Recruiting Have you taken a new psychoactive substance in Canada in the last 12 months?

Tronica

Tronica

Executive Director
Staff member
Joined
Mar 12, 2002
Messages
4,407
Health Canada have launched a new survey about new psychoactive substances.
If you have taken a new psychoactive substance in Canada in the last 12 months, they would love to hear from you.

Bluelight would like to publicly thank the funder for donating to us - these donations help us to keep Bluelight running without advertising dodgy products and websites :)
Please, if you do meet the inclusion criteria, Bluelight recommends you check out the survey and contribute your data as best you can.

Survey link: https://secure.malatest.com/prod/cwx.cgi?2020_NPS

Invitation to participate quoted below.

Thanks a lot everyone!

UPDATE - this survey has been extended for another 12 months. New closing date 28/2/2023.

Hello/Bonjour,

My name is Stephanie Lefebvre, and I work for the research firm R.A. Malatest in Victoria, BC.

In 2017, Health Canada launched a pilot study (on Bluelight!) about New Psychoactive Substances (NPS) experiences. Given the success of that pilot study and the willingness of Bluelight members to share their experiences, Health Canada has asked Malatest to conduct an ongoing survey on their behalf. The results from this survey will allow Health Canada to better understand the presence and demand for NPS in Canada.

Any information you provide us is completely confidential (no identifying information is requested at any time in the survey). Questions you will be asked include where, how much, and effects that you experienced (e.g., unwanted health effects, come-down or after effects). We also ask general socio-demographic questions (e.g., gender, employment status). This survey is completely funded by Health Canada.

The survey is open to anyone (residents and non-residents) as long as the NPS experience took place in Canada. You can also complete the survey as many times as you like (for each unique instance of NPS use). The survey will be available until March 2022.

If you have any questions, I can be contacted at [email protected] or via the Bluelight private messaging system (username: malatest).

Please feel free to post the link to other online communities who may be interested in the survey!

Thank you!

Stephanie Lefebvre
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Note to Canadian Bluelighters who are considering filling out this survey:

As mentioned, Health Canada has previously partnered with Bluelight to survey Bluelight's users on their use of novel psychoactive substances. At the time, concerns were brought up that the survey results might be used to support legislation banning novel psychoactive substances in Canada.

Despite its innocuous name, Health Canada plays a similar role to the DEA in the United States when it comes to the scheduling of drugs. Just like the DEA in the United States can unilaterally "emergency schedule" a drug without government legislation having to be passed, Health Canada can unilaterally decide to prohibit a substance without any legislation. Unlike with "emergency scheduling" in the U.S., however, Health Canada's bans are permanent.

A few days after the 2017 survey closed, Health Canada banned a class of NPS including the compound U-47700. Part of the rationale for the ban included:
Government of Canada said:
Based on recreational user reports, many of the effects of U-47700 appear to resemble those of oxymorphone or hydromorphone. Reports indicate that U-47700 is being sold and used for recreational purposes both internationally and in Canada.
Click to expand...
Just a coincidence? Maybe. And the role that the survey would have played in this decision, if it did play a role, would likely have been minimal. But I still think it's worth taking into consideration before deciding whether or not you would like to share your NPS experience with Health Canada.
 
Thanks for the context @ConcernedCanadian

I think 10-15 years back we could potentially be one of the first places where a new recreational substance might be described, and a survey like this might be the first instance.

These days, with the mass machine learning AI stuff going on with information from across the whole public internet (plus who know what's going on with semi-dark and dark content), I doubt a survey is going to be the first place where a new substance is discovered.

The survey results will offer some pieces of info not available through other online content, namely understanding the demographics of the person using the substance (typically not available through BL or Reddit or other public online posts). And looking at the overall sample, you can get a sense of prevalence - but even that is flawed because it's a convenience sample.

But if you really want to avoid new substances being scheduled, people would have to stop mentioning them at all in public online, e.g. in forums like this one. I hope that doesn't happen - given the harm reduction info that we share here is important for people's safety!
 
Is it like synthetic weed or Bath salts style research chemicals?
 
This is their definition of NPS, on the participant information (first page of the link):

NPS are substances formulated to contain chemicals that mimic the effects of controlled substances, and are often referred to as alternatives to controlled substances. For example,

NPS may include:

  • "legal highs"
  • "herbal highs"
  • synthetic cannabinoids
  • "research chemicals"
  • fentanyl analogues
  • cathinone analogues
NPS do not include:
  • cannabis (e.g., marijuana, hashish, hash oil)
  • cocaine
  • speed
  • ecstasy
  • heroin
Click to expand...
 
