effects of psychedelics and found long-term

behavioural outcomes that show subjective changes in perception, thought, emotion and

consciousness. (p. 896) The serotonergic classic psychedelics, LSD, psilocybin, and DMT,

enhance associative learning (p. 892) and show effectiveness for major depressive disorder by increasing certain cognitive functions. (p. 891) LSD increases sensory information processing and an integration of perceptions creates a novel experience of self that reduces rigid and ruminative thinking patterns. (p. 893) The positive effects of LSD have been seen in positive moods after low doses. Psilocybin has been seen to normalize certain negative cognitive biases in people who are depressed. Here, the mushrooms are helping process negative life events which increases emotional processing. (p. 894)

The dissociative anesthetics, ketamine, and entactogens, MDMA, are not the same as

serotonergic psychedelics but have shown to produce benefits through a different mechanism. (p. 891) Ketamine increases synaptic plasticity that increases the brain’s ability to store information and provide itself adaptive responses to environmental stimuli. These effects have been shown to be helpful for people suffering from depression and suicidal thinking. (p. 894) A degree of dissociation that is subanesthetic is reported by people using ketamine but being consciously aware and sensory processing is crucial for the antidepressant effect. (p. 895)

MDMA has been shown to be effective in treating PTSD as it releases the hormones oxytocin, vasopressin and cortisol. Feelings of openness, trust, social connection create an affiliative and prosocial behavioural context when under the influence of MDMA that can dramatically assist in a therapeutic alliance. (p. 895) For those suffering from PTSD, assisting in emotional processing is very helpful in recovering from the trauma. (p. 896)

Jones and Nock (2022) found that lifetime use of MDMA lowered the risk for a major

depressive episode due to increasing empathic feelings, being prosocial, increased mood and helping to process difficult emotions. (p. 57) The first study done using MDMA to treat PTSD found 83% of people had significant recovery from the disorder. (p. 57) Similar findings on lower risk for major depressive episodes were found for lifetime use of psilocybin. (p. 59)

Krebs and Johansen (2013) found that lifetime use of psychedelics, LSD, psilocybin,

mescaline and peyote) do not cause mental health problems but actually show people have a lower rate of mental health problems. (p. 1, 5) Krebs and Johansen (2015) followed up their

previous study and failed to find that psychedelics cause mental health problems. People were less likely to have suicidal plans, thoughts, depression, anxiety, mania, psychosis and do not harm the brain or body. (p. 270-271) On the contrary, psychedelics have been used for over 5700 years and offer very personal and spiritually meaningful experiences that give the user a greater understanding and acceptance of themselves. (p. 270, 276)

The literature review confirms that the answer to the research question, ‘Are

psychedelics beneficial for mental health?’ is true. For all the psychedelics listed, LSD,

psilocybin, ketamine, MDMA, there has been shown an empirical basis for treatment of some

mental health issues. The research supports the claims in the news article that one full dose of psilocybin or microdosing can be beneficial for depression and anxiety. More research is needed on the causal factors and there are some concerns with LSD and ketamine found in the studies reviewed. The reduction of these drugs as Schedule 1 illegal substances will provide scientists the ability to determine more about dosage and the causal mechanisms to determine specific efficacy in the administration and treatment of the disorders discussed above.

Decriminalization

Drugs in society are one of the most attended to issues legally and morally that affect the lives and deaths of a significant amount of people. The decision to make drugs illegal was decided upon in the early 1900s by western countries through a conceptualization of using them as a social problem and deviant. (Cruz 2015) The UN determined that in 2009, 172-250 million people used illegal drugs making use and dependence a major threat to health globally as one of the top ten risk factors. (Felix and Portugal 2016)

The contemporary moral issue of drug use has two predominant sides to it. The abolition or ‘war on drugs’ side makes drugs illegal and criminalizes the possession, use and trade of certain scheduled substances like cocaine, opiates, and meth. The harm reduction side, sees substance use disorder as an illness and best addressed through access to safe drugs, treatment, social programs promoting recovery and the decriminalization of drugs. After looking at the evidence on this issue between a ‘war on drugs’ through criminalization or decriminalizing and a harm reduction approach, the harm reduction approach has much more empirical evidence showing that it is a better method measured by less deaths from overdose, the cost of drugs actually increases, people are given access to safe injection sites and treatment programs. First, we will look at arguments for the criminalization ‘war on drugs’ approach, then discuss the arguments for the harm reduction, decriminalization approach.

