LETTER:Problems of legal Ecstasy

Mr Charles de Lacy
Thursday 16 November 1995 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

From Mr Charles de Lacy

Sir: You propose (leading article; "The agony of Ecstasy", 14 November) that Ecstasy should be brought within the law but you give no consideration to the complex problems this would create.

For example, all legitimate drugs have to have a proven track record in terms of their safety before they are licensed. To bring Ecstasy within the law, would you imagine it being submitted to all the rigorous tests of any other pharmaceutical drug?

Or is your proposal that any illegally used substances that are widely used will be deemed to be safe and legitimate for recreational purposes, but not medical purposes?

If the latter route were taken, it would have a detrimental knock-on effect on the overall safety of medicines. It would lead to a culture and an outlook that no longer had the rigorous standards we expect from our pharmaceutical industry.

If we are to follow your proposal of legalisation on abused drugs, this must be within the current parameters of testing and licensing. This would mean some recreational drugs never being licensed, because they are dangerous. Others could be licensed but only available on prescription.

I suggest that this scenario is impracticable, and we should accept that there will always be an illegal drugs industry, albeit decriminalised, and with the consequential result that from time to time people will die.

Yours faithfully,

Charles de Lacy

Chelmsford,

Essex

15 November

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in