Health Canada have provided some results from the 2017 study, which was a pilot for this one. Interesting to note that most people got the desired effects and only a quarter reported negative effects from their use of novel substances.

Thank you for your interest and participation in this survey!

The purpose of this survey is to observe patterns of use of new psychoactive substances, as voiced directly from people with lived and living experience. The following results have been provided by Health Canada based on the 2017 pilot survey data. Updated findings from the current survey will be posted as they become available.

In late 2017, Health Canada launched a pilot survey on Bluelight about new psychoactive substance (NPS) use experiences. During that time, 134 respondents from the Bluelight community completed the survey, resulting in a number of reported substances including, but not limited to: 1P-LSD, 25I-NBOMe, 2C-T-7, 4-AcO-DET, 4F-MPH, and ALD-52. On average, 53% of people who reported an episode of NPS use said that it was not their first time using that particular substance, and 79% indicated that they had taken the substance at least three times in the past 12 months.

The majority of reported substances came in the form of a powder (44% ) or blotter/film/stamp (27% ), and was most often taken through absorption (28% ) or swallowed as a pill/capsule (16% ). Most respondents (74% ) reported taking a single dose of the substance, with few respondents indicating that they either took a larger dose than intended (23% ) or took more doses than intended (13% ).

Respondents reported that they took the substance in order to achieve a variety of desired effects, with the most common being hallucination (i.e., to alter one’s visual or auditory perceptions; 41% ), to alter one’s consciousness (24% ), or to reduce or manage anxiety, fear, stress or depression (22% ), and 80% indicated that the desired effects were achieved. Although most respondents felt that the substance they took was of high purity (86% ), one quarter (25% ) of respondents reported at least one negative health effect, with the most common being dizziness or balance problems (25% ), involuntary body movements (22% ), psychological crisis involving depression, anxiety, psychosis, paranoia, or a manic episode (18% ), hyperthermia (20% ), irregular or fast heart beats, severe arrhythmia or tachycardia (17% ), and nausea and vomiting (17% ).

Overall, the majority of respondents reported taking any NPS monthly or less (79% ) and 61% indicated that they plan to use NPS sometime in the future.

For help with problematic substance use, please visit: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-can...-help/get-help-problematic-substance-use.html
Click to expand...
 
If they play any role like the DEA, to hell with them. I can't believe we would even take their money if they can have substances banned

Of course, I am going based on the post at the top; there role could be smaller than I think
 
Lorne??? said:
If they play any role like the DEA, to hell with them. I can't believe we would even take their money if they can have substances banned

Of course, I am going based on the post at the top; there role could be smaller than I think
Click to expand...

I'm not Canadian. Happy to be told otherwise, but a quick look at Health Canada's website tells me they are more like the US's Food and Drug Administration or Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration. So they play a role in regulating drug/food products. A bit different to the DEA.

For the Canadians watching this thread, I'd be keen to know more about whether the drugs listed from the 2017 study are the ones that you were concerned about - or that got banned after 2017?
1P-LSD, 25I-NBOMe, 2C-T-7, 4-AcO-DET, 4F-MPH, and ALD-52

Thanks :)
 
Hi all,
Here is the French version of the 2017 study results (same as those posted above in English by Tronica):

Les résultats ci-dessous ont été fournis par Santé Canada à l’aide des données de l’enquête pilote de 2017. Les résultats actualisés de l’enquête actuelle seront publiés dès qu’ils seront disponibles.

