Back in March this blog listed some complaints about the Talk to Frank website and it’s recent anti cannabis campaign. In a comment, Steve Rolles suggested a distilled list of comments be sent in the hope that feedback would improve the site. Well, wheels here at UKCIA can turn slowly but the following e-mail was sent to Frank at the Home Office on 16th April and acknowledged three days later, with a promise they would reply to the issues I raised:
Talk to Frank Cannabis information
Sir
I have concerns about the information given on the Talk to Frank website and in your recent anti-cannabis campaigns run on TV and radio.
1: Although only mentioned briefly on the website, adverts in the media have given the impression that cannabis regularly causes users to be sick – to “Puke” in Frank’s language. This is almost entirely wrong and cannabis users are in fact rarely sick. It is true that a condition known as a “whitey” can occur if a large amount is smoked quickly, or more likely if it’s taken after drinking a large amount of alcohol, but “whities” are extremely rare and although unpleasant do not normally lead to the person “puking”.
Indeed, cannabis has well documented anti emetic properties [1]; it actually reduces nausea and prevents vomiting.
It must be remembered that cannabis is a well understood substance and it has a well deserved reputation for not being like alcohol and not causing sickness. Telling young people something which they will soon find is untrue simply undermines your campaign and would seem to be counter productive.
2: Mental health issues:
The website claims: “The regular use of cannabis is known to be associated with an increase in the risk of later developing psychotic illnesses including schizophrenia.”
I know of no research to prove that statement, in fact a study carried out in Denmark [2] found
“However, the results clearly show that cannabis-induced psychoses do not occur randomly. Rather, the degree of hereditary predisposition in individuals who receive treatment of cannabis-induced psychosis closely mirrors that in those who develop schizophrenia with no history of cannabis induced psychosis. The results agree with those of other studies that show that cannabis predominantly causes psychotic symptoms in those persons who are predisposed to develop psychosis or show signs of psychosis in the absence of cannabis use”
In other words cannabis does not cause severe mental illness as you seem to be claiming. Indeed, this position was apparently supported by the study carried out for the ACMD by Dr Martin Frisher of Keele University pharmacy school as a part of its classification review last year which the Guardian reported [3]
“Their confidential paper found that between 1996 and 2005 there had been significant reductions in the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia. From 2000 onwards there were also significant reductions in the prevalence of psychoses.
The authors say this data is “not consistent with the hypothesis that increasing cannabis use in earlier decades is associated with increasing schizophrenia or psychoses from the mid-1990s onwards.”
Again, is it not better to be honest in the presentation of information to young people?
Incidentally, Will the Home Office make the results of the Keele study public? If not, why not?
3: The effects of cannabis:
Franks states: “It is a mild sedative (often causing a chilled out feeling or actual sleepiness) and it’s also a mild hallucinogen (meaning you may experience a state where you see objects and reality in a distorted way and may even hallucinate).
The effects of cannabis are far more varied than that as anyone who tries it will soon discover. Because cannabis is a blend of several active chemicals its effects vary greatly from strain to strain. It can be a mild sedative, but it can also be a very “uppy” drug for example. I would question the claim that cannabis can cause genuine hallucinations however. As a direct cause of the government’s policy of prohibition it is not possible to know in advance what type of cannabis a user will be buying and thus what the specific effects will be.
Under the section “The chances of getting hooked” the website states:
“The withdrawals can include cravings for cannabis irritability, mood changes; appetite disturbance, weight loss, difficulty sleeping and even sweating, shaking and diarrhoea in some people.”
I know of no research to demonstrate that Cannabis withdrawal leads to “sweating, shaking and diarrhoea”, that is a gross over statement and a description of a severe physical withdrawal not associated with cannabis use. Most long-term users will experience sleep problems, usually in the form of vivid dreams, but the physical effects of cannabis withdrawal are pretty minor and do not include those you list. Of far greater difficulty are the psychological effects. Again, why give misleading and false information?
Finally
4: The Purity section
The site says: “When thinking about the purity of cannabis, we can consider two separate areas: first, the ‘strength’ of the unadulterated product (ie how much THC it contains), and second how much it is ‘cut’ or contaminated:”
Purity to cannabis users means one thing; how clean it is.
As you point out there is a bad problem of contamination with street cannabis these days. Recent examples of concern are the spraying with glass beads, “oily” bud which leaves a hard black deposit when burned and many other issues. Imported hash is well known for being contaminated. The site says “The health risks of such additions are not always clear”; in truth they are totally unknown and could well be far more serious than pure cannabis itself could cause.
Contamination, of course, is the direct result of the fact that cannabis is illegal and supplied by an uncontrolled black market. This, together with the other dangers and unknowns caused by prohibition really need to be made clear on the Frank website.
I appreciate Talk to frank is aimed at a young audience and is a part of the government’s anti drugs campaign, but I would hope you would agree the information it gives should always be accurate and honest.
