Hubbry Logo
David NuttDavid NuttMain
Open search
David Nutt
Community hub
David Nutt
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
David Nutt
David Nutt
David Nutt
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

David John Nutt (born 16 April 1951) is an English neuropsychopharmacologist specialising in the research of drugs that affect the brain and conditions such as addiction, anxiety, and sleep.[6] He is the chairman of Drug Science, a non-profit which he founded in 2010 to provide independent, evidence-based information on drugs.[7] In 2019 he co-founded the company GABAlabs and its subsidiary SENTIA Spirits which research and market alternatives to alcohol. Until 2009, he was a professor at the University of Bristol heading their Psychopharmacology Unit.[8] Since then he has been the Edmond J Safra chair in Neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College London and director of the Neuropsychopharmacology Unit in the Division of Brain Sciences there.[9] Nutt was a member of the Committee on Safety of Medicines, and was President of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.[10][11][12]

Key Information

Career summary and research

[edit]

Nutt completed his secondary education at Bristol Grammar School and then studied medicine at Downing College, Cambridge, graduating in 1972. In 1975, he completed his clinical training at Guy's Hospital.[13]

He worked as a clinical scientist at the Radcliffe Infirmary from 1978 to 1982 where he carried out basic research into the function of the benzodiazepine receptor/GABA ionophore complex, the long-term effects of BZ agonist treatment and kindling with BZ partial inverse agonists. This work culminated in a ground-breaking paper in Nature in 1982[14] which described the concept of inverse agonism (using his preferred term, "contragonism") for the first time. From 1983 to 1985, he lectured in psychiatry at the University of Oxford. In 1986, he was the Fogarty visiting scientist at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism in Bethesda, MD, outside Washington, D.C. Returning to the UK in 1988, he joined the University of Bristol as director of the Psychopharmacology Unit. In 2009, he then established the Department of Neuropsychopharmacology and Molecular Imaging at Imperial College, London, taking a new chair endowed by the Edmond J Safra Philanthropic Foundation.[13] He is an editor of the Journal of Psychopharmacology,[15] and in 2014 was elected president of the European Brain Council.[16]

In 2007 Nutt published a study on the harms of drug use in The Lancet.[17] Eventually, this led to his dismissal from his position in the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD; see government positions below). Subsequently, Nutt and a number of his colleagues who had resigned from the ACMD founded the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs, later renamed as Drug Science.[18]

Nutt has since produced numerous prominent reports on drug policy through Drug Science, while launching campaigns of support for evidence-based drug policy; including Project Twenty21, Medical Cannabis Working Group, and the Medical Psychedelics Working Group.[7] In 2013, Drug Science launched a peer-reviewed journal - Journal of Drug Science, Policy and Law - for which Nutt was appointed Editor.[19] Nutt also hosts the Drug Science Podcast, in which he engages drug policy experts, policy-makers, and scientists on the topics of drugs and drug policy.[20]

Nutt is the deputy head of the Centre for Psychedelic Research at Imperial College London.[21] He and his team have published research into psilocybin for treatment-resistant depression, as well as neuroimaging studies investigating psilocybin, MDMA, LSD, and DMT.[22]

A summary of the results from Nutt's 2010 paper in The Lancet

In November 2010, Nutt published a study in The Lancet - co-authored with Les King and Lawrence Phillips, on behalf of the Independent Committee on Drug Science - which ranked the harm done to individual users and broader society by a range of licit and illicit drugs.[23] Owing in part to criticism of the 2007 study for arbitrary weighting of factors,[18][24] the 2010 study employed a multiple-criteria decision analysis in its procedure to support their conclusion that alcohol is more harmful to society than heroin and crack (cocaine), whereas heroin, crack, and methamphetamine are most harmful to individuals.[23] Nutt has also published popular-level articles on these findings in newspapers and print media for the general public,[25] which have been met with to public disagreement from other researchers.[26]

Nutt continues to campaign for changing UK drug laws to facilitate greater research opportunities.[27][28][29][30]

Alcarelle and GABA Labs

[edit]

Building on his extensive research on the role of GABA in the brain, and the psychopharmacology of alcohol, since 2014 Nutt has spoken publicly about his desire to bringing-to-market a compound which could act as a "safer" replacement to alcohol and mimic some of its effects – namely, "conviviality" – by affecting the GABA receptor[31] without the negative health impacts of alcohol. Nutt has named the compound "Alcarelle", but has not yet disclosed the exact chemical composition; preliminary tests employed a benzodiazepine derivative, with later adaptations aimed at improving efficacy and reducing abuse potential.

In 2018 Nutt's company GABALabs (previously called "Alcarelle") lodged patents branded as "Alcarelle," [32] for several new compounds proposing to more closely mimic the desired "conviviality" of alcohol.[33][34] As of October 2019, no research has been published regarding the efficacy, safety, or long-term health impacts of these compounds, nor have they been made publicly available to consumers.