À la fin de 2017, Santé Canada a lancé une enquête pilote sur Bluelight concernant les expériences de consommation de nouvelles substances psychoactives. Au cours de cette période, 134 personnes de la communauté Bluelight ont répondu à l’enquête, ce qui a donné lieu à la déclaration d’un certain nombre de substances, notamment, mais pas exclusivement : 1P-LSD, 25I-NBOMe, 2C-T-7, 4-AcO-DET, 4F-MPH et ALD-52. En moyenne, 53 % des personnes ayant déclaré un épisode de consommation ont mentionné que ce n’était pas la première fois qu’elles consommaient cette substance particulière, et 79 % ont indiqué qu’elles avaient pris cette substance au moins trois fois au cours des 12 derniers mois.
La majorité des substances déclarées se présentaient sous forme de poudre (44 % ) ou de buvard, film ou timbre (27 % ), et étaient le plus souvent prises par absorption (28 % ) ou avalées sous forme de pilule ou capsule (16 % ). La plupart des répondants (74 % ) ont déclaré avoir pris une seule dose de la substance, et peu de répondants ont indiqué avoir pris une dose plus importante que prévu (23 % ) ou avoir pris plus de doses que prévu (13 % ).
Les répondants ont indiqué qu’ils prenaient la substance pour obtenir divers effets, les plus courants étant les hallucinations (c.-à-d. pour modifier leurs perceptions visuelles ou auditives (41 % ), pour modifier leur conscience (24 % ), ou pour réduire ou gérer l’anxiété, la peur, le stress ou la dépression (22 % ), et 80 % ont indiqué que les effets souhaités étaient obtenus. Bien que la plupart des répondants aient estimé que la substance qu’ils ont prise était de grande pureté (86 % ), un quart (25 % ) des répondants ont signalé au moins un effet négatif sur la santé, les plus fréquents étant les étourdissements ou les problèmes d’équilibre (25 % ), les mouvements corporels involontaires (22 % ), les crises psychologiques telles que la dépression, l’anxiété, la psychose, la paranoïa ou un épisode maniaque (18 % ), l’hyperthermie (20 % ), les battements de cœur irréguliers ou rapides, l’arythmie grave ou la tachycardie (17 % ), et les nausées et vomissements (17 % ).
Dans l’ensemble, la majorité des répondants ont déclaré prendre des nouvelles substances psychoactives tous les mois ou moins (79 % ) et 61 % ont indiqué qu’elles prévoyaient utiliser de telles substances dans l’avenir.

Pour obtenir de l’aide en cas de consommation problématique de substances, veuillez consulter le site Web à https://www.canada.ca/fr/sante-canada/services/dependance-aux-drogues/obtenir-aide/obtenir-aide-consommation-problematique-substances.html.


If anyone has any questions, feel free to post here or message us directly at [email protected].
Thanks!
 
Tronica said:
Thanks for the context @ConcernedCanadian

I think 10-15 years back we could potentially be one of the first places where a new recreational substance might be described, and a survey like this might be the first instance.

These days, with the mass machine learning AI stuff going on with information from across the whole public internet (plus who know what's going on with semi-dark and dark content), I doubt a survey is going to be the first place where a new substance is discovered.

The survey results will offer some pieces of info not available through other online content, namely understanding the demographics of the person using the substance (typically not available through BL or Reddit or other public online posts). And looking at the overall sample, you can get a sense of prevalence - but even that is flawed because it's a convenience sample.

But if you really want to avoid new substances being scheduled, people would have to stop mentioning them at all in public online, e.g. in forums like this one. I hope that doesn't happen - given the harm reduction info that we share here is important for people's safety!
Click to expand...

The Best:

10 - 15 years back I wouldn't have known Benzos.....

Sigh...


JJ
 
Perhaps my comment is showing what I personally experienced or better said what I personally think about MY consume of drugs the last 10 -15 years.

JJ
 
Last edited:
Tronica said:
I'm not Canadian. Happy to be told otherwise, but a quick look at Health Canada's website tells me they are more like the US's Food and Drug Administration or Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration. So they play a role in regulating drug/food products. A bit different to the DEA.

For the Canadians watching this thread, I'd be keen to know more about whether the drugs listed from the 2017 study are the ones that you were concerned about - or that got banned after 2017?
1P-LSD, 25I-NBOMe, 2C-T-7, 4-AcO-DET, 4F-MPH, and ALD-52

Thanks :)
Click to expand...

1p-LSD is still legal here as far as I can tell. Not sure about the others. Wait...I think ALD-52 is also fully legal here.

25I-NBOMe is illegal, I'm fairly sure.

And, yes, Health Canada isn't anything like the DEA but is instead kind of like the FDA.
 
Saying health Canada is like the dea seems quite misleading.

The dea is both a regulatory and a law enforcement agency.

Health Canada seems to be purely a regulatory agency. There's no armed health Canada agents that I'm aware of.

What frustrates these kinds of comparisons is often there are no direct equivalents, sometimes the system isn't that directly comparable.

For example, what's the Australian FBI? Well what does the FBI do? They do federal law enforcement and domestic counter intelligence.

So what's the agency in Australia responsible for those functions? Well, there isn't one, the Australian federal police does the law enforcement and ASIO does domestic counter intelligence.