Although the site does warn about the dangers of mixing cannabis and tobacco, it doesn’t advise users to avoid using tobacco, surely this would be a very simple and effective bit of harm reduction you could be giving?
Will you please take a look at the information presented by Frank and bring it up to the standard we have a right to expect from government information?
Yours etc.
References were:
[2] Familial Predisposition for Psychiatric Disorder Comparison of Subjects Treated for Cannabis-Induced Psychosis and Schizophrenia, Mikkel Arendt, MScPsych, PhD; Preben B. Mortensen, DrMedSc; Raben Rosenberg, DrMedSc; Carsten B. Pedersen, MSc; Berit L. Waltoft, MSc
[3] Guardian 4th April 2008 “Brown plans tougher line on cannabis against advice of own drug experts”
I hope that was measured and reasonably concise, but although the e-mail was acknowledged promptly I have had no further response as of yet.
Of course, my mail was just a few days before the Sunday Telegraph ran its shock horror expose to the effect that Frank actually told the truth and didn’t just toe the government line of “just say no”, so they’re probably stuck between the rock of doing putting out bad sounding information because the government tells them to and telling the truth, fearful of the wrath of the gutter press as always.
But Talk to Frank claims to offer honest, factual advice and it should do so. It’s no good telling young people lies which they will know to be lies. Anyway we are paying a huge amount for the service, we do have a right to expect it to be honest and factual.
Not wishing to drop the people at Frank in it any more than the Telegraph has already done, I had reason to talk to their advisers myself a week or so later. I was approached recently by a student looking for information about cannabis, so we went to the Frank website but of course, it didn’t work because the latest version of Flash isn’t installed on the machine he was using. This was another issue mentioned in the recent blog, so I thought I’d politely tell them of the problems I was seeing with the website. The line was busy and I sat listening to music for a few minutes before a polite, but very tired sounding lady came on. I explained the access problems and her response was nothing if not honest, along the lines of “yes, we know, the website is rubbish”, but put in stronger and more honest language than that. They get a lot of similar complaints apparently, they log them all but it doesn’t do any good. I actually felt sorry for the adviser and left it at that.
I’ll give it a while longer before getting back to the Home Office about my comments, but I don’t really expect anything much to happen. After all, cannabis policy isn’t based on evidence or fact any more, but on the “judgement” of Gordon Brown. I’m just glad I don’t work as a Talk to Frank Adviser.
I’m not sure that I agree with the point that “whities” are extremely rare: in my experience, they are common if the user is drunk and not used to smoking!
But the letter does raise many good points, which I’m sure Frank will be scratching his head over…
Frank talks about ‘cannabis’ or ‘skunk’ and assumes it is a mixture of tobacco (smoked without a filter or of course) and cannabis of some description. This is not an assessment of the substance itself, but a mixture of two substances. The point is that certain accepted consequences of cannabis use may not be down to the actual substance but to the mixture with tobacco and/or alcohol. Since most users will use cannabis with tobacco and alcohol what ‘Frank’ says may have a ring of truth about it. It may be more correct to say that it is not an inevitable consequence and to may be explain why it happens
(“… and if you mix it with alcohol or tobacco you are much more likely to get a ‘whitie’ ” would do the job whilst staying factually correct).
[anecdotally : I vividly remember feeling very dizzy the first time I smoked tobacco and I had to sit down – If you experience this with your first time being stoned as well then it must be an unpleasant mixture for anyone. It does not represent typical use of pure cannabis alone ]
So this may account for your difference in experiences or claims. We really do need to separate the different types of use and combination use of drugs when discussing any effect that a substance may have.
My first smoke of cannabis was the butt end of a joint when I was extremely drunk. I was very sick though I got to the loo on time fortunately. This was also my first tobacco but subsequent experience has led me to avoid cannabis when drunk because I throw up. Something I have never read in pretty expansive reading on drugs is that people are different and react differently to different drugs. Not everyone throws up if smoking dope whilst drunk. I do.
The Frank Advert on Cannabis is not only nonsense its outright propaganda. Also to say that some people throw up and others dont on Cannabis is also a major generalisation.
Just like with drink sometimes you might be sick other times you wont.
If you have been drinking and you smoke Cannabis it is possible to feel sick yes.
But its the drink that is the primary cause of sickness not the cannabis.
I have been smoking Cannabis for 25 years SOLID.
I know hundreds of people that do the same.
Not once in my entire life have I seen ANYONE on Cannabis react in the way that the Frank advert depicts.
So my experience is greater than most peoples, incluiding the drug councellors.
It should also be noted to two known Killers in this country and around the world are Tobacco and Alcohol.
Try to make them illegal and see the reaction the public would make.
Essentially the public are saying we want two of the biggest killer drugs in the world to be LEGAL.
WIth that in mind its time that the ‘blind’ woke up and stopped being ignorant.
Ethnic minorities, women, and gays know how it feels to be outcast by the IGNORANT public.
This is the same bloody thing.
For those of you that dont know about Cannabis, your ingnorance preceeds you. I suggest you keep your opinions to yourself!