In January 2021, the science team at GABA Labs released-to-market a plant-based functional alcohol alternative, under the brand "Sentia,"[35] and advertised as a "botanical spirit" reported to reproduce the relaxed and social effects typically associated with the consumption of alcoholic beverages.[36]

Psychedelics

[edit]
Simplified visualization of the persistence homological brain function scaffolds from placebo on the left and that induced through psilocybin on the right[37]

In collaboration with Amanda Feilding and the Beckley Foundation, Nutt is investigating the effects of psychedelics on cerebral blood flow.[38][39][40][41][42]

Government positions

[edit]

Nutt previously worked as an advisor to the Ministry of Defence, Department of Health, and the Home Office.[13]

He served on the Committee on Safety of Medicines where he participated in an inquiry into the use of SSRI anti-depressants in 2003. The inquiry drew criticism for Nutt's participation, based on potential conflict-of-interest over his financial involvement in GlaxoSmithKline, which led to his withdrawal from discussions of the drug paroxetine.[43] In January 2008 he was appointed as chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), having previously served as Chair of the Technical Committee of the ACMD for seven years.[6]

"Equasy"

[edit]
Comparison of the perceived harm for various psychoactive drugs from a poll among medical psychiatrists specialized in addiction treatment. The associated paper was written by Nutt and included in his controversial lecture.[17][44]

As ACMD chairman, government ministers have repeatedly clashed with Nutt over conflicting opinions regarding drug harm and drug classification. In January 2009, Nutt published an editorial in the Journal of Psychopharmacology ("Equasy – An overlooked addiction with implications for the current debate on drug harms") in which the risks associated with horse riding (1 serious adverse event every ~350 exposures) were compared to those of taking ecstasy (1 serious adverse event every ~10,000 exposures).[4]

The word equasy is a portmanteau of ecstasy and equestrianism (based on Latin equus, 'horse'). Nutt told The Daily Telegraph that his intention was "to get people to understand that drug harm can be equal to harms in other parts of life".[45] In 2012, he explained to the UK Home Affairs Committee that he chose riding as the "pseudo-drug" in his comparison after being consulted by a patient with irreversible brain damage caused by a fall from a horse. He discovered that riding was "considerably more dangerous than [he] had thought ... popular but dangerous" and "something ... that young people do".[46]

Equasy has been frequently referred to in later discussions of drug harmfulness and drug policies.[47][48][49][50][51]

The issue of the mismatch between lawmakers' classification of recreational drugs, in particular that of cannabis, and scientific measures of their harmfulness surfaced again in October 2009, after the publication of a pamphlet[52] containing a lecture Nutt had given to the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London in July 2009. In this, Nutt repeated his view that illicit drugs should be classified according to the actual evidence of the harm they cause, and presented an analysis in which nine 'parameters of harm' (grouped as 'physical harm', 'dependence', and 'social harms') revealed that alcohol or tobacco were more harmful than LSD, ecstasy or cannabis. In this ranking, alcohol came fifth behind heroin, cocaine, barbiturates and methadone, and tobacco ranked ninth, ahead of cannabis, LSD and ecstasy, he said. In this classification, alcohol and tobacco appeared as Class B drugs, and cannabis was placed at the top of Class C. Nutt also argued that taking cannabis created only a "relatively small risk" of psychotic illness,[53] and that "the obscenity of hunting down low-level cannabis users to protect them is beyond absurd".[54] Nutt objected to the recent re-upgrading (after 5 years) of cannabis from a Class C drug back to a Class B drug (and thus again on a par with amphetamines), considering it politically motivated rather than scientifically justified.[44] In October 2009 Nutt had a public disagreement with psychiatrist Robin Murray in the pages of The Guardian about the dangers of cannabis in triggering psychosis.[26]

Dismissal

[edit]

Following the release of this pamphlet, Nutt was dismissed from his ACMD position by the Home Secretary, Alan Johnson. Explaining his dismissal of Nutt, Johnson wrote in a letter to The Guardian that "[Nutt] was asked to go because he cannot be both a government adviser and a campaigner against government policy. [...] As for his comments about horse riding being more dangerous than ecstasy, which you quote with such reverence, it is of course a political rather than a scientific point."[55] Responding in The Times, Professor Nutt said: "I gave a lecture on the assessment of drug harms and how these relate to the legislation controlling drugs. According to Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, some contents of this lecture meant I had crossed the line from science to policy and so he sacked me. I do not know which comments were beyond the line or, indeed, where the line was [...]".[56] He maintains that "the ACMD was supposed to give advice on policy".[57]

In the wake of Nutt's dismissal, Dr Les King, a part-time advisor to the Department of Health, and the senior chemist on the ACMD, resigned from the body.[58] His resignation was soon followed by that of Marion Walker, Clinical Director of Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust's substance misuse service, and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society's representative on the ACMD.[59]

