 Felly mae'r cwrwch ar y cwrwch fy hoffa, rydyn ni'n dechrau'n rhaid o'r cwrwch ar y dychydig. Mae'n rhaid i'r cwrwch i'r cyd-dweithio. Mae'n dwylo'r bobl gweithio i'r cyfrwyndau'r cyfrwyng. Mae'r bobl gweithio'r cyfrwyng o'r cyfrwyng yn gael. Felly mae'r cwrwch yn ddigonol. Mae'r cwrwch yn ddigonol. Mae ydych chi'n ddigonol o'r ddragoi? Mae llywodol y cwrwch yn ddigonol. y cwmwynt fel o'r adrodd o'r cyffredinig, o'r ddamograff ym mwy o'r adrodd i'w ddeithas. Y ddweud y gwaith ddaeth yma, yw'r adrodd yma chi'n gyfer ar gyfer yma yng Nghymru, ac yn y tîm yn fwyfyr i ddweud y 12% o'r adrodd i'w ddweud i'w ddweud i'w ddweud, i'w digwydd oed o 18% a 25% i gael i gael i'w ddweud i'u ddweud i ddweud i'w 15% o'r adrodd i'w ddweud i'u ddweud i'w ddweud i 25% i 35%. Pan oeddwn i'w digonwysau yma, ydych chi'n gyllid o'r brydau a gynnwysau dyma, mae wedi'n hatchwyr yn ysgrifennu'n 15-25, nid yw y gall ar hynna ymwysau dyma yma yw'r bobl anrefion, ond yr argynnu. Nw'n dechrau o rwyf gynghoru yma, yna lleol o ddysgu cymwyno i ddadw yn ysgrifennu? Felly rwy'n dechrau o rwyf gynghoru yn cymwyno i gyd... Ond mynd i ddim yn roi'n ddifwg yw'r credu. Mae'r ddifwg yn ystod o'r hyn sydd yn fawr. Mae'r ddifwg yn ddifwg yn ddifwg yn ddifwg yn ddifwg yn ddifwg. Mae'n ddifwg yn ddifwg yn ei dda, mae'n ddifwg yn y brin. Felly dy'r cyhoeddiadau yma yn eu bwysig, ond mae'r ddifwg yn y ddifwg yn ddifwg. Rwy'n credu bod ydych chi'n ddifwg yw'r epidemicon, under research and I do tend to shy away from those phrases, but certainly I would described them as a legal alternative to heroin. When people are not having heroin, and when there is no heroin available, people very often take ox pueden or hydrocodone or any of these synthetic opiate replacements. There are even on the international legal priorities mark there are some alternatives like there's just a drug called ODES Methyl tramadol which which is tramadol with just a couple of different functional groups attached. Another drug called H792Y which has killed a few people in the UK already which is a drug that targets the opioid receptors. So yeah, definiteyly, any more questions? Downstage now. I did that this morning. It's a very well-designed and functional site My name on the top right on the corner I'm Mike Powel underneath the settings you can choose to display in 50 different currencies. So they have a currency converter on site. That's the price. In Bitcoins, currently that's about 600 dollars today I think? 400 pounds, something like that. So the Bitcoin story is a really fascinating one. It's one that I think will become very much more prominent in the next few years. Mae'r cyd-ddiadau i'r cyd-ddiadau sy'n ei fod yn y dweud oherwydd i ymddangos y cyd-ddiadau. Felly mae'r cyd-ddiadau yn i gwybod, yn y Cachol, yn y cynnwysau, yn y dweud, i'w gweithio'i gyfnod o'i gwybod. A gyddo'i'n gwybod yma i'r gweithio ei gwybod, ac mae'n gwybod yma i gyd-diadau o gychwyn, sydd yn i gyd-diadau cael ei gwybod. Oni'n gweithio'r cyd-diadau? Mae'n gweithio'n gwybod eich gweithio. pan yn fawr y Cywbeth Fxilio, mae'r ffordd iawn eich gwrth subwysig, mae'r ffordd iawn eich glod, mae'r ffordd iawn eich cyntaf yng nghymru a'r ffordd iawn eich gwrth byw, mae'r ffordd iawn eich glod, felly eich cyfrifost yng Nghymru a'r dark web market. Mae hyn yn ddiweddio'r gwrth. Felly thatas oes y cwysig oherwydd y cyfrifost, mae wnaeth hunan o wybod yn y gwirionedd blwydd, Mae'n meddwl, ac mae'n meddwl yma. Mae'n meddwl o'r US yn meddwl o'r problemau mwy yn Fethan Fethamineau, a'r rhai o'r Fethamineau yma, a mynd i'r Ucaid. Mae'n meddwl i'r US yn gofynu. Mae'n meddwl o'r problemau, mae'n meddwl o'r symud? Mae'n meddwl o'r symud o'r symud o'r urdeunydd a'r urdeunydd, mae'n meddwl o'r symud i'r allan drogau, mae'n meddwl o'r syniad gyda hynny? Mynd i gael y pwarmatid eich llwysgr, ac rhaid o'r llwysgr wedi'i ei blwyddol wrth i ddarlleniaethau'r ysgolwyddiadau a'r rherwydd Ac mae'n rheinydd i gael eich cerddol o drwng ar gwasgu bobl. Mae'n credu'r bobl yn cyhoedd. Mae'n credu'r bobl yn cyhoedd. Mae'r credu yn cael i gyflwynoed ac yn gweld hwnnw. Olygu, mae'n cael ei ddiweddlu'n gweithio'n gweld. Rydw i weithio bod pethwyl yn ychwanegol. Monw'r dweud i'w