The War on Drugs

This attitude and conceptualization was brought forth in the United States during the Nixon and through the Clinton administration to today. Basically, the argument goes that the policies put in place are supposed to reduce the illegal drug trade through reducing production, distribution and consumption of psychoactive drugs. (History.com) There is evidence that many fatalities occur because of overdose so there is an inherent risk to drug use. Deaths from opioid use have been increasing in Canada in the last 10 years being labeled as the opium crisis. (Reinhard 2021) Another reason why the criminalization of drugs has been argued for is because of the direct causal assumption that drugs cause crime and therefore if the drugs were removed the crime would be as well. (Seddon 2000)

Duke (2000) looked at the relationship between crime and drugs by looking at the development of a drug policy program in the UK. Tackling Drugs Together was an initiative in Britain in 1995 that moved away from a harm-reduction policy towards the perspective of drugs in the context of crime, enforcement and punishment. The focus was to address areas of crime, youth and public health with the crime-drug association. They wanted to enforce the drug laws, reduce public fear of drug criminal activity, and the use of drugs in prisons. To this end, the introduction of mandatory drug testing and coercive treatment was implemented in prisons and at different stages of the criminal justice system. (Duke 2000)

The problem was that there was not sufficient evidence that testing without effective treatment plans would deter usage and related crime. The ineffective drug testing methodology spilled to other areas like sniffing dogs in schools or testing in the workplace. The drug-crime causal link was inconclusive for there was some relationship but it was not a necessary condition between the two. (ibid) The drug problem was incorrectly framed as a crime problem instead of focusing on contributing issues of homelessness, poverty and unemployment. (ibid) The drug problem needed to be socialized and defined in terms of health, wellness, and environmental factors within the social structure they were embedded in, instead of criminalization. (Duke 2000)

Felix and Portugal (2016) wanted to determine an argument for the criminalization of drugs, that if they were decriminalized, the price of drugs would go down and increase the usage of drugs. Essentially, the argument is that keeping drugs illegal and a crime makes them more expensive and the high cost will demotivate people from buying and using them. Observing the change in policies in Portugal during their decriminalization policy in 2001, there was no increase in the price of cocaine or opiates after decriminalization. This is a blatant contradiction to the idea that lowering drug laws will decrease costs of drugs but were actually higher after the decriminalization. (Felix and Portugal 2016)

Chambliss (1994, 1995) looked at the effectiveness of the Clinton administration’s War on Drugs and determined that their dismissal of the Surgeon General’s recommendation to look at other countries progress with Decriminalization was mistaken. The War on Drugs was as disaster, not only a failure, because it increased incarceration rates among low level offenders, increased racism, violence and prejudice towards on people of colour, created new types of corruption in terms of federal agents smuggling drugs and taking bribes, disregarded constitutional and human rights in terms of violence and sexual assault, and economic drug dependence where nations have become dependent on the black market trade of illegal drugs. (Chambliss 1995)

Decriminalization and Harm Reduction

Felix and Portugal define decriminalization as the “removal of a conduct or activity from the sphere of criminal law.” (2016) The evidence for decriminalization/ harm reduction is vast and has far more empirical support than the previous ‘war of drugs’ criminalization attitude. Felix and Portugal (2016) found that the Portuguese 2001 decriminalization change in policy “did not lead to higher drug use but did help to reduce the number of drug-related injuries, drug usage, and the criminal justice burden and costs.” (p. 123) They found that the usage levels were lower in Portugal than the European average, lower deaths related to drugs, HIV and AIDS infections, and reduced for at-risk populations. (ibid) Their results were similar to Vicknasingam et. al.’s, (2018) meta-analysis of 57 articles that determined decriminalization did not decrease drug prices and also found there was no effect on age onset of usage.

A safe supply approach was adopted in British Columbia, Canada studied by Reinhard et. al., (2021) in an effort towards the decriminalization movement. Commenting on the success in Portugal, they found that after decriminalization, drug use was the same but there was a reduction in arrests, incarceration, disease, and overdosing. The safe supply approach in BC recommended that PWUD (people who use drugs) seeking nontoxic supply are best provided options to counseling and regular mental health support in a clinic or treatment program. (Ibid) The goal is to prevent overdose by providing safe injection facilities, offering quality treatment programs, and adapting programs to the needs, preferences and expectations for PWUD. (Ibid)

Gehring et. al., (2022) conducted a qualitative study, in Canada, where they interviewed individuals involved in policy directly or indirectly to determine perspectives on harm reduction and drug policies. The main finding was that criminalization was a major factor in the structural vulnerability for PWUD that essentially created more harm by criminalizing poverty for example. The structural issues for PWUD needed to be addressed at the policy level. These issues were poverty, homelessness, trauma, colonization, marginalization, mental illness, medicalization, and institutionalization. They determined that to accurately implement a harm reduction, decriminalization strategy, policies must reflect the structural vulnerabilities of PWUD and a holistic intersectional and intersectoral approach to communicating within government departments.