The Guardian revealed that Alan Johnson ordered what was described as a 'snap review' of the 40-strong ACMD in October 2009. This, it was said, would assess whether the body is "discharging the functions" that it was set up to deliver and decide if it still represented value for money for the public. The review was to be conducted by David Omand.[60] Within hours of that announcement, an article was published online by The Times arguing that Nutt's controversial lecture actually conformed to government guidelines throughout.[61] This issue was further publicised a week later when Liberal Democrat science spokesman Dr Evan Harris, MP, attacked the Home Secretary for apparently having misled Parliament and the country in his original statement about Nutt's dismissal.[62]

John Beddington, the Chief Scientific Adviser to the UK Government stated that he agreed with the views of Professor Nutt on cannabis. When asked if he agreed whether cannabis was less harmful than cigarettes and alcohol, he replied: "I think the scientific evidence is absolutely clear cut. I would agree with it."[63] A few days later, it was revealed that a leaked email from the government's Science Minister Lord Drayson was quoted as saying Mr Johnson's decision to dismiss Nutt without consulting him was a "big mistake" that left him "pretty appalled".[64]

On 4 November, the BBC reported that Nutt had financial backing to create a new independent drug research body if the ACMD was disbanded or proved incapable of functioning.[65] This new body, the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs (later renamed DrugScience), was launched in January 2010 (later on to establish, in 2013, the journal Drug Science, Policy and Law). On 10 November 2009, after a meeting between ACMD and Alan Johnson, three other scientists tendered their resignations, Dr Simon Campbell, a chemist, psychologist Dr John Marsden and scientific consultant Ian Ragan.[66]

In an 11 November 2009 editorial in The Lancet, Nutt explicitly attributed his dismissal to a conflict between government and science, and reiterated that "I have repeatedly stated [cannabis] is not safe, but that the idea that you can reduce use through raising the classification in the Misuse of Drugs Act from class C to class B—where it had previously been placed, but thus now increasing the maximum penalty for possession for personal use to 5 years in prison—is implausible."[67] In a rejoinder, William Cullerne Bown of Research Fortnight pointed out that the framing of science vs. government was misleading because the weighting of the factors in Nutt's 2007 Lancet paper was arbitrary, and consequently that there was no scientific answer to ranking drugs.[68] In reply, Nutt admitted the limitations of the original study, and wrote that ACMD was in the process of devising a multicriteria decision-making approach when he was dismissed. Nutt reiterated that "The repeated claims by Gordon Brown's government that it had scientific evidence that trumped that of the ACMD and the acknowledgment that it was only interested in scientific evidence that supported its political aims was a cynical misuse of scientific evidence that breached the principles of the 1971 Act and was insulting to Council." Nutt announced that he and number of colleagues that had resigned from the ACMD had set up an Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs.[18]

A subsequent review of policy drafted by Lord Drayson[18] essentially reaffirmed that the scientific advisers to the government can be dismissed under similar circumstances: "Government and its scientific advisers should not act to undermine mutual trust."[69] This clause was kept despite protest from Sense about Science, Campaign for Science and Engineering, and Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris; according to Lord Drayson, the clause was requested by John Beddington, the Chief Scientific Adviser to the UK Government.[70] Leslie Iversen was announced as the successor of Nutt as the chair of the ACMD in January 2010.[71]

Honours

[edit]

David Nutt is a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians, Royal College of Psychiatrists and the Academy of Medical Sciences. He holds visiting professorships in Australia, New Zealand and the Netherlands. He is a past president of the British Association of Psychopharmacology and of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.[13] He was the recipient of the 2013 John Maddox Prize for promoting sound science and evidence on a matter of public interest, whilst facing difficulty or hostility in doing so.[72] He is past president of the British Neuroscience Association and past president of the European Brain Council.[73]

His book Drugs Without the Hot Air (UIT press) won the Salon London Transmission Prize in 2014.[74]

The University of Bath awarded Nutt with an honorary doctorate of laws in December 2019.[75]

Personal life

[edit]

David Nutt lives in Bristol, with his wife Diana. He has four children.[76]

Nutt is a Patron of My Death My Decision, an organisation which seeks a more compassionate approach to dying in the UK, including the legal right to a medically assisted death, if that is a person's persistent wish.[77]

Publications

[edit]

Articles

[edit]

Books

[edit]
  • David J. Nutt (2012). Drugs Without the Hot Air: Minimising the Harms of Legal and Illegal Drugs. Cambridge: UIT. ISBN 978-1-906860-16-5.
  • David J. Nutt (2020). Drink?: The New Science of Alcohol and Your Health. Yellow Kite. ISBN 978-1-529393-23-1.
  • David J. Nutt (2021). Nutt Uncut. Waterside Press.
  • David J. Nutt (2021). Brain and Mind Made Simple. Waterside Press.
  • David J. Nutt (2022). Cannabis (seeing through the smoke): The New Science of Cannabis and Your Health. Yellow Kite.
  • David J. Nutt (2023). Psychedelics: The revolutionary drugs that could change your life – a guide from the expert. Yellow Kite. ISBN 978-1-529360-53-0.

