Improving community health and safety in Canada through evidence-based policies on illegal drugs

Open Medicine

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 35-40

  Wood, Evan ^a   McKinnon, Moira ^b   Strang, Robert ^b   Kendall, Perry R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANNABIS; STREET DRUG;

CANADA; COMMUNITY CARE; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; PUBLIC HEALTH; REVIEW; SAFETY; STATISTICS;

CANADA; CANNABIS; COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES; EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; PUBLIC HEALTH; SAFETY; STREET DRUGS;

EID: 84859841100     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19112092     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Fischer B, Rehm J, Patra J, Kalousek K, Haydon E, Tyndall M, et al. Crack across Canada: Comparing crack users and crack non-users in a Canadian multi-city cohort of illicit opioid users. Addiction 2006;101(12):1760-1770.
2. Reuter P. Why does research have so little impact on American drug policy? Addiction 2001;96(3):373-376.
3. Wodak A, McLeod L. The role of harm reduction in controlling HIV among injecting drug users. AIDS 2008;22 (Suppl 2):S81-92.
4. Werb D, Rowell G, Guyatt G, Kerr T, Montaner J, Wood E. Effect of drug law enforcement on drug market violence: a systematic review. Int J Drug Policy 2011;22(2):87-94.
5. Office of the Auditor General of Canada. 2001 Report of the Auditor General of Canada. Chapter 11-Illicit drugs: the federal government's role. Available from: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_200112_11_e_11832.html.
6. Fitzpatrick M. Omnibus crime bill hearings underway in Senate. CBC News. 2012 Feb 7. Available from: www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/02/01/pol-senate-committee-crime-bill.html.
7. Beyrer C, Malinowska-Sempruch K, Kamarulzaman A, Kazatchkine M, Sidibe M, Strathdee SA. Time to act: a call for comprehensive responses to HIV in people who use drugs. Lancet 2010;376(9740):551-563.
8. International Centre for Science in Drug Policy. Tools for debate: US federal government data on cannabis prohibition. 2010. Available from: www.icsdp.org/docs/ICSDP-2.pdf (accessed 2010 Dec).
9. Wood E, Tyndall MW, Spittal PM, Li K, Anis AH, Hogg RS, et al. Impact of supply-side policies for control of illicit drugs in the face of the AIDS and overdose epidemics: investigation of a massive heroin seizure. CMAJ 2003;168(2):165-169.
10. Babor T, Caulkins J, Edwards G, Fischer B, Foxcroft D, Humphreys K. et al. Drug policy and the public good. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010.
11. Reuter P. Ten years after the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS): assessing drug problems, policies and reform proposals. Addiction 2009;104(4):510-517.
12. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. World Drug Report 2010. Available from: www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/WDR-2010.html (accessed 2011 May 2).
13. National Center for Natural Products Research (NCNPR), Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences. Quarterly Report, Potency Monitoring Project, Report 107, September 16, 2009 thru December 15, 2009. University (MS): NCNPR, Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, University of Mississippi; 2010. Available from: http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/sourcefiles/UMPMC-quarterlymonitoring-report.pdf
14. Wood E, Montaner JS, Kerr T. Illicit drug addiction, infectious disease spread, and the need for an evidence-based response. Lancet Infect Dis 2008;8(3):142-143.
15. Degenhardt L, Chiu WT, Sampson N, Kessler RC, Anthony JC, Angermeyer M, et al. Toward a global view of alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, and cocaine use: findings from the WHO World Mental Health Surveys. PLoS Med 2008;5(7):e141.
16. Johnston LD, O'Malley PM, Bachman JG, Schulenberg JE. Monitoring the future: national survey results on drug use, 1975-2005. Volume I. Secondary school students (NIH pub. no. 06-5883). Bethesda (MD): National Institute on Drug Abuse. Available from: www.monitoringthefuture.org/pubs.html.
17. The Vienna Declaration. Available from: www.viennadeclaration.com (accessed 2010 Dec).
18. West SL, O'Neal KK. Project D.A.R.E. outcome effectiveness revisited. Am J Public Health 2004;94(6):1027-1029.
19. Werb D, Mills E, DeBeck K, Kerr T, Montaner J, Wood E. The effectiveness of anti-illicit drug public-service announcements: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Epidemiol Community Health 2011; 65(10):834-840.
20. Fishbein M, Hall-Jamieson K, Zimmer E, von Haeften I, Nabi R. Avoiding the boomerang: testing the relative effectiveness of antidrug public service announcements before a national campaign. Am J Public Health 2002;92(2):238-245.
21. United States Government Accountability Office. Contractor's national evaluation did not find that the youth anti-drug media campaign was effective in reducing youth drug use. 2006. Available from: www.gao.gov/new.items/d06818.pdf.