The United States has recently moved towards decriminalization in the state of Oregon by allowing PWUD to possess small amounts of drugs. (Netherland et. al., 2022) This is a stark contrast to the War on Drugs policies discussed earlier and the success or failure of its implementation hinges on how data is being measured. Netherland et al., (2022) conducted a small sample interview study to determine how PWUD could help in the collection of data and the evaluation of the study. They stress how important it is that people with lived experiences using drugs are part of the research process so that any effectiveness is accurately accounted for in methodology and evaluation of the new harm reduction and decriminalization effort. (ibid)

On the other end of the spectrum, Reider (2021) discusses legalization of drugs from two positions, a rights based and the harm reduction arguments. The rights based position is that people ought to have the right of autonomy of their body and make decisions on their health including ingesting substances. This is a libertarian view that would take priority over an ethical worldview that would focus on public health goals. The harm reduction argument is in the line of legalization, where decriminalizing drugs would remove pressure from unsafe drugs in the black market towards pure, regulated ones. Reider discusses how establishing a safe supply of drugs doesn’t mean that they would be available to the point of creating public health concerns. He argues for some form of harm reduction, prescription safe supply that doesn’t create issues to the public. (Reider 2021)

If it is the case the decriminalization is the better option for social health regarding substance use disorder, Greer et. al., (2022) determined reforming, eligibility and actions towards personal use policies for simple possession. Simple possession was defined as drugs for personal use. Initially, they discuss reform objectives for changing drug policy towards reducing social and health harms, promoting public health and safety, and reducing taxpayer cost. They stress how articulating goals helps with evaluation, accountability and implementation of policies being reformed from criminalization for simple possession. Through decriminalization reform can create effective access to treatment as well as the savings in cost by avoiding imprisonment and utilizing alternative social services. (Greer et. al., 2022)

Eligibility requirements determine populations like minors/adults or history of offense, place like prohibiting indoors or schools, drug criteria like type and threshold quantity for personal use. Actions towards drug detection focuses on non-criminal deterrence options like therapeutic and educational strategies, contexts for enforcement and the role of police discretion, drug confiscation, and how to respond to noncompliance. They ultimately want to focus on the design aspect of reforming decriminalization, depenalization and diversion policies to support the harm reduction approach. (Greer et. al. 2022)

Conclusion

When comparing the two policy approaches towards psychotropic drugs, the War on Drugs model has shown to cause more harm than the decriminalization, harm reduction model. The War on drugs perpetuates racism, violence, fuels the illegal drug economic machine, does not adequately respond to the need for treatment and has no effect on the reduction of drug use. The harm reduction, decriminalization method, has shown to be effective in reducing death by overdose, decreasing unnecessary arrests, incarceration, and imprisonment for nonviolent, drug-related crimes, gives people access to safe injection sites that provide social service treatment programs to assist in recovery from SUD (substance use disorder).

When looking at the evidence comparing the War on Drugs to decriminalization and a harm reduction approach, it is clear that the decriminalization approach is best to be implemented immediately in every country in the world. This political action would greatly increase the wellbeing of marginalized groups, decrease violence and racism to people of colour and allocate taxpayer resources to effective treatment plans for SUD. It is also important how decriminalization policies are reformed to account for structural vulnerabilities.

References: Mental Health Benefits of Psychadelics

Anderson, T., Petranker, R., Rosenbaum, D., Weissman, C. R., Dinh-Williams, L., Hui, K., Hapke, E., & Farb, N. A. S. (2019). Microdosing psychedelics: personality, mental health, and

creativity differences in microdosers. Psychopharmacology, 236(2), 731-740.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-018-5106-2

Barrett, F.S., Doss, M.K., Sepeda, N.D. et al. (2020) Emotions and brain function are altered up to one month after a single high dose of psilocybin. Sci Rep 10, 2214.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-59282-y

Carhart-Harris, R., Goodwin, G. (2017) The Therapeutic Potential of Psychedelic Drugs: Past,

Present, and Future. Neuropsychopharmacol 42, 2105–2113. https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2017.84

Daws, R.E., Timmermann, C., Giribaldi, B. et al. (2022) Increased global integration in the brain after psilocybin therapy for depression. Nat Med 28, 844–851.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01744-z

Davis AK, Barrett FS, May DG, et al. (2021) Effects of Psilocybin-Assisted Therapy on Major

Depressive Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Psychiatry. 78(5):481–489.

doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.3285

de Gregorio, Danilo., Aguilar-Valles, Argel., et. al., (2021) Hallucinogens in Mental Health:

Preclinical and Clinical Studies on LSD, Psilocybin, MDMA, and Ketamine. Journal of

Neuroscience, 41(5) 891-900; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1659-20.

Johansen PØ, Krebs TS. (2015) Psychedelics not linked to mental health problems or suicidal

behavior: a population study. J Psychopharmacol. Mar;29(3):270-9. doi:

10.1177/0269881114568039. Epub 2015 Mar 5. PMID: 25744618.

