What Exactly Are Legal Highs

[jennyjoan]

what are the above there is so much talk about. Obviously you can buy them but what is the danger. Enlighten me please. Ta

[Buenchico]

Everything is legal until Parliament passes a law saying that it isn't . (OK, pedants will point out that there are a few 'common law' offences, such as murder, which Parliament has never made illegal - since it was already regarded as illegal when Parliament was first created. However that's not relevant here).

So, until Parliament creates a law saying 'XYZ' is illegal (or the Home Secretary uses exising laws to add 'XYZ' to a list of illegal substances) 'XYZ' will always be legal. 'XYZ' might be risk-free, have very limited risks or be highly dangerous. It makes no difference; until Parliament (or the Home Secretary) has made it illegal, anyone can sell it or use it.

So anything that acts as a stimulant (or sedative or hallucinogenic), and that nobody has yet made illegal, is a 'legal high'. Your local supermarket, for example, sells a remarkably powerful hallucinogenic substance (and which people have died from overdosing on), which you might have bought yourself. It's called 'nutmeg'. (Similarly, the caffeine in coffee, or which is added to many fizzy drinks , could be classed as a 'legal high'. Again, people have died through consuming too much of it).

Fairly obviously, the types of 'legal highs' sold in night clubs, etc, are unlikey to involve nutmeg or caffeine. They tend to be drugs that have been developed for various purposes (such as use by vets to treat horses) or other substances that people have found gives them a high. (Do you remember when glue-sniffing was all the rage? That was a very basic, but still potentially lethal, example of a 'legal high'). Some of them are synthetic drugs which have been deliberately designed to emulate the effects of illegal drugs.

There's some general information here:
http://www.talktofrank.com/drug/legal-highs

[jennyjoan]

thanks chris for that lengthy answer

[Old_Geezer]

Not much to add save that the general way that the UK legal system works is that something is allowed until banned. Some legal systems work the other way about. And that drugs can be created and marketed faster than governments can test and legislate against. So you take responsibility for your own actions if you give these drugs a try.

[beso]

Singing is good. Exercise too. All those lovely endorphines.

[New Judge]

The "legal highs" that are currently under the microscope are grouped under the umbrella of "New Psychoactive Substances" (NPS). They are synthetic chemicals specifically designed to mimic the effects of illegal or controlled substances but, as Buenchico says, because they have not been individually identified and made subject to control there is nothing to stop them being sold or used. Without going into too much detail they fall into three main groups:

Synthetic cannabinoids. These bear no relation to the cannabis plant except in that the chemicals which are blended into the plant matter, act on the brain in a similar way to cannabis.

Stimulant-type drugs – these replicate effects gained from illegal substances such as amphetamine.

Hallucinogenic which give similar effects to substances such as ketamine.

They all trade under exotic names such as Charlie White, GoGaine, Clockwork Orange, Black Mamba, Exodus, Charlie Sheen, Euphoria. They are all packaged in attractive packs and it is quite clear where their intended market lies and the use to which they are expected to be put. However they also carry warnings such as "Not to be Taken", "Unfit for Human Consumption" and "Dangerous if Swallowed". They all carry literature (such that it is) that suggests they are "research chemicals" but this completely belies their packaging, marketing and obvious intended use.

Unfortunately almost all of them also have side-effects which can include seriously increased heart rate, increase in body temperature to dangerous levels, shortness of breath and difficulty in decision taking. There have been a number of deaths resulting from their use.

Some local authorities are using Trading Standards legislation to combat this problem. They are taking retailers selling "legal highs" to court suggesting that they have contravened the rules concerning labelling and instructions for use. Many cases have been successful but the shortcoming of this approach is that the powers that the court has are limited to forfeiture and destruction of the actual goods seized. They have no power to impose penalties on the retailers or to prevent them simply acquiring more of the stuff and begin selling it again. At least one of the larger chain of outlets is challenging these actions and some cases are due to come to court later this year.

[Hopkirk]

Perhaps call them 'not yet illegal'