22. WHO, UNODC, UNAIDS. Technical Guide for countries to set targets for universal access to HIV prevention, treatment and care for injecting drug users. 2009. Available from: www.who.int/hiv/pub/idu/OMSTargetSettingGuide.pdf.
23. Oviedo-Joekes E, Brissette S, Marsh DC, Lauzon P, Guh D, Anis A, et al. Diacetylmorphine versus methadone for the treatment of opioid addiction. N Engl J Med 2009;361(8):777-786.
24. Hughes CE, Stevens A. What can we learn from the Portuguese decriminalization of illicit drugs? Br J Criminol 2010;50:999-1022.
25. Marsden J, Eastwood B, Bradbury C, Dale-Perera A, Farrell M, Hammond P, et al. Effectiveness of community treatments for heroin and crack cocaine addiction in England: a prospective, in-treatment cohort study. Lancet 2009;374(9697):1262-1270.
26. The House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security. Mental health and drug and alcohol addiction in the federal correctional system. 2010. Available from: www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=4864852&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=3 (accessed 2011 Jan).
27. Wall R, Rehm J, Fischer B, Brands B, Gilksman L, Stewart J, et al. Social costs of untreated opioid dependence. J Urban Health 2000;77(4):688-722.
28. Strang J, Metrebian N, Lintzeris N, Potts L, Carnwath T, Mayet S, et al. Supervised injectable heroin or injectable methadone versus optimised oral methadone as treatment for chronic heroin addicts in England after persistent failure in orthodox treatment (RIOTT): a randomised trial. Lancet 2010;375(9729):1885-1895.
29. Rehm J, Gschwend P, Steffen T, Gutzwiller F, Dobler-Mikola A, Uchtenhagen A. Feasibility, safety, and efficacy of injectable heroin prescription for refractory opioid addicts: a follow-up study. Lancet 2001;358(9291):1417-1423.
30. National Specialty Society for Community Medicine. Supervised drug consumption sites and InSite program [position statement]. Ottawa: The Society; 2009. Available from: http://nsscm.ca/Resources/Documents/ECAC%20Docs/NSSCMs_Position_on_Supervised_Consumption_Sites.pdf (accessed 2012 Feb 7).
31. Kerr T, Kimber J, Debeck K, Wood E. The role of safer injection facilities in the response to HIV/AIDS among injection drug users. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep 2007;4(4):158-164.
32. Marshall BD, Milloy MJ, Wood E, Montaner JS, Kerr T. Reduction in overdose mortality after the opening of North America's first medically supervised safer injecting facility: a retrospective population-based study. Lancet 2011;377(9775):1429-1437.
33. Kimber J, Dolan K, van Beek I, Hedrich D, Zurhold H. Drug consumption facilities: an update since 2000. Drug Alcohol Rev 2003;22(2):227-233.
34. Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. Mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses: why everyone loses. 2006. Available from: www.aidslaw.ca/publications/interfaces/downloadFile.php?ref=1455 (accessed 2010, Dec).
35. Rethinking America's "War on Drugs" as a public-health issue. Lancet 2001;357(9261):971.
36. Room R. In thinking about cannabis policy, what can be learned from alcohol and tobacco? In: A cannabis reader: global issues and local experiences. Monograph series 8, vol. 1. Lisbon: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction; 2008.
37. Rolles S. After the war on drugs: blueprint for regulation. Bristol (UK): Transform Drug Policy Foundation; 2009. Available from: www.tdpf.org.uk/blueprintdownload.htm
38. Nordt C, Stohler R. Incidence of heroin use in Zurich, Switzerland: a treatment case register analysis. Lancet 2006;367(9525):1830-1834.
39. Reinarman C, Cohen PD, Kaal HL. The limited relevance of drug policy: cannabis in Amsterdam and in San Francisco. Am J Public Health 2004;94(5):836-842.
40. O'Keefe K, Earleywine M, Mirken B. Marijuana use by young people: The impact of state marijuana laws. 2007. Available from: www.mainecommonsense.org/pdf/TeenUseReport_0407.pdf.
41. Canadian Public Health Association. Canadian Public Health Association 2007 Resolutions. Available from: www.cpha.ca/uploads/resolutions/2007_e.pdf (accessed 2010 Dec).
42. Health Officers Council of British Columbia. A public health approach to drug control in Canada. Discussion paper. 2005. Available from: www.cfdp.ca/bchoc.pdf (accessed December 2010).
43. Angus Reid Public Opinion. Half of Canadians support the legalization of marijuana. 2010. Available from: www.angus-reid.com/polls/43593/half-of-canadians-support-the-legalization-of-marijuana/ (accessed 2010 Dec).
44. Nutt DJ, King LA, Phillips LD, Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs. Drug harms in the UK: a multicriteria decision analysis. Lancet 2010;376(9752):1558-1565.
45. Health Canada Drug Strategy and Controlled Substances Programme and Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse. National framework for action to reduce the harms associated with alcohol and other drugs and substances in Canada. First edition. 2005. Available from: www.nationalframework-cadrenational.ca/images/uploads/file/ccsa0113232005_e.pdf (accessed 2010 Dec).