Medical and science

[edit]

Pharmacotherapy

Brain science

  • David J. Nutt; Martin Sarter; Richard G. Lister (1995). Benzodiazepine receptor inverse agonists. New York: Wiley-Liss. ISBN 978-0-471-56173-6.

Addiction and associated disorder

Anxiety disorders

  • David J. Nutt; James C. Ballenger (2003). Anxiety disorders. Oxford: Blackwell Science. ISBN 978-0-632-05938-6.
  • David J. Nutt; Eric J.L. Griez; Carlo Faravelli; Joseph Zohar (2001). Anxiety disorders: an introduction to clinical management and research. New York: Wiley. doi:10.1002/0470846437. ISBN 978-0-471-97873-2.
  • David J. Nutt; Spilios Argyropoulos; Adrian Feeney (2002). Anxiety Disorders Comorbid with Depression: Panic Disorder and Agoraphobia. London: Martin Dunitz. ISBN 978-1-84184-049-9.
  • David J. Nutt; Karl Rickels; Dan J. Stein (2002). Generalised Anxiety Disorder: Symptomatology, Pathogenesis and Management. London: Martin Dunitz. ISBN 978-1-84184-131-1.
  • David J. Nutt; Spilios Argyropoulos; Sam Forshall (2001). Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Diagnosis, Treatment and Its Relationship to Other Anxiety Disorders, 3rd edition. London: Martin Dunitz. ISBN 978-1-84184-135-9. 1st ed(1998):ISBN 1-85317-659-1
  • David J. Nutt; Spilios Argyropoulos; Sean Hood (2000). Clinician's manual on anxiety disorders and comorbid depression. London: Science Press. ISBN 978-1-85873-397-5.

Other disorders

Sleep and connected disorder

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

David Nutt

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

David John Nutt (born 16 April 1951) is a British neuropsychopharmacologist and psychiatrist specializing in the effects of psychoactive substances on the brain and in neuropsychiatric conditions including addiction, anxiety, and sleep disorders.
As the Edmond J. Safra Professor of Neuropsychopharmacology and head of the Centre for Neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College London, Nutt has advanced empirical methods for evaluating drug harms through multicriteria decision analyses, notably ranking alcohol as the overall most harmful substance due to its physical harm, dependence potential, and societal costs.61462-6/abstract)
His commitment to evidence-based drug classification over political considerations led to his dismissal as chair of the UK's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs in 2009 by Home Secretary Alan Johnson, after he publicly critiqued government decisions that prioritized perceived risks over scientific data, such as reclassifying cannabis despite evidence of lower harm relative to alcohol or tobacco.60301-7/abstract)
Nutt's work extends to pioneering research on psychedelics for therapeutic applications and advocacy for policy reforms grounded in causal assessments of harm reduction, earning him the 2013 John Maddox Prize for promoting science against opposition.

Background

Early life and education

David John Nutt was born on 16 April 1951 in England. He completed his secondary education at Bristol Grammar School before gaining admission via the 11-plus examination. Nutt was awarded an open scholarship in medicine at Downing College, University of Cambridge, where he began his undergraduate studies. He subsequently undertook clinical medical training at Guy's Hospital Medical School in London. Following his medical qualification, Nutt pursued postgraduate training in , attaining membership of the Royal College of Physicians (MRCP). He then specialized in , completing his training at the , where he earned a (DM) degree.60700-X/fulltext) This foundational period established his expertise in neuropsychopharmacology through structured clinical and research-oriented education.

Academic Career

Key positions and affiliations

Nutt established and led the Unit at the upon returning to the in 1988, serving as Professor of and head of the unit until 2009. In this role, he also headed the Department of Community-Based , focusing on psychopharmacology within addiction and brain sciences contexts. In 2009, Nutt was appointed the Edmond J. Safra Professor of Neuropsychopharmacology at , a position he has held continuously in the Division of Sciences, Faculty of . Concurrently, he directs the Neuropsychopharmacology Unit, overseeing operations in neuropsychopharmacological research and related brain science initiatives. Nutt maintains additional academic affiliations, including visiting professorships at the in the UK and in the , which facilitate collaborative extensions of his institutional work.

Core research themes

David Nutt's research in neuropsychopharmacology has centered on elucidating the neural mechanisms underlying psychoactive substance effects, with a focus on processes and their modulation by systems. His work has emphasized the role of inhibitory neurotransmission, particularly GABAergic pathways, in disorders involving compulsive behaviors, as demonstrated through studies linking GABA-A receptor dysregulation to conditions like gambling disorder. Nutt has also explored and GABAergic imbalances in using techniques to quantify synaptic alterations. A core theme involves integrating pharmacological interventions with imaging to assess cognitive and behavioral outcomes in psychiatric conditions, including depression and anxiety. For instance, Nutt's investigations have utilized functional MRI platforms to probe neuropharmacological responses, aiming to map how substances alter connectivity and . This approach prioritizes empirical quantification of substance impacts on neural circuits over subjective or societal valuations, facilitating objective evaluations of therapeutic potential and risk. Nutt's empirical framework underscores causal links between molecular targets—like GABA and serotonin receptors—and observable harms or benefits, drawing on longitudinal data from human and preclinical models to inform substance classification based on verifiable neurobiological rather than external influences. His contributions extend to modeling as a dysregulated reward-inhibition interplay, incorporating dynamics to predict vulnerability and response to treatments.

Drug Harm Assessments

Methodology and key studies

David Nutt's initial approach to quantifying drug harms appeared in a 2007 study published in The Lancet, which developed a nine-category matrix to evaluate 20 substances of potential misuse.60464-4/abstract) The matrix divided harms into three broad domains—physical harm, dependence potential, and social harms (encompassing crime, family disruption, economic costs, community damage, and international damage)—with experts using a Delphi-like process to score each drug on a 0–3 scale per category, aggregating to overall harm ratings.60464-4/abstract) Scores drew from epidemiological data on mortality, morbidity, and addiction rates, alongside consultations with pharmacologists, psychiatrists, and policy experts, aiming to provide a systematic, evidence-informed framework rather than relying on subjective or political classifications. This method evolved in the 2010 Lancet study, which applied multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to assess harms from 20 drugs in the UK context.61462-6/abstract) MCDA involved selecting 16 specific criteria—nine for individual harms (e.g., acute physical damage, chronic physical disease, intravenous harm, psychological dependence, social harm) and seven for harms to others (e.g., physical harm via crime, economic costs, environmental damage)—scored quantitatively by members of the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs (ISCD) using a 0–100 scale informed by peer-reviewed literature and expert consensus.61462-6/abstract) Weights for criteria were derived through paired comparisons by ISCD members and external specialists, enabling a structured aggregation that addressed limitations in the 2007 matrix, such as inconsistent weighting and less discrimination between drugs. Subsequent refinements incorporated drug prevalence and user population estimates to adjust for societal impact, using data from national surveys like the British Crime Survey and health statistics to scale harms by exposure levels. These methods relied on verifiable sources including clinical trials, reports, and longitudinal studies for scoring inputs, with transparency emphasized through published matrices and sensitivity analyses to test robustness against varying expert judgments.61462-6/abstract)

Findings on relative harms

In the 2010 multicriteria by Nutt and colleagues, alcohol emerged with the highest overall harm score of 72 out of 100, attributed to its widespread prevalence amplifying societal impacts, followed by at 55 and at 54, reflecting the highest combined personal and social harm scores for alcohol.61462-6/abstract) ranked sixth overall at 26, reflecting significant physical harm despite lower dependence scores compared to illicit opioids.61462-6/abstract) Harm to users specifically placed at the top with 37, at 34, and at 32, whereas alcohol scored 26, primarily from acute intoxication and chronic disease risks.61462-6/abstract) received an overall score of 20, lower than both alcohol and , with minimal scores in lethality and intravenous harm but moderate dependence potential, positioning it eighth in the overall ranking and outside the top tier of harms.61462-6/abstract) Substances like and ecstasy () scored notably low at 7 and 9 overall, respectively, due to limited evidence of severe physical damage or high dependence, contrasting with higher-ranked Class A drugs such as (27).61462-6/abstract) Anabolic steroids and magic mushrooms tied for the lowest at 6-9, with harms concentrated in specific contexts like misuse rather than broad societal effects.61462-6/abstract) Subsequent adaptations of the framework in international contexts, such as and , replicated alcohol's top ranking and the relative positioning of below legal drugs like , emphasizing prevalence-adjusted totals in harm calculations. Recent US polls align with these expert assessments, showing 58-61% of adults view regular alcohol use as more harmful to health than marijuana.

Scientific and methodological critiques

Critics of Nutt's multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework have highlighted its reliance on subjective expert judgments, particularly in the process where panels assign and adjust scores for harm criteria. Rolles and Measham (2011) argue that this approach is vulnerable to error due to over-reliance on value judgments, lacking measures for weightings that prioritize certain harms over others, such as social versus individual impacts. They further contend that aggregating heterogeneous criteria—like physical , dependence, and —into a single overall harm score conflates non-commensurable elements, reducing analytical precision and potentially misrepresenting relative risks. Specific methodological concerns include the underemphasis on acute and long-term risks for certain substances. For instance, in assessing (ecstasy), commentators have noted grounds for concern that and associated cognitive deficits—evidenced in complex literature on serotonin system disruption, memory impairment, and mood alterations—may be downplayed relative to other drugs like or , where dependence and acute harms receive higher weightings. This stems from the framework's focus on averaged expert scores, which critics argue insufficiently accounts for variability in evidence interpretation, such as ecstasy's lower dependence rating despite potential for repeated use amplifying neurotoxic effects. Debates persist over omitted factors, including gateway effects, polydrug interactions, and enforcement costs, which some rebuttals claim distort assessments by isolating "intrinsic" harms from broader societal dynamics. Nutt has countered these by emphasizing data-driven separation of drug-specific effects from influences, citing consistent rankings from independent panels in 2007 that validated weights without significant divergence. Nonetheless, detractors maintain that such exclusions limit the model's applicability to real-world harm profiles, where and context modulate outcomes.

Policy Advocacy and Government Roles

Advisory appointments

David Nutt served as a member of the UK's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) prior to his elevation to chairmanship. In May 2008, announced his appointment as chair designate, with Nutt assuming the role in October 2008. As ACMD chair, Nutt oversaw the council's mandate to deliver independent expert advice to the on the control of dangerous or harmful substances. This encompassed reviewing scientific evidence on drug harms to recommend classifications and schedulings under the , which categorizes substances into Classes A, B, and C based on potential for misuse and associated risks. The process involved evaluating pharmacological profiles, dependence liability, toxicity, and societal impacts through subcommittees and formal evidence submissions. Nutt's tenure emphasized rigorous, data-driven assessments for policy inputs, including interactions with departments to ensure recommendations aligned with empirical findings on effects prior to 2009. The ACMD under his prioritized multidisciplinary input from , , and experts to inform controls on both novel and established substances.

The "Equasy" paper and equine sports analogy

In February 2009, David Nutt published the short article "Equasy – An overlooked addiction with implications for the current debate on drug harms" in the Journal of Psychopharmacology. In it, he coined the term "equasy," a portmanteau of "equine" and "ecstasy," to describe what he portrayed as an addictive pursuit of horse riding, using the analogy to challenge perceived inconsistencies in how society and policymakers assess and regulate risks from recreational activities versus illicit drugs. Nutt argued that equasy exemplifies how high-risk behaviors, including acute injuries and fatalities, are tolerated when culturally accepted, contrasting this with the absolutist stance on substances like MDMA (ecstasy). The piece aimed to advocate for harm-based, evidence-driven drug classification over moralistic prohibition, emphasizing that policy should reflect comparative empirical dangers rather than symbolic deterrence. Nutt grounded the comparison in a modified 9-point harm assessment scale, previously applied to drugs, rating categories such as acute personal harm, chronic harm, dependence, and societal costs. For acute harm to users, he cited horse riding's rate of one serious injury per 350 episodes—drawing from hospital data showing around 100 deaths and thousands of injuries annually—versus ecstasy's rarer one per episodes, with ecstasy-related deaths numbering 50–60 yearly amid an estimated 500,000–800,000 users. Dependence potential was scored low for both (+1), but equasy's chronic physical toll (e.g., joint damage) and social harms (e.g., costs of maintaining horses) were highlighted as comparable or exceeding those of occasional ecstasy use, which lacks strong evidence of long-term cognitive deficits at typical doses. Nutt stressed these statistics underscore ecstasy's relative safety in controlled, non-adulterated contexts, urging reevaluation of its Class A status under the 's Misuse of Drugs Act. The publication elicited swift criticism from political figures and equine organizations, who accused Nutt of trivializing ecstasy's dangers and disrespecting legitimate sports. publicly condemned the analogy as inappropriate, demanding an apology for implying equivalence between a voluntary pastime and a , amid ongoing debates over ecstasy reclassification following earlier ACMD reviews. Nutt issued a partial retraction, regretting the "equasy" terminology for potentially offending riders but reaffirming the validity of the risk data and policy critique. Bodies like the British Horse Society and equestrian federations decried the framing as derogatory, arguing it ignored contextual differences in , , and intent between sporting pursuits and consumption.

Dismissal from ACMD and policy implications

On 30 October 2009, David Nutt was dismissed as chair of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) by , who stated that he had "lost confidence" in Nutt's ability to provide impartial advice due to public statements perceived as undermining government policy. Nutt's comments included assertions that alcohol caused greater societal harm than or in certain metrics, and that drugs like ecstasy and posed lower risks than alcohol, which conflicted with official classifications and decisions such as the 2009 recriminalization of to Class B. Johnson cited Nutt's role as requiring discretion, arguing that such public critiques distorted scientific evidence in the eyes of policymakers. The dismissal prompted immediate backlash within the , including the resignations of at least five ACMD members in , highlighting concerns over the politicization of expert advice. In response, Nutt established the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs (later rebranded as Drug Science) on 15 January 2010, positioning it as an alternative body to deliver evidence-based assessments free from governmental influence. This organization aimed to rank drug harms using multicriteria analysis, critiquing the ACMD's perceived alignment with punitive rather than empirical priorities. The event underscored a persistent rift between empirical harm assessments and drug policy, which prioritized moral and political signaling over data-driven reforms; despite Nutt's analyses, classifications like those for , ecstasy, and remained unchanged through subsequent governments. A decade later, in 2019, policy reviews confirmed minimal shifts, with ongoing reliance on Class A/B/C frameworks that Nutt and others argued ignored relative harms, such as alcohol's unclassified status despite high societal costs exceeding those of many scheduled drugs. This reinforced critiques that lawmaking favored punitivist approaches, sidelining causal evidence on and outcomes, and eroded trust in advisory bodies by signaling that dissenting risked exclusion.

