Grupo de trabalho sobre direitos humanos

O grupo concluiu que a atual política internacional de drogas, que enfatiza a “necessidade de programas de erradicação e medidas de repressão ao cultivo, à produção, à fabricação e ao tráfico ilícitos” de diversas substâncias, não tem garantido e nem promovido o respeito universal aos direitos e liberdades fundamentais do homem sob diversos aspectos:

1.    Fere o artigo XVIII  da Declaração Universal dos Direitos Humanos, pois ameaça direitos e liberdades de toda população/comunidade, na medida em que todos são afetados pela violência decorrente do mercado ilícito que, inexoravelmente, se constrói ao redor da proibição dessas substâncias.

2.    Fere o artigo XII , na medida em que interfere na vida privada dos usuários de drogas, no direito de disporem de seu corpo e de sua consciência, sendo incriminados e perseguidos por isso. Exemplos: criminalização do porte de drogas; utilização compulsória de exames toxicológicos em diversos contextos (profissional, esportivo, clínico, escolar e familiar); discriminação, exclusão e exposição pública; abstinência como única meta possível e adequada de tratamento.

3.    Fere os artigos II , VII  e IX , pois promove perseguição e homicídio sistemáticos de populações mais pobres e/ou vulneráveis, notadamente nos países em desenvolvimento, principais vítimas da guerra entre criminosos, do abuso e da corrupção policial.

4.    Fere os direitos de pacientes de diversas moléstias que poderiam se beneficiar, imediatamente ou no futuro, da prescrição de diversas substâncias cuja eficácia terapêutica tem sido cada vez mais demonstrada.

(* ver artigos na íntegra no final)

Diante desse quadro, sugerimos as seguintes orientações para uma política justa e realista sobre drogas:

A.    Não criminalização e regulamentação do cultivo, produção, fabricação, comércio e consumo de drogas.

B.    Aumento dos investimentos em pesquisas e produção de conhecimento científico sobre drogas.

C.    Incremento de políticas educativas e informativas sobre efeitos e danos possíveis das substâncias, tipos e locais de tratamento, transtornos mentais associados, etc. As informações devem: tratar igualmente todas as substâncias; ser isentas de preconceito; ser de fácil acesso e entendimento, ser o mais completa possível, contemplando todos os assuntos relacionados e os diversos pontos de vista.

D.    Incremento dos serviços de tratamento e de redução de danos para o uso abusivo/dependente de todas as substâncias (lícitas e ilícitas) e investimento na formação, capacitação, reconhecimento e valorização dos profissionais de saúde pública envolvidos.

E.    Apoio e orientação aos diversos movimentos sociais para que haja um maior envolvimento dos mesmos.

Os recursos financeiros para os itens B, C, D e E poderão ter como fonte os gigantescos gastos destinados à repressão da oferta e da demanda que, até hoje, tem se mostrado ineficaz e servido para gerar violência e corrupção.

Por fim, ressaltamos que a elaboração das políticas de drogas não seja pautada em concepções morais e religiosas.

Grupo de Trabalho Redução de Danos

Resolução I :
Reivindicamos a inclusão, de forma explícita e clara, da Redução de Danos como Política Oficial das Organizações das Nações Unidas, passando a figurar expressamente em todas os documentos (convenções, tratados, resoluções, normas e recomendações) oficiais ;

Da mesma forma, reconhecendo a multidisciplinariedade do tema, reivindicamos que o paradigma ideológico que norteia as ações de redução de danos sejam reconhecidos e estimulada a sua consideração na formulação de políticas públicas no âmbito de outras áreas, para além da saúde pública, como, apenas a título de exemplo e não exclusivamente, a Política de Segurança Pública, Política Criminal, Política de Educação, Política Penitenciária e, notadamente, a  Política de Direitos Humanos.

Resolução II :

Reivindicamos que seja garantido o direito à informação e liberdade de manifestação do pensamento através de financiamento de campanhas de divulgação e informação sobre Redução de Danos e programas de capacitação para os agentes públicos envolvidos nas ações de redução de danos efetivamente implantadas pelos Estados  membros.

