Daily review 07/10/2019

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, October 7th, 2019 - 16 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

16 comments on “Daily review 07/10/2019 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. joe90 1
    7 October 2019 at 6:12 pm

    tRump's green lighting Erdogan to solve his Kurdish problem is a horrifying betrayal of the west's allies in the region. Fuck!

    Washington — The White House said Sunday that Turkey will soon invade northern Syria, renewing fears of a slaughter of Kurdish fighters allied with the U.S. in a years-long campaign against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

    The White House statement said Turkey will take custody of foreign fighters captured in the U.S.-led campaign against ISIS who've been held by the Kurdish forces supported by the U.S.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/turkey-invade-northern-syria-take-captured-isis-fighters-held-by-kurdish-forces-white-house-says/

  2. Agora 2
    7 October 2019 at 6:49 pm

    Shared E-scooters aren't always as 'green' as other transport options

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190802104535.htm

  3. aj 3
    7 October 2019 at 7:38 pm

    Fair Go tonight: a segment about the lack of safety belts on school buses. Wouldn't be a bad use of Nanny State to insist these transport contractors were forced to fit belts on all buses, and the Govt fund the cost. Win – Win.

  5. Dukeofurl 5
    8 October 2019 at 7:17 am

    Where is Festival Drug testing rigorously scientifically tested?

    Its not possible for ethical reasons to use people as guinea pigs for a 'random selection of street drugs'.

    • Psycho Milt 5.1
      8 October 2019 at 7:22 am

      No testing on either humans or animals is required to establish the chemical composition of a substance. You seem to be unaware of what's actually under discussion on this subject.

      • Dukeofurl 5.1.1
        8 October 2019 at 12:20 pm

        "Scientifically proven to reduce risky drug taking behaviour"

        Where is it 'scientific'. They just seem to offer to test some drugs, where is the science . Do you even know what that word means when comparing different situations.

        One person who died at a NSW festival took 9 Ecstasy pills. That doesnt seem to be a 'quality problem"

        https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jan/22/drug-deaths-at-music-festivals-one-overdose-victim-took-up-to-nine-mdma-pills

        Some sought medical attention , others did not. Dehydration comes into it as well

        Quantity not quality is the issue . As well it doesnt seem to have entered young peoples heads that , yes you can die from popping strange pills.

        Thats what I meant by a claim of Scientifically proven , when its not.

        You could take a NZ major hospital, and the drug overdoses treated over a year, how many are adulterated drugs and how many are adverse reactions from 'standard' street drugs -if there is such a thing.

        Festivals should have well resourced medical facilities and rehydration tents before they just offer 'testing'

        • weka 5.1.1.1
          8 October 2019 at 12:50 pm

          http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC1901/S00047/festival-drug-testing-expert-reaction.htm

          https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0955395918302755

          Results

          Test results revealed that one in five substances was not as sold or acquired. One in five service users utilised the disposal service for further substances of concern in their possession and another one in six moderated their consumption. Two thirds of those whose sample was missold disposed of further substances, compared with under one in ten whose sample was as sold. Service users who acquired substances onsite at the festival were more than twice as likely to have been missold them as those acquired offsite, were nearly twice as likely to use the disposal service and were on average two years younger. Women were more likely to be using the drug for the first time and more likely to use the disposal service. Test results were shared with emergency services; alerts issued across site and an unanticipated feedback loop occurred to some drug suppliers.

          Conclusion

          This pilot suggests that festival-goers engage productively with onsite drug safety testing services when given the opportunity, such services can access harder-to-reach and new user groups and can play a part in reducing drug-related harm by identifying and informing service users, emergency services and offsite drug using communities about substances of concern. Disposals to the testing service for onward police destruction provide an externally corroborated measure of impact, reducing harm to the individual and others by removing such substances from site. Evidence of differential dealing onsite and its potential negative consequences has implications for future research and policing.

        • joe90 5.1.1.2
          8 October 2019 at 12:55 pm

          Dehydration comes into it as well

          Two of the three who've died in NZ after taking MDMA died because they drank too much water.

          Festivals should have well resourced medical facilities and rehydration tents before they just offer 'testing'

          If the small town festivals I've attended over the past few years are anything to go by, most festivals do indeed have well resourced medical facilities and rehydration tents

        • Psycho Milt 5.1.1.3
          8 October 2019 at 1:09 pm

          "Scientifically proven to reduce risky drug taking behaviour"

          Where is it 'scientific'. They just seem to offer to test some drugs, where is the science.

          Weka's already posted the relevant info, but to summarise:

          The science consists of a study in which one in five drug users disposed of their drugs after having them tested and a further one in six "moderated their consumption." That is clear evidence of the tests having "reduced risky drug-taking behaviour."

          With your example of someone who died after taking Ecstasy, you're making an implied claim that safety measures are pointless unless they guarantee no-one can possibly suffer death from misadventure. That's a ridiculous approach to take.

    • Cricklewood 5.2
      8 October 2019 at 7:50 am

      The NZ First position is so hard to fathom… truth is if you have testing and people realize that they have purchased say bath salts or a shit meth batch pressed into a pill and not the E they thought they'll likely not take it… Less harm and likely less drugs consumed

      • Dukeofurl 5.2.1
        8 October 2019 at 12:23 pm

        Excess quantity of drugs taken is more of a problem than adultered ones. On site Medical treatment is more relevant factor as well, and not just a single over worked doctor plusa few St Johns volunteers.