THE DRUG HABIT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3764, 4 May 1926, Page 72

THE DRUG HABIT.

FEWER CASES IN RECENT YEARS. (From Oob Own Correspondent.i LONDON, February 24. “In a considerable proportion of cases the circumstance which has immediately led to addiction has been the previous use of the drug in medical treatment,” states the report of the departmental committee on Morphine and Heroin addiction published as a White Paper. 1 * Other circumstances noted, according to the committee, have been self-treatment for the relief of pain, etc., recourse to drugs in emotional distress, influence of other addicts, and indulgences for the sake of curiosity or the experience of pleasurable sensations. Cases of addiction originating in use of the drugs otherwise than under medical orders must be Expected in future to be less frequent than in the past Addiction to morphine or heroin, it is stated, is rare in this country, and has diminished in recent years. Cases are proportionately more frequent in the great urban centres, among persons who have to handle these drugs for professional or business reasons, and among persons specially liable to nervous and mental strain. Addiction is more readily produced by the use of heroin than by the use of morphine, and addiction to heroin is more difficult to cure. The committee •attributes the recent diminution in the number of addicts to the restrictions imposed by the Dangerous Drugs Act, and adds that, with few exceptions, addiction to these drugs should be regarded as a manifestation of a morbid state, and not as a mere form of vicious indulgence. INSTITUTIONAL TREATMENT. Dealing with treatment and after-care the committee suggests that abrupt or rapid withdrawal cannot be carried out safely except under certain conditions, and consider that the only practicable method under ordinary conditions will be gradual withdrawal. Institutional treatment, while with rare exceptions indispensable for the abrupt method, also affords the best hope cf cure by the gradual method, and patients should always, if possible, be induced to undergo treatment in an institution or nursing home. For permanent cure a prolonged period of after-care is necessary. A suggestion is made that a doctor should be satisfied as to urgency before ordering or supplying these particular drugs to a patient concerning whom he has no previous knowledge. The minimum dose should be administered and repetition withheld until details of the case have been obtained from the previous practitioner. It i« also considered that the Homo Secretary should have power, after the conviction of a doctor in the courts for an offence under the Dangerous Drugs Acts, or on the advice of a medical tribunal, to withdraw the practitioner’s authorisation to prescribe dangerous drugs. Doctors who do not dispense should be required to keep a simple record of their purchases of dangerous drugs. The obtaining of a second medical opinion before undertaking the responsibility of continuing to administer drugs should, the committee thinks, be regarded as a professional obligation.