So is asio the Australian FBI? Is the afp the Australian FBI? Yes to both, and also no to both. ;P

So saying health Canada is the Canadian DEA is way too overly simplistic. In truth I don't think most countries have their own version of the DEA really. The DEA was mostly invented for political reasons.
 
Health Canada is not our DEA. They are merely simple, scripted whores for hire, as the political wind blows.

At Health Canada, health means nothing. Science means nothing. Evidence means nothing. And truth means nothing. They can't be bothered with all that crap! Those things require effort and integrity.

True, they are the whores who drive the RC industry forward in Canada! They amend the controlled substances schedules and write reams of regulations about everything imaginable. I suppose it's their surrogate for honest, productive public service: describing a safe, sexless, bloodless world without doing SFA to bring it about. Like a preacher.

Health Canada is almost entirely a PR pyramid supporting the fiction they have a useful purpose and the means to do it. They are clueless and they lie without hesitation.
 
Astatine said:
Health Canada is not our DEA. They are merely simple, scripted whores for hire, as the political wind blows.

At Health Canada, health means nothing. Science means nothing. Evidence means nothing. And truth means nothing. They can't be bothered with all that crap! Those things require effort and integrity.

True, they are the whores who drive the RC industry forward in Canada! They amend the controlled substances schedules and write reams of regulations about everything imaginable. I suppose it's their surrogate for honest, productive public service: describing a safe, sexless, bloodless world without doing SFA to bring it about. Like a preacher.

Health Canada is almost entirely a PR pyramid supporting the fiction they have a useful purpose and the means to do it. They are clueless and they lie without hesitation.
Click to expand...
Those are some strong words. But I'm not Canadian and can't really comment with any expertise...

What I can say is that continuing to ban novel substances is a problem. No country has worked out a policy that actually works. Some countries ban whole classes of drugs, other countries even try to ban another deemed 'psychoactive' (this is Australia's approach, where I am from). But what is psychoactive - how can you define that in law? It becomes very messy. And it shows up the vast inconsistencies in drugs law. If psychoactive things should be banned, how do we explain caffeine, alcohol and nicotine?

Many countries - including Canada - are suffering with staggering overdose rates. And much of that comes from fentanyl derivatives, and if those are banned, there will undoubtedly just be other analogues used instead and/or people don't care, it's prohibited, but they distribute the potent opioids that kill people anyway.

Canada impresses me with other innovations, like the recent safe supply initiative where people just handed out tested drugs on the streets. You guys do some cool stuff, but none of it should be necessary if we just regulated supply of psychoactives...
 
Health Canada deserves strong words, and very little credit for these initiatives. It's never their idea.

First, they're trifling numbers in the big picture of OD deaths here. Second, they are invariably the result of months or years of grinding pleading and protest from extremely hard-hit communities where the OD rate is insane. Fed up and gutsy local groups just go ahead, with or without HC approval. Should they happen to get a grudging, temporary, revocable-at-will dispensation from High Holy Health Canada, it's touted as a courageous and progressive made-in-Canada triumph! For the moment and for one community it may be. But truly significant change has been driven by decades-long Supreme Court battles.

Contrary to what is commonly reported (including by our government) cannabis is not "legal" here at all! Adults are allowed to buy and sell small amount obtained form a licensed vendor who must purchase it from licensed producer. HC hands those out, and the requirements are so stupidly onerous (the law is 128 pages, the regs several hundred more pages) only a handful of BIG companies made the cut. I think one is still standing. Investors lost billions, not that I care a jot about that. Those who know say "legal" weed is overpriced crap.

Or, you can grow your own. I think we're allowed six plants. So, were I to be caught smoking from my seventh plant I'd be a criminal. The arresting officer would know that of course. It's such a farce, but a distinctly Canuck farce!

And nothing much has changed, because Canada's illicit weed industry has been so deeply entrenched for decades many Canadians kind of assumed it was more or less legal and didn't give a damn either way. If they knew the law a few might have had second thoughts, but I doubt it. I really doubt it.

The only hugely good thing to come out of this fiasco is no more lives will be knee-capped by a criminal record for having a little dope in their pocket. And, of course, now the kids are safe. Uh-huh.

From one year ago: Stoners cheered when Canada legalised cannabis. How did it go so wrong? Our supposed multi-billion dollar industry has almost fully collapsed since then, and these failed captains of industry have moved on -- to psychedelics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top