UN Commission approves WHO recommendations to place psychoactive substances under international control
Following recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) has decided to place five new psychoactive substances and one medicine under international control.
The recommendations were developed by WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence--ECDD, which consists of global experts analyzing health risks and benefits of psychoactive substances circulating on global markets and alerting to include them under international control if evidence found that their use can cause harm for population health in countries.
substances placed in Schedule I of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961), as amended by the 1972 Protocol are:
Substance placed in Schedule II of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances (1971):
Substance placed in Schedule IV of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances (1971):
Carisoprodol
Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs:
Schedules
The Single Convention's Schedules of drugs range from most restrictive to least restrictive, in this order: Schedule IV, Schedule I, Schedule II, Schedule III. The list of drugs initially controlled was annexed to the treaty. Article 3 states that for a drug to be placed in a Schedule, the World Health Organization must make the findings required for that Schedule, to wit:
- Schedule I – The substance is liable to similar abuse and productive of similar ill effects as the drugs already in Schedule I or Schedule II, or is convertible into a drug.
- Schedule II – The substance is liable to similar abuse and productive of similar ill effects as the drugs already in Schedule I or Schedule II, or is convertible into a drug.
- Schedule III – The preparation, because of the substances which it contains, is not liable to abuse and cannot produce ill effects; and the drug therein is not readily recoverable.
- Schedule IV – The drug, which is already in Schedule I, is particularly liable to abuse and to produce ill effects, and such liability is not offset by substantial therapeutic advantages.
Comments