Talk:Convention on Psychotropic Substances

message: If anyone creates a treatybox, some relevant info is:
*Signed at Vienna on February 21, 1971.
*Entered into force on August 16, 1976.
SonicSynergy 18:51, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Treatybox

message: Can these policies be justified in any sort of moral or reasonable legal context (other than "we banned them because we think they're bad")?  If not shouldn't there be a criticism section.  The banning of LSD, for instance, is pretty much bullshit, as pure LSD doesn't have many bad effects, certainly less than alcohol. 208.97.117.154 23:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Legality?

message: In both the convention and the article I imagine medical use means licensed medicinal use.
Some question the idea that recreational use can not be also medicinal or therapeutic. Laurel Bush 09:52, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't mind getting ahold of the Commentary to the Convention on Psychotropic Substances, which might shed some light on the legislative intent there. SonicSynergy 22:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you seen ? Good stuff. Sheds a lot of light on the legislative intent. It is much similar to a commentary. ShockTrooper 12:47, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See also http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/bulletin/bulletin_1970-01-01_3_page002.html . Pravoka 05:32, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Medical and recreational use

message: :This was cross-posted to Wikipedia talk:Footnotes.
If someone wants to do a lot of people a big wiki-favor, please create a macro for automated conversion of an existing article to this footnote system. For instance, Convention on Psychotropic Substances needs to be converted to footnotes, but that would be rather time-consuming to do manually. There are probably hundreds or thousands of articles in need of such conversion. Please take a look and see what you think. Thanks! Remember me 14:35, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, it's fixed now. Remember me 22:42, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Automated conversion of an existing article to this footnote system

message: The WHO report about cathinone, MDMA, etc. is here. http://www.maps.org/dea-mdma/pdf/0165.PDF It would be great to get ahold of more of these reports. Remember me 19:36, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Cathinone

message: It should be noted that the treaty did not enter into force with respect to the United States until July 15, 1980. http://www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/usc/ttl21/ch13/subchI/ptA/sec801a.html CSA 12:38, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Entry into force

message: Please see Talk:Convention on Psychotropic Substances/Pics. Percolator 18:18, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Pic options

message: I've changed all the references to Cite.php per Wikipedia:Footnotes. There were a large number of footnotes that were never used in the text but that were at the end of the article. I've put these in a bulleted list at the end of the references section. Someone familiar with the article/subject should probably go through and determine whether the links are appropriate in the references section. —Seqsea (talk) 06:44, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated to use Cite.php 

message: During the 1960s, a wave of drug use spread across Western developed nations, to the point where it appeared to alarmed policymakers to be reaching epidemic proportions.
I think that's too much, isn't it? ---Nicor 19:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: During the 1960s, drug use increased greatly around the world, especially in Western nations.
This seems like it might be a tricky thing to measure, especially the 'around the world' part. Are all drugs included in this? If people consume less of one drug and more of another, how do we tell if 'drug use' went up or down overall? Pound for pound comparisons? What about all the drug use that goes unmeasured? Also, if drug use 'increased greatly' during a certain period, does this mean there was an increase in per capita consumption, or is an increase at the rate of population growth good enough to qualify?--Eloil 08:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: The scheduled drug list under this convention looks just like the list from the US's CSA. And the US CSA isn't based on scientific facts at all, since soft drugs such as cannabis, psilocybin, and LSD are schedule 1. Did US politicians bribe the UN or is the UN as dumb as US officials? Obviously psychedelics are illegal because they make people question authority and government, since their health risks are minimal but health benefits are high. Zachorious 12:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't start a flamewar with this guy. 69.81.50.3 13:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looks Just Like The US CSA 

message: Gosh trying to find out why these drugs are illegal is proving difficult. "government authorities opposed this for numerous reasons, arguing that along with negative health effects, drug use led to lowered moral standards"
Ok, so what are the "negative health effects"? Where are the statistics for hospital admissions, the death rate etc?
What are the "moral standards"? Where is the schedule of moral standards? Is the "problem of the abuse of the psychotropic substances" that people enjoy getting high? Is that it? What is "the problem"? Where is "abuse" defined?
"It covers such a grab-bag of natural and manufactured items that at every stage of its consideration its proponents felt obliged to stress anew that it would not affect alcohol or tobacco abuse."
So it's all completely arbitrary then? There need not be a negative effect of a drug for it to be prohibited?
"there was insufficient evidence to indicate that the substance has therapeutic usefulness" seems to be the cryteria. So harmless or not, any drug other than tobacco and alcohol are banned for no clearly defined reason? Shouldn't we be linking to articles about fascism and totalitarianism, if that's what this really is?
60.241.100.51 (talk) 06:46, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: WHY

message: In the infobox at the top of the article, it's talking about how Schedule I drugs are allowed. But in the list, it says the complete opposite; that Schedule I drugs are the only ones that are competely illegal. It looks ike someone copied the schedule list form the US version. 69.81.50.3 13:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WTF? 