Resolução III :

Reivindicamos que seja garantido o protagonismo das pessoas que usam álcool e outras drogas, dos agentes de saúde comunitários  - redutores de danos – e do movimento social  na construção coletiva e paritária de políticas públicas para as questões relacionadas à Política Mundial sobre Drogas.

Resolução IV :

Reivindicamos a adoção dos paradigmas ideológicos da Política de Redução de Danos na formulação de estratégias e ações políticas relacionadas a todas as drogas e não somente àquelas administradas pela via endovenosa e associadas à epidemia HIV/Aids e hepatites virais.

Resolução V :

Reivindicamos o expresso apoio e o fomento à pesquisa que garanta a produção científica no campo da Política de Redução de Danos, com a criação e incremento de linhas de crédito e financiamento específicos e expressamente destinadas ao desenvolvimento das áreas de conhecimento envolvidas com a Política de Redução de Danos.

Da mesma forma, reconhecendo a diversidade de objetivos válidos numa política sobre drogas, reivindicamos a adoção de processos de avaliação de projetos que tenham como meta a redução de danos relacionados ao uso de álcool e outras drogas e não, apenas e tão somente, a abstinência e o não uso de drogas.

Inidacação de Moçâo:

Além das resoluções aprovadas o Grupo de Trabalho 1 – Redução de Danos – indica para a plenária desse encontro a aprovação de MOÇÃO DE APOIO à aprovação do Projeto de Lei Federal nº 1.692/2007, que dispõe sobre as atividades de Redução de Danos entre usuários de drogas, visando a prevenir a transmissão de doenças,  de autoria da Deputada Cida Diogo, cujo processo legislativo encontra-se tramitando pela Câmara Federal, estando presentemente aguardando parecer da Comissão de Finanças e Tributação, relator Deputado Pepe Vargas.

Grupo de trabalho sobre HIV/AIDS

Será apresentado em breve.

___

(*)

Artigo XVIII - Toda pessoa tem direito a uma ordem social e internacional em que os direitos e  liberdades estabelecidos na presente Declaração possam ser plenamente realizados.

Artigo XII - Ninguém será sujeito a interferências na sua vida privada, na sua família, no seu lar ou na sua correspondência, nem a ataques à sua honra e reputação. Toda pessoa tem direito à proteção da lei contra tais interferências ou ataques.

Artigo II - Toda pessoa tem capacidade para gozar os direitos e as liberdades estabelecidos nesta Declaração, sem distinção de qualquer espécie, seja de raça, cor, sexo, língua,  religião, opinião política ou de outra natureza, origem nacional ou social, riqueza, nascimento, ou qualquer outra condição.

Artigo VII - Todos são iguais perante a lei e têm direito, sem qualquer distinção, a igual proteção da lei. Todos têm direito a igual proteção contra qualquer discriminação que viole a presente Declaração e contra qualquer incitamento a tal discriminação.

Artigo IX - Ninguém será arbitrariamente preso, detido ou exilado.

Dec 18th 2008
From The Economist print edition
Ecstasy may be good for those who can’t get over something truly horrible

Craig Ward

“I’VE been shot in the leg. I’ve been beat up. But that’s pretty minor,” says a 41-year-old American security contractor who spent four years in Iraq. “But when you get a vehicle blown out from under you and ambushed by six or eight al-Qaedas, it does tend to affect one a little bit.”

With a broken back, two broken feet and neurological damage, the man, who asked that his name not be used, spent the next three months in hospitals in Iraq, Germany and America. But though he was physically on the mend by the start of this year, he found himself incapacitated. “I was having nightmares right off the bat,” he recalls. “I couldn’t do anything. Mostly, I’d just retreat to a room and not leave.”

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD, is the persistence of debilitating psychological symptoms. It can include flashbacks and nightmares, increased arousal in the form of insomnia, anger and an inability to concentrate, and impaired personal relationships. Although lasting psychological damage from horrific experiences has been recognised since time immemorial, it is only since 1980, when veterans were still experiencing stress from the Vietnam war, that PTSD has been a formal psychiatric diagnosis.

