Prof. David Nutt awarded the John Maddox Prize for Standing up for Science
Prof. David Nutt is a man who needs no introduction. The expert psychiatrist, neuropsychopharmacologist and Chair of the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs (ISCD) was made world famous by former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith who in 2008 fired him from the British Government's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs for providing the British Government and the public with advice about drugs based on science. This wasn't a major setback for the professor, who wasn't on the government payroll and was being flatly ignored by the government anyway, but in the short time that he has been free from interference a lot of good has come from his liberation.
In 2011 I had the pleasure of interviewing Prof. Nutt, we talked about the professor's liberation from the subliminal pressure to give the government the answers they wanted and the freedom of being able to start the ISCD. Only a few months earlier Prof Nutt had published a breakdown of drug harms in The Lancet that turned the government's classification system on its head.
We discussed how that year the new government was already following in the previous government's footsteps; by pushing science out of the ACMD and harming scientific progress by banning chemicals before science had a hope in hell of figuring out whether or not they might even be remotely likely to be useful.
The John Maddox Prize awarded by Nature and Sense About Science for standing up for science demonstrates the support within the scientific community for the man outcast from government for confronting the lack of respect for science within the current system. Yesterday Prof. Nutt described in The Conversation how the situation has worsened, how science has recently been deprived of a great many entire groups of extremely promising new compounds:
"Instead we have the systematic banning of new drugs through the temporary banning orders. We know in the last month they’ve banned a whole series of compounds which were being developed for treatment of Parkinson’s Disease and a new tracer which looks to be the best for measuring serotonin in the brain. And they’ve done that without even knowing that these drugs were being developed for those purposes. They’re just so obsessed with the recreational use of drugs that they miss the science.
MDMA in some people with Parkinson’s Disease does have a very profound beneficial effect, making their abnormal movements better. So groups have been working on finding analogues [new compounds with similar chemical structures] that aren’t illegal so they can be made more easily available to patients – and it was a series of these compounds that have just been banned under a temporary banning order because they fall under a general structural terminology of a benzofuran. So people can’t work on them anymore."
Prof. Nutt goes on to call on the scientific community to defend the work done by scientists that increasingly is being made impossible by the law: "We need scientists to stand up and say let’s do the right kind of science to actually improve health, and let’s make it such that the laws allow the therapeutic potential of drugs like MDMA to be developed."
The professor slams the "continued deluge of misinformation from the Home Office about the relative harm of drugs and how the drug policies are working when they’re not". The situation in the UK remains dire, but Prof. Nutt is still happy to be free from the clutches of the Home Office, "Did it give me a much greater voice in terms of thinking about the science? Probably. Overall it was a net benefit to the scientific field I work in."
If you want free, honest, impartial advice about drugs from experts not politicians, head over to Drugscience.org, the website of the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs. On the bright side, that's not something I could say in 2008. Also check out the Professor's excellent and very readable book: Drugs Without the Hot Air.
Former president of the ACLU Nadine Strossen discusses whether our society should always defend free speech rights, even for groups who would oppose such rights.
- Former ACLU president Nadine Strossen understands that protecting free speech rights isn't always a straightforward proposition.
- In this video, Strossen describes the reasoning behind why the ACLU defended the free speech rights of neo-Nazis in Skokie, Illinois, 1977.
- The opinions expressed in this video do not necessarily reflect the views of the Charles Koch Foundation, which encourages the expression of diverse viewpoints within a culture of civil discourse and mutual respect.
Going back to the moon will give us fresh insights about the creation of our solar system.
- July 2019 marks the 50th anniversary of the moon landing — Apollo 11.
- Today, we have a strong scientific case for returning to the moon: the original rock samples that we took from the moon revolutionized our view of how Earth and the solar system formed. We could now glean even more insights with fresh, nonchemically-altered samples.
- NASA plans to send humans to a crater in the South Pole of the moon because it's safer there, and would allow for better communications with people back on Earth.
Pugs and bulldogs are incredibly trendy, but experts have massive animal welfare concerns about these genetically manipulated breeds.
- Pugs, Frenchies, boxers, shih-tzus and other flat-faced dog breeds have been trending for at least the last decade.
- Higher visibility (usually in a celebrity's handbag), an increase in city living (smaller dogs for smaller homes), and possibly even the fine acting of Frank the Pug in 1997's Men in Black may be the cause.
- These small, specialty pure breeds are seen as the pinnacle of cuteness – they have friendly personalities, endearing odd looks, and are perfect for Stranger Things video montages.
Jokesters and serious Area 51 raiders would be met with military force.
- Facebook joke event to "raid Area 51" has already gained 1,000,000 "going" attendees.
- The U.S. Air Force has issued an official warning to potential "raiders."
- If anyone actually tries to storm an American military base, the use of deadly force is authorized.