ddau am wahanol a ddwy blaenol. Rydw i'w ddweud i ddweud hwnnw o'r ddweud i'w rhan o'r ddweud o'r ysgrunegol a gwynhau amgylcheddol a rhan o'r ddweud i'w ddweud cael eu gwneud a'r ddweud lleidol i weithio. A chnynno isio sy'n ddweud â chynnyddiant a chynnyddio rydw i'w ddweud i gynhyrch. Mae oedd yn yr unig a chynnyddio'r parwysu Mae ysgrifennidau yng Nghymru'r Llywodraeth i'r cyd-deithasio, mae Ysgrifennidau yng Nghymru yn ei ddweud am gael'r gilydd. Mae yna'r prynsibol yng Nghymru. Mae gennym ddim yn gwybod y cyd-dweud a'r llyfin. Mae'r ysgrifennidau yng nghymru yn ei ddefnyddio'r ymddangos a'r paradanaethau'n ymddangos. Rwy'n meddwl yng Nghymru, dyna rwy'n meddwl yng nghymru. Mae'r ysgrifennidau fel y credliadau yng Nghymru yn ysgrifennidau. Mae'r bwysig yw'r cymhwyl sy'n gweithio'r cymhwyl yw'r hefyd. Felly, mae hynny'n ddod o'r rhan o'r rhan o'r cymhwyl. Felly, rydyn ni'n gweithio'n cymhwyl. Rydyn ni'n gweithio canibus, ac mae'r rhan o'r rhan o'r canibus yn ynmangorol. Mae'r rhan o'r cymhwyl yn cymhwyl yn cyfnodol yn ymwyloedd o'r cofnodol. Mae'r rhan o'r ban. Rydyn ni'n gweithio'n cymhwyl ar y cyflodau cyflodau. I want to see policy that consults with user groups and the consults with communities and the consults with the medical profession. Certainly, yes, I do think that the medical community had a leading role to play in this, rather than a kind of a justice or a punitive or a prison, or jailing people doesn't keep them healthy, you know, helping them to remove their addiction or helping them to make more rational choices or to make safer choices in their drug use. It will save us money. It will save us money, and it is a more or less problematic approach, I think. That's great news. You made one comment in your post. Yes, sure. Is heroin part of your story? Heroin is part of my story at the beginning. The question was, is heroin part of my story? Heroin is part of my story at the beginning, when I described that heroin was actually one of the first designer drugs. Heroin was created in the laboratory. I outsourced my memory to my book. I needed a consultant. Yes, and so this drug was actually invented. Heroin was invented, believe it or not, as a way to help people avoid addiction. It was to help them wean them off morphine. And so the designer drug industry, it feels like it really came along in the 1980s with ecstasy. That was when that time was fair shoes. But really, designer drugs, a designer drug is just a chemical. It's a chemical that's been worked in the laboratory. So heroin was the original designer drug. And then immediately, again, interestingly to note, as soon as heroin was banned, legal versions of heroin were created with various other functional groups, and benzil groups attached, and protocol groups. So the story of chemists manipulating drugs to circumvent national and international drug control, it's as old as the hills, but it is going to prominence once more. Yes, the first part of your question, what makes a drug legal or illegal, it's really broad and it's huge. Each country has its own drug laws, and then each country is a signatory to the United Nations Convention, which bans the 234 drugs that I mentioned before. So each country has its own drug laws, and then each of those drug laws is kind of different. Now that's part of the story. What's interesting is that, as the internet has kind of destroyed time, space and national borders, the drug laws really don't have much weight. They don't have any relevance. So there are drugs that you can buy in Spain, which are legal in Spain, but illegal in France, in the next country. So that's one kind of key thing that the internet's changed. It's made drug laws redundant. It's made them more enforceable in certain ways, because you can just have them posted, you know? The United Kingdom has like 80 million pieces of posts per day. That's the United Kingdom, or one small island in Europe. Think about that in like an American context. So post the law, the drugs is a key part of this. So that's what makes drugs legal or illegal. It's just the decision of each country based upon, frankly, arbitrary parameters. The next part of your question was about decriminalisation