By 2005 72,000 American veterans were receiving disability payments for PTSD. A study two years later estimated that 12% of American veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from PTSD. Thus far, 1.8m Americans have been deployed in those two theatres, implying 216,000 eventual cases.

Yet most PTSD sufferers are not drawn from the ranks of those for whom trauma is an occupational hazard: 5% of American men suffer from PTSD at some period in their lives. For American women, the rate is double that, mostly from exposure to such crimes as domestic violence and sexual abuse. Two in five rape victims are diagnosable with PTSD six months after the attack. “It can go on for ever”, says Kathleen Brady, a professor of psychiatry at the Medical University of South Carolina who studies the disorder, “but even after 30 years, PTSD is treatable.”

Treatment usually includes drugs and antidepressants such as Zoloft, sometimes combined with psychotherapy. “There is a lot of evidence supporting exposure-based therapy”, says Dr Brady, “which means re-living the events in a safe setting so patients can separate the inappropriate effect from the trauma.” Yet in at least a quarter of cases chronic PTSD is resistant to all treatment.

Gail Westerfield, a writer who lives in South Carolina, was sexually abused by a neighbour when she was a child, and later raped by an acquaintance when a university student. She suffered a range of symptoms including memory problems, bouts of depression, crying fits and tremors.

She was diagnosed with PTSD a decade ago when she was in her 30s. But she found this knowledge cold comfort. “I was probably on half a dozen different kinds of antidepressants over the years”, she says, “and they never worked for me. I’ve had this my whole life, pretty much.”

So the results of a clinical trial recently announced by Michael Mithoefer, a psychiatrist in Charleston, South Carolina, are encouraging. Twenty patients with PTSD who had resisted standard treatments—including both Ms Westerfield and the security contractor—were given an experimental drug in combination with psychotherapy. After just two sessions all of them reported dramatic improvement. The compound, methylenedioxymethamphetamine, or MDMA, is not new. Known as Ecstasy, it is illegal nearly everywhere.

Dr Mithoefer’s study is part of a broader resumption of research into the therapeutic uses of psychoactive compounds. Scientists in North America, Europe and Israel are studying the use of MDMA, LSD, hallucinogenic mushrooms, marijuana and other banned psychoactive substances in treating conditions such as anxiety, cluster headaches, addiction and obsessive-compulsive disorder. They are supported by private funds from a handful of organisations: the Beckley Foundation in Britain; the Heffter Research Institute and the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) in America.

This avenue of research—as opposed to research into the damage done by recreational drug use—came to a halt in the 1970s when drug prohibition became politically popular first in America and then in the rest of the world. Though the “war on drugs” continues, the approach is gradually becoming less dogmatic and more pragmatic. Even so, research into therapeutic uses of banned drugs is fraught with political considerations, often with bizarre results. For instance, though medical marijuana is now recognised in many parts of the world—in California more than 20,000 people are registered to use it—there are few studies into its benefits.
Fun has its uses

MDMA was first synthesised almost a century ago but was little noticed until the 1960s when young American chemists began to ingest it. Alexander Shulgin, a chemist at Dow Chemical in California who had invented Zectran, the first biodegradable insecticide, had been experimenting—in every sense—with mescaline and its chemical relatives. Then one of his students suggested that he try MDMA. “By golly”, he recalls, “she was absolutely right: this was an interesting compound.”

Mr Shulgin left Dow to pursue psychoactive chemistry full-time. Over a couple of decades he synthesised hundreds of chemicals, all of which he tried first on himself and a small group of volunteers. One of his collaborators was his wife, Ann. In the late 1970s the Shulgins introduced MDMA to Leo Zeff, a Californian psychotherapist who had developed LSD therapies in the 1960s when that drug was still legal. Dr Zeff was so impressed that he postponed retirement and became an enthusiastic proponent of the drug (which he called Adam), introducing it to hundreds of other therapists in America and Europe.

