Making drug policy in summer-drug checking in Australia as providing more heat than light.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: There was an exceptional drug policy debate in Australia over the summer of 2018-2019 regarding the availability of drug checking (pill-testing) services at festivals. Drug checking is not a new intervention and has been available across Europe for many years. This paper aimed to analyse the nature of the policy debate. DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were sourced from public domain sites; online, TV and radio media, alongside documentation of advocacy actions. Analysis of the contents of the public debate was conducted through the theoretical lens of Science and Technology Studies, notably the work of Stengers.
RESULTS: The narratives identified in favour of pill-testing focussed on the evidence available to date, the importance of informed choice and accessing a population to provide information and education. The arguments against pill-testing included the belief that there is no such thing as safe drug use, the false sense of security that pill-testing would engender and that the evidence to date is equivocal. Both those for and against pill-testing shared the same goal-saving lives. However, the beliefs and values underpinning this goal differed. As the heat increased over summer, the debate became more polarised, but shedding little light. DISCUSSION AND
CONCLUSIONS: Drug policy debate, which becomes polarised, and remains focussed on matters of fact, rather than matters of concern, seems unlikely to result in productive resolutions. A more 'civilised' mode of debate that situates knowledge, engages values, is conducted with humility and encourages hesitation (following Stengers) may be more productive.