WHY does the Australian 2020 Penington Report state there were 328 "unintentional overdoses" from cannabinoids? I for one would like to know how it is possible to "unintentionally overdose" on cannabinoids? [Ah, which ones??]
Hi Kevin, thanks for getting in touch. The 328 unintentional overdose deaths involving cannabinoids are all the overdose deaths where cannabinoids were detected in a person's system at autopsy. It doesn't necessarily mean that the cannabinoid caused that person's death. Synthetic cannabinoids have been linked to more harms than natural/medicinal cannabis. In the rare instances where deaths involve just cannabinoids on their own, they are very likely to be due to synthetic cannabinoid products. Hope this helps.
@@peningtoninstitute6882 Thank you for your prompt response. Perhaps I am missing something, but if "overdose deaths where cannabinoids were detected in a person's system at autopsy" are part of a larger issue whereby multiple drugs were involved in ALL known cases, why does the graphic shown at 1 min, 1 sec into the video state categorically the "number of unintentional overdose deaths in Australia" due to cannabinoids were 328? This seems extremely disingenuous to me, especially when you state above "it doesn't necessarily mean that the cannabinoid caused that person's death?" To be clear, IF the issue is polypharmacy identified via toxicology at autopsy AND there are only "rare instances where deaths involve just cannabinoids"...that are "very likely to be due to synthetic cannabinoid products", how is 328 unintentional overdose deaths involving cannabinoids a truthful statement, or a reliable indicator of what is actually occurring here? Also, may I ask please: 1. HOW many deaths in Australia in 2018 were specifically due to synthetic cannabinoid products? If it is so rare, what are the actual hard numbers? & 2. HOW many deaths in Australia in 2018 were specifically due to non-synthetic or organic cannabis, where it was the only substance found at autopsy?
Hi @@kevinjames3184. The graphic you mention at 1.01 does not categorically state that 328 overdose deaths were solely attributable to cannabis. It's intended to show the contribution of different types of substances to unintentional overdose deaths, not attribute sole responsibility to any one type of drug. Adding up the number of deaths where a particular substance was identified (the circles around the outside of the map of Australia) results in a number that is higher than the total number of unintentional overdose deaths in Australia in 2018 (1,556). This is because, as we emphasise in the Report, the number of cases where multiple substances are detected is rising (so-called polydrug use). Unfortunately, the data we currently receive for the Report does not allow the different types of cannabinoids (natural, synthetic and medicinal) to be separated. Penington Institute has previously had pieces published calling for the decriminalisation of cannabis, including this piece from last October: www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/crimefighting-dividends-in-decriminalising-cannabis/news-story/8553cbad9333fe513d1df7ee77d7d59f And this piece in the Canberra Times, supporting the ACT's decision to legalise cannabis for personal use: www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6608930/legal-cannabis-a-good-step-but-drug-war-hangover-remains/
@@peningtoninstitute6882 I see what your intent is here, but for a layman listening to your video [I am not a statistician] it still comes across as ambiguous imho...I simply wonder IF alcohol has played a far more significant role in deaths and/or hospitalisations per year in Australia, yet it is a legal 'revenue raiser' for the Federal Gov't. P.S. Thank you for posting the article in The Australian, however it is unfortunately behind a Paywall.
@@kevinjames3184 apologies for any ambiguity or confusion! Hopefully, despite the pay wall on the article in The Australian, you can see that it's certainly not our intention to demonise cannabis. We believe it has fewer risks than many currently legal substances!
Great job. Hope your government wakes up and stops their shit war on drugs. It has clearly failed.
WHY does the Australian 2020 Penington Report state there were 328 "unintentional overdoses" from cannabinoids?
I for one would like to know how it is possible to "unintentionally overdose" on cannabinoids? [Ah, which ones??]
Hi Kevin, thanks for getting in touch.
The 328 unintentional overdose deaths involving cannabinoids are all the overdose deaths where cannabinoids were detected in a person's system at autopsy. It doesn't necessarily mean that the cannabinoid caused that person's death.
Synthetic cannabinoids have been linked to more harms than natural/medicinal cannabis.
In the rare instances where deaths involve just cannabinoids on their own, they are very likely to be due to synthetic cannabinoid products.
Hope this helps.
@@peningtoninstitute6882 Thank you for your prompt response. Perhaps I am missing something, but if "overdose deaths where cannabinoids were detected in a person's system at autopsy" are part of a larger issue whereby multiple drugs were involved in ALL known cases, why does the graphic shown at 1 min, 1 sec into the video state categorically the "number of unintentional overdose deaths in Australia" due to cannabinoids were 328? This seems extremely disingenuous to me, especially when you state above "it doesn't necessarily mean that the cannabinoid caused that person's death?"
To be clear, IF the issue is polypharmacy identified via toxicology at autopsy AND there are only "rare instances where deaths involve just cannabinoids"...that are "very likely to be due to synthetic cannabinoid products", how is 328 unintentional overdose deaths involving cannabinoids a truthful statement, or a reliable indicator of what is actually occurring here?
Also, may I ask please: 1. HOW many deaths in Australia in 2018 were specifically due to synthetic cannabinoid products? If it is so rare, what are the actual hard numbers? & 2. HOW many deaths in Australia in 2018 were specifically due to non-synthetic or organic cannabis, where it was the only substance found at autopsy?
Hi @@kevinjames3184.
The graphic you mention at 1.01 does not categorically state that 328 overdose deaths were solely attributable to cannabis. It's intended to show the contribution of different types of substances to unintentional overdose deaths, not attribute sole responsibility to any one type of drug. Adding up the number of deaths where a particular substance was identified (the circles around the outside of the map of Australia) results in a number that is higher than the total number of unintentional overdose deaths in Australia in 2018 (1,556). This is because, as we emphasise in the Report, the number of cases where multiple substances are detected is rising (so-called polydrug use).
Unfortunately, the data we currently receive for the Report does not allow the different types of cannabinoids (natural, synthetic and medicinal) to be separated.
Penington Institute has previously had pieces published calling for the decriminalisation of cannabis, including this piece from last October: www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/crimefighting-dividends-in-decriminalising-cannabis/news-story/8553cbad9333fe513d1df7ee77d7d59f
And this piece in the Canberra Times, supporting the ACT's decision to legalise cannabis for personal use: www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6608930/legal-cannabis-a-good-step-but-drug-war-hangover-remains/
@@peningtoninstitute6882 I see what your intent is here, but for a layman listening to your video [I am not a statistician] it still comes across as ambiguous imho...I simply wonder IF alcohol has played a far more significant role in deaths and/or hospitalisations per year in Australia, yet it is a legal 'revenue raiser' for the Federal Gov't. P.S. Thank you for posting the article in The Australian, however it is unfortunately behind a Paywall.
@@kevinjames3184 apologies for any ambiguity or confusion! Hopefully, despite the pay wall on the article in The Australian, you can see that it's certainly not our intention to demonise cannabis. We believe it has fewer risks than many currently legal substances!