The addiction for profit industry has had a very good two decades, and the public has footed the bill. In the United States, lawmakers loosened drug laws and promised fewer deaths. However, the death counts went the wrong way, and oversight never caught up.
A Former Reform Campaigner Says He Got It Wrong
Michael Shellenberger spent the late 1990s and early 2000s campaigning for drug decriminalisation, harm reduction and criminal justice reform. In an essay published in August 2021, he called that work a mistake. “It’s obvious now that we were wrong,” he wrote. His intentions were good, he says. The results were not.
Still, the deaths tell the story. Over the last 20 years the United States liberalised its drug laws, and deaths from illicit drugs rose from 17,000 to 93,000. That is two and a half times the toll from car accidents. It is five times the toll from homicide.
Some of the dead were homeless people who died alone in hotel rooms and apartment units handed out under Housing First. Others were children, found dead by their parents on the floors of their rooms. Europe’s showcase models offer little comfort either. Shellenberger says Portugal and the Netherlands still ban dealing. He asked Portugal’s head of drug policy what happens to someone injecting heroin in public. “They would be arrested,” came the answer.
Why the Addiction for Profit Industry Thrives on Weak Oversight
A March 2020 case review on marijuana and violence opens with a big number. Marijuana is the most consumed illicit drug in the world, with over 192 million users. Its authors say the push to legalise has outrun public health oversight. They describe 14 cases of violence involving chronic users and tie them to marijuana induced paranoia and psychosis.
A set of cases has limits, of course. It cannot say how common these outcomes are. Still, the authors make a point that stands on its own. When they wrote, ten US states had legalised recreational use and more than 20 had decriminalised it. Products were on sale at high THC concentrations “without taking into account its addictive qualities and adverse effects,” they say. They want wider public awareness and government monitoring of the drug’s composition, creation and distribution. Selling first and studying later is a bad deal for the public.
The Dutch Experiment Exposes the Back Door Problem
The Dutch case is a warning about the addiction for profit industry. Since the 1970s the Netherlands has tolerated cannabis sales in coffeeshops, and that created what officials call the back door problem. Front door sales are tolerated. Cultivation and supply at the back door are not. As a result, nobody can properly check quality or origin, and criminals can move into production and distribution.
The government’s fix was a trial. From 7 April 2025, ten municipalities began running a legal supply chain. Breuer and Intraval, RAND Europe and the Trimbos Institute, commissioned by the WODC, are studying it against ten comparison municipalities that kept the old system.
The first follow up shows the chain works. Coffeeshops in the trial areas now sell more varieties of flower, hash and joints than before, plus edibles, vapes and concentrates. Flower prices fell further than in the comparison areas. Hash prices rose. Visitors also rated the price to quality ratio of flower more highly.
Then the researchers add a caution. It is too early to say anything about coffeeshop visits, frequency of use, perceived health, problematic use, quality of life, safety or the illicit market. Stakeholders also reported problems with regulated hash supply, the admin load of track and trace, and unclear rules for edibles and vapes. So the menu has grown and some prices have fallen, while the health questions stay open.
Who Pays for the Profit Driven Addiction Market
Shellenberger says communities carry the cost of the addiction for profit industry. In addition, he takes aim at a popular idea about prisons. Nearly half of federal prisoners are there for nonviolent drug offences, he accepts. But state prisons hold eight times as many people, and only 14 per cent of them are in for nonviolent drug offences. Just 4 per cent are in for nonviolent possession. Meanwhile, half are there for murder, rape, robbery and other violent offences.
On San Francisco, he goes further. He argues the city hands out easy access to drugs instead of treatment, including cash payments and injecting equipment, and that this directly finances the drug death crisis. You can argue with that claim. The death figures are harder to argue with.
Above all, stopping use before it starts protects young people and leaves less room for a market that lives off dependence. The Dutch researchers will report more in further annual measurements, with a broader evaluation planned about 2.5 years after the trial began. Until then, caution makes sense.
The addiction for profit industry grows when oversight lags. Nobody should hand it another head start.
Sources:
Leave a Reply