through Latin America. Well, we look at Uruguay, and we see that the presence of Uruguay has specifically attempted to remove marijuana cannabis from the banned list. And he said, okay, let's take it out of the hands of gangsters by selling it at a dollar a gram. Let's sell it for less than the gangsters. Let's undercut organised crime. Now, that's really clever. That's really smart. That's like how, what better way to prevent some of the operating in a market than to take away their profits? And you know, Uruguay hasn't fallen into the sea and society hasn't collapsed. You know, the states of Washington and Colorado haven't ground to a halt because of the recreational use of marijuana. You know, it's... I mean, even the name marijuana is an old racist construct. It's actually cannabis, obviously. Marijuana was what the Mexican workers called cannabis. And so back in that era, the name was used in order to demonise the drug rather than it's being seen as a simple relaxing smoke. So yeah, throughout Latin America, in Mexico they're considered, they have decriminalised marijuana and they have decriminalised personal possession of cocaine and ecstasy. Columbia is arguing for the same and they have decriminalised around those, around cannabis and cocaine. And I think that that will be seen. I think that we'll see a domino effect as each country basically defies the United States and defies the United Nations and puts in place their own experimental drug policy, which, let's face it, is a response to policy not working. In which other area of public policy do we see that it doesn't work yet we persist with it? We don't have that mentality in any other area of public policy. It's like if we were educating people and they couldn't speak French or English at the end of five years in school, we would change the system. After 60 years of the war on drugs, we have more drugs on sale, we have more profits, we have more death and more destruction than was caused before. So we have a policy that's discredited and doesn't work, but we persist with it for, well, who knows why? Yes. Sorry, I've had one from you. I'm going to take one from the guy at the back. Yes. Yeah. You're going to have to really shout. I'm so sorry. I can't quite hear you. Do I think that the popularity of the internet has said that... I'm so sorry. Ah, excuse me. I think that the internet helps communities coalesce and I think it helps create a kind of... a kind of coalition of consciousness. I think that it helps people come together and to create communities. And yeah, I think that that's contributed to this argument. I think the internet has created a smaller world where you can find out about policy in Uruguay, like that. So yeah, I think it possibly has. Any more questions? Right at the back, but you're going to have to come forward and shout it out. I'm going to cry. I'm just kind of curious. Okay. Yeah, okay. Yeah, I think I might have skipped over that bit. I said that I created a new drug and you asked what I did next. I wrote a story about it. I wrote a story. I wrote an 8,000-word story about how easy it is to make and to create a new drug. I mean, I didn't commercialise it. I didn't market it, but I did ask the guy for a kilo. I said how much would a kilo be? And he told me it would be not very much money. If I wanted to, I could have taken that drug and sold it in the United Kingdom completely legally. And I would be a millionaire today, instantly, in the space of probably, I'd say, two months. Completely legal tax. I'd pay my taxes. I'm a respectable citizen. So yeah, no, I didn't do anything for that. It's in my drawer at home. I was going to send it to a different laboratory for the guy's toxicology and poison centre, but I was quite busy over Christmas and I didn't get a chance. But yeah, it's still a home. In fact, you remind me, I need to get it sent. I need the outer house. It might get banned and then I'm going to be in trouble, you know? Any more questions? Yeah, go on. But very often, sorry, your point was that your question was that I argued that health should have a greater hand in drug policy, but many times people are addicted to legal drugs from hospitals. That's