message: I think this article could use a section devoted to each schedule and the drugs in it a la Controlled Substances Act, Controlled Drugs and Substances Act etc. Where is the full list of scheduled drugs available?--Eloil 01:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections on schedules 

message: From the history paragraph: 
"Circa 1969, with use of stimulants spiraling out of control.."
Spiraling out of control? This needs to have some serious backing. And even if relevant sources state the same I would rather use more sober wording.
If there are no arguments against I will change to somthing like "Circa 1969, with use of stimulants growing.."
Pukkie (talk) 14:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV / wording 

message: Could someome post a list of the signed countries as this would improve the articles readibilty59.100.169.39 (talk) 11:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which countries Signed? 

message: "the quiet Canadian defiance of treaty obligations seemed to be another hairline crack in the foundation of global drug control."
This sounds like it was written in a novel, in addition to not being very neutral making Canada seem like something destroying the very foundation of global drug control(read: it says exactly that). Someone please edit this to make it sound more professional (less dramatic) or just remove it. In general I've noticed a lot of over dramatic writing in the article. Toxic Ninja (talk) 10:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite or remove 

message: "Despite its well-known presence in the rave scene, ketamine, or Special K, remains uncontrolled internationally due to its importance as an anesthetic in veterinary medicine."
Should this be changed to just "in medicine"? Ketamine is used regularly in human medicine too, and there are substances being classified under the UNCPS that are used in vetinary medicine, and it didn't seem to affect the desicion to place them under control. See Benzylpiperazine. --Daflore (talk) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, definitely. Turkeyphant 16:35, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ketamine 

message: Can anyone fix these?  I can't find most of the documents linked. Turkeyphant 16:35, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed most of the broken links. Still broken: 
* "Monthly Status of Treaty Adherence". United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. 2005-01-01. http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaty_adherence.html. Retrieved 2006-04-15. 
* "World drug threat, the UN reports". United Nations International Drug Control Programme. 1997. http://www.ias.org.uk/publications/theglobe/97issue3/globe9703_p11.html. Retrieved 2006-04-15.
* Bazant, Wayne (2002-02-04). "Amphetamine Type Stimulants Threaten East Asia". United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. http://www.unodc.un.or.th/factsheet/ATSissuesplans310102.htm. Retrieved 2006-04-15.
Zhunn (talk) 20:16, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  tons of UN citations 404d 

message: The mentioned plant species Mimosa hostilis is not the plant that is logical for the text of this particular section. According to the narrative, the plant Psychotria viridis seems more appropriate. Both Mimosa and Psychotria contain DMT. Perhaps someone would like to make this correction (?).213.186.246.222 (talk) 08:12, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Psychedelic plants and fungi 

message: It says that it's a Schedule IV drug now but under the WHO's evaluation the stub suggests that it is still a Schedule I drug. "...while leaving other tetrahydrocannabinols and their stereochemical variants in Schedule I." I gather this change was fairly recent and am not clear on the details so am not fixing it myself.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.210.172.17 (talk) 06:02, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  THC Schedule  

message: Is there a list of nations which have signed the convention? Should there be?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Testem (talk • contribs) 21:05, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Participating nations 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Convention on Psychotropic Substances. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.who.int/medicines/library/qsm/who-edm-qsm-2000-5/thc.doc
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:24, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Convention on Psychotropic Substances. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/resolution_1968-12-19_1.html
*Added  tag to http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-e/ille-e/rep-e/repfinalvol3-e.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/bulletin/bulletin_1999-01-01_1_page003.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaty_adherence.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/bulletin/bulletin_1970-01-01_3_page002.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/csa/811.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nida.nih.gov/DirReports/DirRep297/DirectorReport9.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120121083150/http://www.maps.org/pipermail/maps_forum/2001-March/003376.html to http://www.maps.org/pipermail/maps_forum/2001-March/003376.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ias.org.uk/publications/theglobe/97issue3/globe9703_p11.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:51, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Convention on Psychotropic Substances. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-e/ille-e/rep-e/repfinalvol3-e.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060516010858/http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/t990311b.html to http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/t990311b.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Convention on Psychotropic Substances. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060528001238/http://paranoia.lycaeum.org/stimulants/59.FR.31639 to http://paranoia.lycaeum.org/stimulants/59.FR.31639
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:19, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified