Vaccinations against drug addiction - good or bad?

According to this report, the British government is considering vaccinating schoolchildren against addiction to cocaine, heroin, tobacco etc in later life.
Is it a knee-jerk reaction to suggest this is a violation human rights or would it be a wise and proper move for the government to take?

Is vaccination against drugs posible? :eek:

According to the report, the vaccine was 58% effective in trials. I’m not sure that’s high enough to use on the general population. Assuming that it was more effective, though, I think that the government should only be able to require vaccinations for communicable diseases. Otherwise, an individual’s right to decide if they want a medical treatment (for him- or herself or their children) outweighs the government’s public health interest.

How exactly do you tell which children are at risk of becoming drug users?

I don’t think it should be mandatory, but I’d like to see some incentives to have it done, in the form of tax breaks, etc…

vaccines designed to thwart drug addiction are still extremely experimental, and are many years away from general use. Some are designed to produce protiens which block the drug’s action on the brain, but their safety and effectiveness have not yet been established. Some are designed to supposedly make antibodies against metabolities of the drug, which in theory is intended to reduce the effects of the drug on the brain, but these have been tried mainly only in mice thus far.

Don’t hold your breath. If you want to affect addiction rates, support early intervention and treatment for addicts.

Just this week, my Local Maastricht university asked for volunteer subjects (smoking adults) to test a vaccine against nicotine. It’s supposed to adsorb the nicotine, so smoking loses most of it’s benefits to the ones addicted to nicotine. So that fits with Quadgop’s remark, and who knows, if anyone wants to try those drugs they could try to become guineapigs too?

I did know aversion therapy existed to treat alcoholism:

In response to the OP, how could a drug that prevents addiction, not also prevent us to feel any beneficiary effects to say, social drinking, or the opiates administerd as painkillers in hospital?
Coult the drug allow us to enjoy alcohol and morphine/heroine (I thought they worked the same psysiologically, but IAND) in moderate doses, yet stop addiction? I don’t see how.

This is in Britain, remember? With a typical “we know what’s best for you” European government?

The children who are… well, you know, THOSE people.

Even worse, couldn’t it also interfere with the body’s own chemistry? I mean, the brain has receptors for these molecules for a reason. If they’re blocked from being activated by cocaine or heroin use, wouldn’t they also fail to be activated naturally?

Something tells me the people pushing these vaccines don’t believe a “moderate dose” exists. Drugs are bad, mm’kay.

As for the OP: This is a horrible, ghastly idea. IMO it’s as savage as mutilating little girls’ genitals to prevent them from feeling sexual pleasure later in life. It eliminates the possibility of addiction and temptation, at the cost of making its victim’s life a whole lot duller.

I wonder how vaccinated children would react if they needed to receive opiate-based medications later in life for legitimate medical reasons.

I never heard of vaccination against drug abuse before, so I haven’t thought it thru. What would be the ramifications of a life-long immunity to cocaine, for instance?


Looking at their parents? There’s a claim that “addictive personalities” are an inherited trait, which is why children of alcoholics are at risk for be coming alcoholics themselves.

Ya know, I wouldn’t be a bit suprised if this turned out to be a total disaster. Dopamines are natural chemicals found in the brain that create elevated moods. I have a nasty, sinking feeling that this stuff could mess them up very, very badly.

I used to think that the UK might be a nicer place to live than the States, but if this stuff goes wrong, badly wrong, the number of suicides could go through the roof.

This guy on Slashdot agrees:

Now I’m confused. I thought that this vaccine would only stop the narcotic from giving the user the rush of dopamine. I didn’t think this vaccine would negate the other physical aspects of the drug. Morphine would still kill pain; cocaine would still elevate the heart rate. I wonder, do the people designing this vaccine understand the difference in the effects of narcotics that addicts experience? For example, if I’d used cocaine a dozen or so years ago, I would have experienced a brief and mild euphoria, followed by several hours of heightened metabolism, which might be pleasurable or annoying, depending on how I felt that evening. If my friend Luke (MHRIP) used cocaine, he would experience a more intense and longer euphoria, which he would want to experience again before the physical effects of the drug wore off. Wouldn’t we need to know why we have these different effects before designing the vaccine?

Given the suicides, domestic strife and social problems associated with failed relationships, might we not also immunise children against against the euphoria which comes from falling in love?

A mature society allows its citizens to partake in euphoria-producing behaviour while simultaneously educating them in how not to let it ruin one’s life, while providing a safety net for those lives it does ruin.

Actually, this farcical suggestion runs utterly counter to traditional, pragmatic UK policy-making. I would be surprised if it ever even made it to a second reading in the House.