But in the 1980s MDMA, which at the time was still unregulated, escaped its semi-underground psychotherapeutic milieu and began to be taken by young people for the sheer fun of it. In a panic, America’s Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), unaware of the therapeutic MDMA network, made an emergency classification in 1985 that placed MDMA in Schedule I—the most restrictive category for drugs with “a high potential for abuse” and “no currently accepted medical use”.

Schedule I also includes marijuana, LSD, psilocybin, mescaline and heroin (though rules vary widely: heroin, for example, is available by prescription in Britain and some other countries). Cocaine, amphetamines, opium, morphine and others are in Schedule II and can be prescribed by doctors under DEA supervision. Although 500,000 doses of MDMA had by this point been used in therapeutic settings, the compound was thereafter banned worldwide.

Some therapists went underground, continuing MDMA treatment illegally, using illicit supplies. “It’s a very simple compound to make,” remarks Mr Shulgin.

Ironically, once it became illegal, MDMA’s recreational use exploded. The UN estimates that at least 9m people—compared with 12m heroin and 16m cocaine users—consume round about 100 tonnes of MDMA and related compounds worldwide each year. The criminal nature of the business makes it difficult to assess the dosage or purity of the MDMA being consumed and it can have lethal effects. But millions of people, rolling about on fake fur pillows or waving glowsticks to electronic music, attest to feeling good. “The first time I ever did it was literally the first time in my life that I felt good in my body,” says Ms Westerfield, who took MDMA recreationally in the 1980s (half the study participants had swallowed the drug occasionally in the past).

In 1986 Rick Doblin, one of Dr Zeff’s students, founded MAPS with the goal of ushering MDMA through the formal drug-approval process of America’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and so bringing about its rescheduling. Drug approval often takes big pharmaceutical firms a dozen years at an average cost exceeding $1 billion. But Mr Doblin, then a student, had time and enthusiasm on his side.

“Our whole approach is based on the idea that science matters at the FDA,” he says. No studies had been performed on the effects of banned psychoactive drugs on humans since 1971 (though a thaw came in 1990 with a study to assess the relationship between schizophrenia and dimethyltryptamine or DMT, a potent hallucinogen that occurs naturally in the brain). Mr Doblin explains that since the FDA insists that psychedelics should be treated like any other drug, “we had to start with a Phase I safety study, where the drug is first used on humans—even though millions of people had taken MDMA by then.” The study got going in 1992 at the University of California, Los Angeles.

The results were positive but by the mid-1990s, when the study was complete, MDMA had become even more controversial. It was not until 2000, when Mr Doblin met Dr Mithoefer, another of Dr Zeff’s former students, that the opportunity arose to propose a Phase II study on the efficacy of MDMA in treating PTSD. Treatments began in 2004.

Dr Mithoefer’s Phase II research, which used MDMA from the only legal source—a chemist at Purdue University licensed by the DEA to distribute controlled quantities from a supply synthesised in 1985—is directly descended from the first generation of LSD psychotherapy. Subjects were given MDMA while attended by Dr Mithoefer and his wife, a psychiatric nurse. They rested on a futon, listened to music and were encouraged to revisit their trauma.
“I was blown 15 feet through the air, and forgot the ride upwards”

“I remember feeling incredibly safe and very motivated,” says Ms Westerfield of her first session. The security contractor from Iraq concurs. “It helped me put the pieces of the puzzle together,” he says. “I was blown 15 feet through the air in a vehicle, and I forgot the ride upwards. It made me remember it.”

The patients who received MDMA showed statistically significant improvement of their PTSD symptoms compared with those who received the same day-long therapy sessions with an inactive placebo. “All the major approaches involve revisiting the trauma in therapy”, says Dr Mithoefer, “but patients may be overwhelmed and retraumatised.” He believes the fear and defensiveness that characterise PTSD are obstacles to treatment, and that it is MDMA’s attenuation of these emotions that permits concurrent psychotherapy to be effective. He will publish the study shortly.

