2014
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g1534
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New Zealand's regulation of new psychoactive substances

Abstract: A response to the futility of trying to ban such substances as they appear

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Substances judged as 'low risk' would not be acted upon at the EU level, while consumer market prohibition would be introduced for 'moderate-risk' and drug control measures for 'high-risk' substances. Unlike the New Zealand model, the responsibility and costs of assessment do not lie with the producer, and the low-risk category is not intended for limited consumer distribution; it is this shift towards regulation which makes the New Zealand model unique [3]. Although EU deliberations are at an early stage, some member states have already raised concerns [4].…”
Section: Regulatory Approaches To New Psychoactive Substances (Nps) Imentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Substances judged as 'low risk' would not be acted upon at the EU level, while consumer market prohibition would be introduced for 'moderate-risk' and drug control measures for 'high-risk' substances. Unlike the New Zealand model, the responsibility and costs of assessment do not lie with the producer, and the low-risk category is not intended for limited consumer distribution; it is this shift towards regulation which makes the New Zealand model unique [3]. Although EU deliberations are at an early stage, some member states have already raised concerns [4].…”
Section: Regulatory Approaches To New Psychoactive Substances (Nps) Imentioning
confidence: 99%
“…New Zealand officials have acknowledged this risk and consequently have pointed to the need to ensure a balance between low risk and the credible effects of approved products [2]. To date, the New Zealand NPS Authority appears to have erred too much on the side of ensuring credible effects by approving a number of particularly potent cannabinoid products, which have subsequently been associated with fairly serious side effects, such as vomiting and agitation [3,4]. However, even if only fairly low-strength NPS products are approved, this market may still appeal to many consumers.…”
Section: Response To Commentariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An example of an approach to regulate recreational psychoactive substances to minimise harm and improve their safety and quality is New Zealand's Psychoactive Substances Act 2013, which requires all products to be approved by the Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority (Newberry, Wodak, Sellman & Robinson, 2014). The Act also requires all importers, researchers, manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers to be licenced.…”
Section: Amend Therapeutic Goods Regulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is a fundamentally pragmatic approach [6] but one that, given its novelty, is bound to have some teething problems. The New Zealand authorities have demonstrated a willingness to challenge the status quo in face of the evidence that previous approaches were not effective, and are also keeping the current policy and emerging evidence on drug risks under close review.…”
Section: Prohibition Is a Key Driver Of The New Psychoactive Substancmentioning
confidence: 99%