Citation

Kalant H. Addiction 2010; 105(7): 1146-1149.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2010, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02830.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Governments currently classify illicit drugs for various purposes: to guide courts in the sentencing of convicted violators of drug control laws, to prioritize targets of prevention measures and to educate the public about relative risks of the various drugs. It has been proposed that classification should be conducted by scientists and drug experts rather than by politicians, so that it will reflect only accurate factual knowledge of drug effects and risks rather than political biases. Although this is an appealing goal, it is inherently impossible because rank‐ordering of the drugs inevitably requires value judgements concerning the different types of harm. Such judgements, even by scientists, depend upon subjective personal criteria and not only upon scientific facts. Moreover, classification that is meant to guide the legal system in controlling dangerous drug use can function only if it is in harmony with the values and sentiments of the public. In some respects, politicians may be better attuned to public attitudes and wishes, and to what policies the public will support, than are scientific experts. The problems inherent in such drug classification are illustrated by the examples of cannabis and of salvinorin A. They raise the question as to whether the classification process really serves any socially beneficial purpose.