Psychedelic and Novel Therapy Research

Development of research programs

In 2008, following his appointment at , David Nutt co-founded the Beckley/Imperial Psychedelic Research Programme in collaboration with of the Beckley Foundation, marking the inception of structured psychedelic investigations at the institution. This initiative built upon Nutt's prior expertise in neuropsychopharmacology and aimed to systematically explore the brain effects of psychedelics through controlled studies, shifting emphasis from historical recreational associations toward potential therapeutic applications. The programme evolved over the subsequent decade, incorporating advanced techniques to examine substances including , , and DMT under regulated conditions, with a focus on elucidating neural mechanisms relevant to disorders. By 2019, this groundwork culminated in the formal launch of the Centre for Psychedelic Research on , recognized as the world's first dedicated center for such studies, led by Robin Carhart-Harris with Nutt serving as the Edmond J. Safra in Neuropsychopharmacology. This development provided historical continuity to psychedelic inquiry, reviving protocols from the and —when LSD and similar compounds showed promise in psychiatric settings before regulatory prohibitions largely halted research—now updated with contemporary ethical frameworks, randomized controlled trials, and multimodal imaging. Funding for these efforts has included grants from the Beckley Foundation and charitable donations, enabling interdisciplinary collaborations with researchers such as David Erritzoe to expand infrastructure for preclinical and clinical explorations.

Clinical trials and empirical outcomes

Nutt co-authored findings from a 2016 open-label feasibility study at involving 12 patients with , where a single 10 mg or 25 mg dose of administered with psychological support led to rapid and sustained antidepressant effects; at 1-week follow-up, 8 of 12 patients showed a greater than 50% reduction in depression scores on the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS), with effects persisting in some up to 3 months, though the small sample and lack of placebo control limited causal inferences. A 2021 he co-led compared two 25 mg doses plus psychological support against a 6-week course of in 59 patients with ; both arms showed significant symptom reductions, but yielded higher remission rates (37% vs. 18% at week 6, per Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale criteria) and greater improvements in well-being and environmental connectedness, despite comparable response rates, with the trial noting limitations from its modest sample size and absence of blinding for 's subjective effects. Functional MRI (fMRI) data from psilocybin-treated depression patients, analyzed in Nutt-affiliated research, revealed acute decreases in integrity and increased global brain connectivity, correlating with symptom relief; post-treatment scans indicated persistent desynchronization and enhanced plasticity-like changes, such as reduced reactivity to negative stimuli, with effect sizes (e.g., Cohen's d > 1 for connectivity metrics) suggesting mechanisms beyond , though longitudinal causality remains unproven due to small cohorts (n<60) and confounding from expectancy. In 2023-2024, Nutt supported early-phase designs for psilocybin trials targeting addiction, including a UK government-funded study at Imperial for opioid use disorder relapse prevention (ISRCTN10232579), combining 25 mg psilocybin with therapy to assess craving reduction and abstinence rates over 6 months in 100 participants, building on prior addiction pilot data but pending empirical outcomes; similarly, a gambling disorder protocol initiated fMRI probes of psilocybin's impact on reward processing, hypothesizing disruption of compulsive circuits, with recruitment planned for 2024 but no completed results as of late 2025. These efforts reference Australia's 2023 regulatory approvals for psilocybin in treatment-resistant depression as a comparative benchmark, where clinician-prescribed use showed preliminary remission in 20-30% of cases, underscoring the need for larger, controlled Nutt-led validations amid sample and generalizability constraints.

Therapeutic claims versus evidence gaps

David Nutt has described psychedelics as possessing revolutionary therapeutic potential for psychiatric disorders, asserting in his 2023 book Psychedelics: The Revolutionary Drugs That Could Change Your Life that society stands "on the cusp" of a major shift in mental health treatment through these substances. He emphasizes their capacity to induce profound neuroplasticity and psychological insights, potentially outperforming conventional antidepressants in conditions like depression and PTSD. However, such assertions are tempered by empirical limitations in the supporting data, including persistently small sample sizes—often under 100 participants per arm—and reliance on short-term follow-ups rarely exceeding six months, which hinder assessments of durability and generalizability. Further scrutiny reveals inconsistencies in placebo controls, as psychedelic trials frequently suffer from blinding failures due to the drugs' unmistakable subjective effects, such as intense perceptual alterations, leading participants and therapists to accurately guess assignments in over 90% of sessions. This compromises causal attribution, inflating apparent efficacy through expectancy biases rather than isolated pharmacological action. Critiques highlight a risk of hype, akin to the "Pollan effect" from popularized narratives that amplify optimism while downplaying methodological flaws, potentially skewing public and investor expectations beyond the nascent evidence base. Adverse events remain understudied, particularly in vulnerable populations, with conditions like hallucinogen persisting perception disorder (HPPD)—involving chronic visual disturbances—and potential dependency patterns in those with preexisting psychiatric vulnerabilities receiving insufficient long-term scrutiny in trials. Establishing robust causality demands large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to isolate effects from contextual confounds, yet the field's progression toward such designs lags, underscoring the gap between promotional claims and verifiable therapeutic superiority.