true, but really what's happening there is that those drugs are being diverted. It's not people who are being prescribed them. The majority of those who are addicted to prescription opiates or tranquilizers or benzodiazepines, they're actually diverted and just bought illicitly on the black markets or they're bought from friends or anything like that. So I think it's important to establish in any discussion around this. Nothing will fix everything. No legalisation, having heroin vending machines on the streets is not going to fix anything. Having licensed premises where you can buy cocaine of various purity is not going to solve the drug problem. What it will solve is it will instead improve the situation incrementally. It will make drug policy more rational. It won't stop people taking drugs. I mean, in my book, one of the first things I looked into was the first ever recorded use of drugs. It was 9,000 years ago. 9,000 years ago in Thailand, someone was found that they found and carbon-dated a quid, a kind of a pouch of a stimulant that someone was chewing. They found this in a cave 9,000 years ago. It's a human instinct to take drugs. I would guarantee that everyone in this room was taking drugs today. I mean, there's a vat of coffee over there. Now 200 milligrams of caffeine would put me right on edge. I can't drink three Espresso's. If you were to take all of the caffeine in that jug over there and concentrate into one small cup, it would kill you. If you took a cigarette and you extracted all of the alcohol, all of the nicotine from it, it would kill you. You could kill a horse with a packet of cigarettes. So it's about dosage, it's about information, it's about behaviour. What we need to do in the future, the drug policy, is to look at behaviour, to look at how people are harmed by their own behaviour, and instead offer them solutions, offer them options, rather than having drug consumption as an illicit or illegal or dangerous activity. Have it as, well, exactly as it is, a consumer choice. It's a consumer choice with exactly the same risks as drinking too much alcohol. It's a lifestyle choice which has the same danger levels as, for example, ecstasy, ecstasy is in the UK, was famously analysed by one of the government's leading positions, and he found that using ecstasy was about as dangerous as horseback riding. So your dangers from consuming MDMA is about as dangerous as going down to a horse. So why do we not buy a horse riding? I'm not arguing that ecstasy is a safe drug, I'm not arguing that it's a great thing to do with your life. What I'm arguing is that we don't have a clear view because we have this moralistic view of drug use, we have this moralistic view of drugs being evil, wrong, or counter-cultural. We've projected a whole bunch of stuff that isn't true on chemicals, they're just chemicals, they're just carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen. Around it all, we have this cultural and this kind of, it's just a projection of cultural values onto chemicals. I think strip that away, make it into a health issue, and then from there we can have a rational forward-thinking policy. Danny. Is there a lot of talk about innovation and a few examples to come up, a couple that didn't come up for Portugal? Yeah, absolutely. Can you talk a little bit about those two examples and how you can extend it to your own innovation? Sure, in the early 2000s Portugal had a huge heroin problem. There were open-air heroin markets and open-air areas of the city where people were openly injecting heroin. The Portuguese government decided rightly that this was the wrong kind of society to have with the wrong kind of social scene to have. Portugal basically decriminalised all drugs and they offered people help and health assistance. In that time, injecting rates of heroin use I think have gone down by 80% because people have been brought into a system, brought into a treatment option. And as well as that, what else has gone on over there? Injecting rates have really dropped and also new rates of HIV transmission are down by 80%. So, you know, usage levels didn't go up. Suddenly, all of Portugal didn't start injecting heroin into themselves