Jones GM, Nock MK. (2022) Lifetime use of MDMA/ecstasy and psilocybin is associated with

reduced odds of major depressive episodes. J Psychopharmacol. Jan;36(1):57-65. doi:

10.1177/02698811211066714. Epub 2022 Jan 5. PMID: 34983261.

Krebs TS, Johansen PØ. (2013) Psychedelics and mental health: a population study. PLoS One. Aug 19;8(8):e63972. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0063972. PMID: 23976938; PMCID:

PMC3747247.

LaMotte, Sandee. (2022, June 11). How psilocybin, the psychedelic in mushrooms, may rewire the brain to ease depression, anxiety and more. CNN.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/how-psilocybin-the-psychedelic-in-mushrooms-may-re

wire-the-brain-to-ease-depression-anxiety-and-more-1.5942863

Lea, T., Nicole, A., Henrik, J., Henrike, S., Norbert, S., & Klein, M. (2020). Perceived outcomes of psychedelic microdosing as self-managed therapies for mental and substance use

disorders. Psychopharmacology, 237(5), 1521-1532.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-020-05477-0

References: Decriminalizing Drugs

Chambliss, William J. (1995). Another Lost War: The Costs and Consequences of Drug Prohibition. Social Justice, 22(2), 101–124.

Chambliss, William J. (1994) Why the U.S. Government is Not Contributing to the Resolution of the Nation’s Drug Problem. International Journal of Health Services. 24(4), 675-690. doi:10.2190/5LCE-H1XL-HDJ9-YWKW

Cruz, O. S. (2015). Nonproblematic Illegal Drug Use: Drug Use Management Strategies in a Portuguese Sample. Journal of Drug Issues, 45(2), 133–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022042614559842

Duke, Karen. (2006) Out of crime and into treatment?: The criminalization of contemporary drug policy since TacklingDrugsTogether. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 13:5, 409-415, DOI: 10.1080/09687630600613520

Félix, Sónia. Portugal, Pedro. (2016) Drug decriminalization and the price of illicit drugs. International Journal of Drug Policy, 39(2017), 121-129. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2016.10.014. Epub 2016 Dec 9. PMID: 27940068.

Gehring, Nicole D., Speed, Kelsey A., Wild, Cameron T., Pauly, Bernie. Salvalaggio, Ginetta. Hyshka, Elaine. (2022) Policy actor views on structural vulnerability in harm reduction and policymaking for illegal drugs: A qualitative study. International Journal of Drug Policy, 108(103805). doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2022.103805. Epub 2022 Jul 27. PMID: 35907373.

Greer Alissa. Bonn, Matt. Shane, Caitlin. Stevens, Alex. Tousenard, Natasha. Ritter, Alison. (2022) The details of decriminalization: Designing a non-criminal response to the possession of drugs for personal use. International Journal of Drug Policy, 102(103605). doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2022.103605. Epub 2022 Feb 5. PMID: 35131688.

History. (2017, May 31) War on Drugs. History.com. https://www.history.com/topics/crime/the-war-on-drugs

Krausz, Reinhard M., Wong James S.H., Westenberg Jean N., Choi, Fiona., Schütz, Christian G., Jang, Kerry L. (2021) Canada's Response to the Dual Public Health Crises: A Cautionary Tale. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 66(4), 349-353. doi: 10.1177/0706743721993634. Epub 2021 Feb 11. PMID: 33567889; PMCID: PMC8044624.

Netherland J, Kral AH, Ompad DC, Davis CS, Bluthenthal RN, Dasgupta N, Gilbert M, Morgan R, Wheelock H. (2022) Principles and Metrics for Evaluating Oregon's Innovative Drug Decriminalization Measure. J Urban Health. 99(2), 328-331. doi: 10.1007/s11524-022-00606-w. Epub 2022 Feb 2. PMID: 35107693; PMCID: PMC8809225.

Rieder, Travis N. (2021) Ending the War on Drugs Requires Decriminalization. Does It Also Require Legalization? The American Journal of Bioethics, 21(4), 38-41. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2021.1891332. PMID: 33825646.

Seddon, T. (2000). Explaining the Drug–Crime Link: Theoretical, Policy and Research Issues. Journal of Social Policy, 29(1), 95-107. doi:10.1017/S0047279400005833

Vicknasingam, Balasingama; Narayanan, Sureshb; Singh, Darshana; Chawarski, Marekc. (2018) Decriminalization of drug use. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 31(4), 300-305. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0000000000000429

Oops! It's one of those situations again. Apparently, this chapter is still being researched and written. Achilles has been busy coordinating the Community Housing Program and designing the Flow Optimization consulting program. Check back soon for the completion of the first draft of this chapter!

AJ 26.2.18, 27.3.20, 11.3.21

© Achilles Atlas Justice and achillesjustice.com, 2018 - 2021. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Achilles Atlas Justice and achillesjustice.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.