- Saturday 18 May 2013
- My Account
- Logout
- Register
- Login
- News
-
Voices
-
Find by writer
- Yasmin Alibhai-Brown
- Rebecca Armstrong
- Memphis Barker
- Terence Blacker
- Chris Blackhurst
- David Blanchflower
- Archie Bland
- Ian Burrell
- Andrew Buncombe
- Ben Chu
- Patrick Cockburn
- Laura Davis
- Mary Dejevsky
- Grace Dent
- Robert Fisk
- Andrew Grice
- Philip Hensher
- Ian Herbert
- Howard Jacobson
- Ellen E Jones
- Alice Jones
- Owen Jones
- Emily Jupp
- Simon Kelner
- Dominic Lawson
- Donald Macintyre
- Lisa Markwell
- Comment
- Campaigns
- Debate
- Editorials
- Letters
- IV Drip
- Archive
- Our Voices
- Commentators
- Columnists
- Democracy 2015
- IV Drip Archive
-
Find by writer
- Sport
- Tech
- Life
- Property
- Arts & Ents
- Travel
- Money
- IndyBest
- Blogs
- Student
Iv drip The juice you can't live without
Does taking ecstasy live on TV glamourise drugs?
27 September 2012 10:03 AM
As Channel 4 broadcast the show Drugs Live: The Ecstasy Trial last night, many are divided as to whether the show was needed.
Drugs specialist Professor David Nutt led the research, testing the use of ecstasy and a placebo on willing participants - including actor Keith Allen.
The Sun have debated whether the show glamourises the use of drugs, with Allen arguing one side, and Jullie Manning opposing. She says "David Nutt loves publicity and he is doing this because it is controversial." Another participant, Graham Lawton, asks " How can we have a solid drugs policy when we don’t have appropriate evidence to base it on?"
The Independent's Science Editor Steve Connor thinks the experiments are part of a genuine academic study, but what do you think? Is this a valid way to show the public what happens when people take ecstasy?
Ecstasy: The poll
The price of pacifism
Jason Isaacs: Groupies, theatre bores and James Bond
Sealand: 'Micronation' or illegal fortress?
One man returns to Argentina's town that drowned
Gordon Ramsay's worst nightmare: A restaurant he cannot save
Why bitters are back on the bar
The 10 Best barbecues