because they weren't going to go to jail for it, but instead they were healthier. So that's the Portuguese model, which has been to decriminalise and there the impact it's had. The New Zealand model is interesting. It's an experimental step that New Zealand has taken. Now, New Zealand is so far away that you can't really get drugs in New Zealand. People make their own drugs there. They make their own crystal meth. So, the way that the market's developed out there in the last few years because New Zealand's so isolated in the words of one guy that I know in New Zealand he said that cocaine doesn't stop in New Zealand. So, over the years, the New Zealand drug using culture has been very interested in legal highs. Now, New Zealand became so fed up. They were so completely over the fact that every time a drug was banned a new one would come to take its place and they couldn't seem to stamp out this game of chemical whack-a-mole. And they said, okay, let's instead put the owners on the manufacturers and now, in New Zealand, manufacturers can sell a new drug, a new legal drug so long as it has actually passed various basic health tests. Now, that's a radical and new innovation and it hasn't actually been tested to the limit yet. It's only been in place for about a year. But it's a brave step. It's an innovation and it's the kind of thinking that we need in the internet era to move the debate beyond legal and illegal, beyond prison or no prison. It's like, let's look at what people want to do. Some people want to take drugs. We need to get over that. We need to just accept that some people sometimes will take drugs. It's been going on for 9,000 years. In the modern context, it's been going on for 50 years. People take drugs. It's not a big deal. It's not something that I think is something that is law-de-treat. It's just a fact of life. People take drugs in the same way they read books. Not all drug use is problematic, but all drug policy is predicated on the assumption that people who take drugs are addicted or in trouble or any number of things, but there is lots of different reasons for taking drugs and for selling and buying them, mainly economics. If there's any more questions, I'll take maybe one more. Do I speak about psychedelics in my book? Yes, I do. I think that psychedelics are a really interesting case in all drug policy, because if you look at a psychedelic, such as Mesculin, or Salla Cybin, Mesculin extracted or taken from paeoteicactors, it's been used for thousands of years by Native American people, and there have been studies done which show that they actually have higher levels of mental health. Those who have used Mesculin extensively on hundreds of occasions through their life than those who didn't. Obviously that's taken in... It's the context that I think is interesting with psychedelics in the drugs. Psychedelics, just when they're taken, I think, just randomly, I'm sure that they're not very helpful substances, but I think in a ritualistic or a shamanistic environment, for some people and for some communities and for some cultures, it's a positive thing, and we can't argue against that, because the data's there and the history is there. I do talk about psychedelics. I talk about the fact that the new psychedelics which are replacing the banned psychedelics are actually far more dangerous. You can't toxicologically overdose on Salla Cybin. You can't eat enough magic mushrooms to die. You just can't do it. You'll turn into a frog first. You can quite easily die from many of the new legal psychedelics which are being sold all over the internet right now. These drugs, which have name-like chemical soups, 25 li MBOME, these drugs are LSD replacements, legal in much of the USA, and the killer people, because they're really potent. So, yeah, my drugs, my book covers all psychedelics from the very first LSD trip and the very first masculine trip by a conservative politician on camera, which is a fun story, right through to Al Hoffman inventing LSD in 1943 and right until 2013. So, yeah, everything's in there. All of that. So that was really informative and really enjoyable. Q&A. Thank you very much, everyone. Thank you for coming.