Several additional Phase II studies organised by MAPS are about to start in Israel, Switzerland and Canada. A Phase III trial, in which the methodology is extended to many more therapists and several hundred patients, is still more than two years away. But eventually, if two Phase III studies are successful, the next step would be rescheduling MDMA. Dr Mithoefer is cautious, suggesting that looking that far ahead is premature. “There’s reason to think this may be an exciting new treatment at some point,” he says. “But it’s a long way to proving it in larger trials.”

“We don’t have failures”, says Mr Doblin, “because we’re working with drugs that have been tested in the underground, and work.” Government research into the harmful effects of these drugs has, curiously, helped his cause: “There are over 3,000 papers on MDMA that have cost more than $200m to produce,” he says. He estimates that, thanks to these bodies of formal and informal knowledge, MAPS can take MDMA through the approval process for only about $10m.

While the bureaucracy rolls on, a few people are watching the results with personal interest—and impatience. “There are other things that I would still like to work on,” says Ms Westerfield, whose last MDMA-assisted therapeutic session was four years ago. “That’s why I hope it gets approved sooner rather than later.”

Close to 40 invited participants were in attendence and representing NGOs related to the movements of  HIV/AIDS, Human Rights, and Harm Reduction, academic researchers, health agencies of the government, addiction treatment institutions, the LGBT movement and politicians (State Congressman Simão Pedro, Alderwoman Soninha and an aid to the Federal Congressman Paulo Teixeira), among others.
The event was opened by the executive director of Psicotropicus, the psychologist Luiz Paulo Guanabara.  He explained presented the objective of redirecting the political declaration that represents the position of Brazil’s civil society in the next meeting of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND, the committee at the center of creating policy for the system of drug control in the UN), that will take place in Vienna in March of 2009.

Next, the lawyer Critiano Maronna, of the Brazilian Institute of Criminal Sciences (IBCCrim), gave a presentation on the conventions of the UN and the political problems of prohibitionism. Congressman Simão Pedro – who was instrumental in organizing the meeting in the Assembly – greeted all present and highlighted the importance of political debate on the topic of drugs.

Before the activities started, one of the participants questioned the absence of drug users from the discussions of the public policies on the issue.  Others noted that, because the consumption of drugs is considered a crime, it is difficult for drug users to “disclose themselves,” but the lack of inclusion of the “native” perspective compromises the democracy of the process as well as hampering the establishment of efficacious proposals for dealing with the issue.

The participants then split into three Working Groups: 1)HIV/AIDS; 2) Harm Reduction; 3) Human Rights. Each group had a discussion in which they outlined the limitations and successes of the current public policies on drugs, and they make suggestions for the declaration that will be read in the Vienna meeting. Next, the three groups presented their proposals in a plenary session.

The Working Group for Harm Reduction, represented by the lawyer Maurides Ribeiro, emphasized with vigor the necessity of including the phrase “harm reduction” in UN declarations – a position that is still met with enormous resistance.  The social scientist Maurício Fiore (of NEIP) was chosen to speak for the Working Group for Human Rights and he proposed “non-criminalization” and “regulation of drug use” as fundamental points to be raised and discussed in the next UN meeting.  Teresino Pinto, of the AIDS Prevention and Treatment Association (APTA), reflected on the question of whether “the public policies of drugs in Brazil represent a de facto attack on person living with HIV/AIDS?”

The representatives of the Working Groups committed themselves to submitting the minutes of their groups, so that they can be systematized by Reduc and Psicotropicus and whose results will be summarized in the a similar meeting in Rio de Janeiro shortly before the Vienna meeting.  A virtual debate to be held through the Internet will serve towards the consolidation of the final text to be presented in Vienna.
The historian Henrique Carneiro (of NEIP), the activist Renato Cinco (of the Movement for the National Legalization of Drugs), and the student Thiago Moraes (of the March for Marijuana), proposed another meeting next year that would assemble many sectors of society for the creation of a broad movement for the reform of public policies and legislation on drugs.

