Dear Committee Members, The proposed classification of isopropyl nitrite as prescription only and amyl nitrite (“poppers”) as restricted has consequences for gay and bisexual men in New Zealand. • Some men rely on poppers as a sex aid and are unable to have anal intercourse without its analgesic and muscle-relaxing effects. • Requiring a prescription will require some men to effectively ‘out themselves’ to their doctor/pharmacist. This may lead to prejudice, in particular in small communities, that may result in danger to gay/bisexual men. • Restricted control of supply is open to ‘gatekeeping’. Some doctors/pharmacists may restrict supply to some men because of misunderstanding/prejudice (similar to cases of women being denied emergency contraception) and/or only stocking some brands. • Ease of supply during periods of high-volume (e.g. Pride) may prevent some men from having their preferred type of gay sex. This could also cause congestion for other pharmacy users in terms of the pharmacist's time. • Physical and online adult shops are open much longer hours than pharmacies and demand for poppers is often outside business hours. Although potentially hazardous when taken incorrectly or in excess, the potential negative effects of poppers can be mitigated through warning labels, safety-cap requirements and education. There are risks with the consumption of poppers, about which the LGBTQI+ community is aware. There are also significant benefits; such as being able to enjoy anal sex when you choose. Members of this community should not be required to talk to someone about an aspect of their sex life when a straight person is not required to do so. The proposed legislation is in effect regulating sex for many of NZ’s gay and bisexual men. Amyl Nitrate Poppers generally have a low-level risk from harm or long term use (especially when compared with Isopropyl Nitrite) and should be freely available to buy in physical and online sex shops. Warnings and education on use should be enhanced instead of restrictions imposed. The social context of the proposed changes is poorly understood and the current proposal is unreasonable and disproportionate. Harmonisation of rules with Australia is not a good enough reason to restrict, expose, and regulate the sex lives of an already historically persecuted group of New Zealanders. Regards, March 16, 2020. Submission - Agenda Item 5.3 Alkyl Nitrites, 64th Meeting of Medicines Classification Committee Introduction [Biographical details redacted]. Comments There are two points I wish to make. 1. The Committee is considering steps that would amount to an intervention in a well- established sexual culture. The culture is important to the lives of its participants. The use of poppers within that culture is widespread, long-standing, and valued. Moreover, that use of poppers has been de facto permitted by the state for several decades. The steps the Committee is considering do not appear motivated by any fresh official desire in New Zealand to end poppers use for its own sake. Given that backdrop many gay and bisexual men would not regard as having been justified or necessarily respect, any decision which prevented the use of poppers either by formal prohibition or via a regulatory regime tantamount to prohibiting them. Such a decision would risk creating a black market in a product for which there is still demand. 2. I urge the Committee to adopt the recommendations made by the New Zealand Drugs Foundation and the New Zealand Aids Foundation in their joint submission to the Committee’s 63rd meeting. As I follow them, they would: allow the least harmful amyl nitrite to become the reigning poppers chemical and be sold through the current channels rather than through the likely near-prohibitive routes of prescription and pharmacy-only access, and tighten the regulation of the most harmful alkyl nitrites. I hope the Committee finds that such an outcome would satisfy its purposes as well as be legitimate in the eyes of an affected group and prevent the harms of illegal sale. Thank you for your consideration. 19 March 2020 My submission with respect to Agenda Item 5.3 alkyl nitrates. I am a gay man who has been using this product since 1980; I am now 62. I am in good health and have suffered none of the ailments that feature prominently in the apparent safety issues raised in Medsafe’s arguments. I find myself questioning the value of this submission and the authenticity of the process. Medsafe have undermined this meeting by adding alkyl nitrates, a substance with no therapeutic or medicinal use, to the Medicines List prior to submissions being made or consideration by the Committee. I have felt intimidated and deterred from making this submission by Medsafe’s aggressive strategy. One of the arguments I have heard put forward has been for NZ to move in line with Australia. I find this assertion dubious. Until the Australian changes, Medsafe always deferred to the UK (and selectively still does) for decisions and