The objective of this national forum would be to consolidate a social movement of “resistance to the harms of prohibitionism.”  There was a debate on how such a movement should be named since not all of those present seemed to broadly and openly support the title “Anti-Prohibitionism.”

A general consensus appeared to permeate the meeting was that it is necessary to take political stances in the context of today’s debate on drugs, which is highly irrational and moralized.  The case of the researcher Stella Almeida was brought up; Almeida is currently at the center of a political inquiry for having distributed a flyer with basic instructions on harm reduction for ecstasy users.  The prohibition of debate, as is known, is also a characteristic of today’s culture of prohibitionism.

This initiative of Psicotropicus was warmly welcomed by the participants.  There was a feeling of optimism in the air, a sense of hope for the development of something new, which at the same time seemed to coexist side by side with a healthy dose of skepticism in relation to the possibilities of transforming the official, international anti-drug bureaucracy of the UN (that, nevertheless, will probably be calmly greeted by the official delegation of the Brazilian government, which is composed of members of the National Anti-drugs Agency and the Ministry of Foreign Relations, among others).

Daniela Piconez (of Reduc), the main speaker of the meeting, closed the day’s session.  She and João Pedro Padua, the legal director of Psicotropicus, urged those present to follow the progress of the harm reduction Law 1692/2007 proposed by Federal Congresswoman Cida Diogo, which is now being considered in the Legislature (the proposed Law is currently open for amendments).

The results of this meeting will soon be made available on this website.

(*Translated to English by Brian Anderson)

Message sent today from parishallucinations@gmail.com

Dear Colleagues and friends,

We are happy to announce the 2nd Paris Spring Symposium on Hallucinations (and other Modified States of Consciousness) in Philosophy & Cognitive Science that will take place in Paris’ Latin Quarter April 8-11, 2009.

It will host a selection of experts on the topic of hallucinations and other modified states of consciousness, from a wide spectrum of fields (cognitive neuroscience, psychology, philosophy, psychiatry and psychopathology, anthropology, art, ethnology, pharmacology…).

The first three days will be dedicated to full talks, rising-researcher talks and poster presentations. The fourth and last day will consist of transdisciplinary roundtables. Convivial evenings will allow meetings and informal exchanges between speakers and participants.

Further information can be found on our website (be sure to activate the English-language selector on the top center of the page), such as a preliminary list of speakers and a program, registration procedures and guidelines for rising-researcher applications.

Early-bird tickets and rising researchers applications close on February 1st, 2009.
Website : http://hallucinations.risc.cnrs.fr/colloque2009
Contact : inscription.parishallucinations AT gmail DOT com

The Organizing Comittee

–
Pour l’ARTHEMOC
http://hallucinations.risc.cnrs.fr
(Assocation de Recherche Transdisciplinaire sur les Hallucinations et autres Etats MOdifiés de Conscience)

A Spiritual Approach to Quitting Smoking

 A Johns Hopkins / Beckley Foundation collaboration

with Professor Roland Griffiths

Scientists have found that the entheogens (roughly meaning God-evoking substances) sometimes bring about states that are indistinguishable from the mystical and visionary states reflected in the sacred texts and poetry of the world’s religions. These states of consciousness may provide an opportunity to overcome addictive behaviors.

Indeed, before research with psychedelics was suspended due to prohibition, some studies suggested that these substances, when administered under supportive and well-prepared conditions, were effective in helping people overcome addictions.

This will be the first study in recent times to investigate the use of psilocybin-facilitated treatment of cigarette smoking in participants who have attempted to quit smoking several times unsuccessfully.  Should this research prove successful it will open the door to the use of psychedelic assisted therapy in the treatment of other addictions.

* * *

The First Psychedelic Study in the UK Since Prohibition

A Study Investigating Changes in Blood Flow and Remote Memory Access Brought About by Psilocybin

A Leading London Institution/Beckley Foundation Collaboration

This study will investigate, with the latest brain imaging technology, both the changes in cerebral blood flow brought about by psilocybin and how psilocybin affects regional activation and emotional responses. In so doing, this study will help inform the psychotherapeutic applications for this fascinating and important compound.