guidance. The UK’s stance is curiously absent here simply because alkyl nitrates are not considered a medicine in the UK for good reason – it is not a medicine, it has no therapeutic use. The proposal to make the product a pharmacy only medication is tantamount to a ban. No reputable doctor or pharmacy would prescribe or dispense the product. This, I know, will very quickly lead to ‘backyard production’ as it has before. The original product called poppers was amyl nitrate, a product that does have medicinal use. When amyl nitrate was effectively banned in the early 1980’s and prior to the industry manufacturers adapting to a non-medicinal product, there was a period where a range of backyard products using ‘Kiwi resourcefulness and ingenuity’ became widely available. The quality and constitution of these products was unknown, packaging invariably problematic with leakage commonplace. Once the industry adapted to new regulation, with a significantly diluted and weakened product, these issues were resolved and marketing through saunas and adult shops became successfully self regulated, as it has remained until today. I do wonder why Medsafe are so determined to consign this product to the annals of history. To the best of my knowledge, this product is only a problem to Medsafe. I have heard of no issues raised by the Police, no issues raised by Emergency Departments, no issues raised by the Ministry of Education, in fact any branch of Government at all. Safety concerns have been leveled at this product in particular only because it is the predominant product in the market. The issues raised can only factor after sustained and excessive use which is highly unlikely, unrealistic and not in line with the short term, brief manner the product is anecdotally used as well as in my personal experience. The effective removal of this product from the market would have a significant impact on my personal life. It is one of the few pleasures I have left sexually. For me to ask a doctor for a prescription and to collect from a pharmacy would be not only highly unlikely but would be an undignified and embarrassing process to undertake. The current situation works for everyone other than Medsafe. It works for those who chose to use the product, it works for those who sell it and their employee’s, it works for the United Kingdom and many other countries. The status quo is working and has done for over 40 years since it first became available in the late 1970’s. I respectfully request the Committee to maintain the status quo. Harmonisation of the New Zealand and Australian schedules for alkyl nitrites Thank you for the opportunity to submit feedback to the 64th meeting of Medicines Classification Committee in May 2020 agenda item around the classification of alkyl nitrites. This issue is of great importance to the LGBT+ community in particular, but additionally has broad health implications for the public. Medsafe is looking to harmonize the New Zealand and Australian Schedule with respect to Alkyl nitrites. On Feb 1 2020 the updates to the Australian schedule came into effect regarding alkyl Nitrites. Amyl Nitrite is now Schedule 3 (restricted) when in preparations for human therapeutic use and packaged in containers with child-resistant closures - meaning they can be purchased from behind the counter at a pharmacist pending appropriate packaging. Isoamyl nitrite, butyl nitrite, isobutyl nitrite and octyl nitrite remain on schedule 4 — effectively restricting them to ‘prescription only’ access. Isopropyl nitrite & n-propyl nitrite are classified as Schedule 10 - prohibiting them from sale, supply, and use due to the potential health risks of temporary or permanent retinal maculopathy. The product currently available in Australia through adult stores is butyl nitrite which remains unchanged as schedule 4 – Prescription only. While this means amyl nitrite may eventually be available through pharmacies, there are no products currently on the market for this purpose in Australia. Adult shops and sex venues sell “aromas” and “leather cleaners”. They have always been illegal to sell without prescription, but state and territory police have overlooked that law. There is potential for enforcement to crack down with raids as happened in Canada when legislation changed. Enforcement actions could include stop sales, recalls, voluntary forfeitures detention or disposal or 2 months imprisonment for a first offence. Some Australian adult venues have stopped selling or moved products under the counter to avoid litigation. If you import, buy, possess, or use poppers in Australia without a prescription, you are now liable for prosecution. This is a particular risk if you bring poppers into areas and events where police regularly harass queer people and people who use drugs, such as lines to enter venues, dance parties and festivals.
Details
-
File Typepdf
-
Upload Time-
-
Content LanguagesEnglish
-
Upload UserAnonymous/Not logged-in
-
File Pages111 Page
-
File Size-