Commercial and Organizational Ventures

Founding of Drug Science

Drug Science was established in January 2010 by , shortly after his dismissal from the chairmanship of the UK's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) in November 2009, which stemmed from his public criticisms of government drug classification policies as ideologically driven rather than evidence-based. The organization was launched as an independent scientific body to counter perceived politicization in official drug advice, with an initial focus on assembling experts to review scientific evidence on drug harms without governmental constraints. The nonprofit's mission centers on producing and disseminating impartial, data-driven analyses of drugs to advocate for reforms grounded in empirical harm assessments, equipping policymakers, media, and the public with information untainted by political or commercial pressures. Organizationally, it operates as a registered UK charity (number 5027633) led by Nutt as founder and chief scientific officer, supported by an executive team handling operations and a scientific committee comprising prominent UK experts in pharmacology, neuroscience, and policy from academia and research institutions. Funding derives primarily from individual donations and philanthropic grants, such as those from the , ensuring operational independence from state or industry sources. Key outputs include detailed reports evaluating the comparative harms of substances like cannabis and alcohol, using quantitative metrics such as physical dependence potential, mortality risks, and societal costs to propose classification alternatives based on scientific benchmarks rather than punitive or moralistic criteria. These publications have contributed to public discourse by highlighting inconsistencies in legal frameworks—for instance, arguing that alcohol's documented harms exceed those of cannabis in several domains—fostering debates on evidence-led policy without reliance on government affiliations.

GABA Labs and Alcarelle project

In 2019, David Nutt co-founded GABA Labs, a commercial venture aimed at developing novel GABAergic compounds to replicate the desirable social and relaxing effects of alcohol while eliminating associated health risks such as liver toxicity, hangovers, and dependence. The company focuses on biomimetic molecules that selectively target GABA_A receptors in the brain—the primary mechanism by which ethanol induces euphoria and disinhibition—without engaging other pathways that cause oxidative stress or metabolic harm. The flagship project, Alcarelle, is a patented synthetic ingredient designed as a non-alcoholic alternative, with Nutt estimating potential market availability by late 2027 pending regulatory approval, including submissions to the US FDA as a novel food ingredient. Development began with screening over 90 candidate compounds identified through literature review of GABA binding sites, narrowing to three finalists via preclinical neurochemical assays demonstrating selective receptor agonism and dopamine/serotonin release akin to low-dose ethanol. Patents for these Alcarelle formulations were filed starting in 2018, emphasizing causal specificity to GABA-mediated effects for harm reduction in social drinking. GABA Labs markets Alcarelle for integration into non-alcoholic beverages, positioning it as a tool for reducing alcohol-related societal costs—estimated at billions annually from morbidity and lost productivity—by offering equivalent conviviality without caloric load or toxicity. Initial proof-of-concept products like Sentia, using plant-derived GABA agonists, have been commercialized to validate consumer appeal, though full-scale empirical trials for Alcarelle's long-term safety and efficacy remain pending, with some experts cautioning that untested selective agonism may overlook off-target neural adaptations or incomplete replication of alcohol's multifaceted pharmacology.

Publications

Major books

Drugs Without the Hot Air: Minimising the Harms of Legal and Illegal Drugs, first published on May 31, 2012, by UIT Cambridge, applies scientific evidence to evaluate the comparative risks of various substances, including alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, and opioids, while critiquing prohibitionist policies for inflating harms through adulteration and criminalization. The book uses quantitative rankings of drug harms, derived from expert assessments, to argue for harm minimization strategies over moralistic approaches, emphasizing data on physical dependence, social costs, and overdose potentials. Revised editions in 2020 and 2022 integrate updated epidemiological data and policy developments, maintaining the core thesis that legal drugs like alcohol cause greater aggregate harm than many illicit ones. In Psychedelics: The Revolutionary Drugs That Could Change Your Life—A Guide from the Expert, released January 1, 2023, by Balance Books, Nutt synthesizes neuropharmacological research on compounds like psilocybin, , and , highlighting their serotonin receptor agonism and potential to induce neuroplasticity for treating depression and PTSD. Drawing from controlled trials, the monograph details mechanisms such as default mode network disruption and mystical experience correlations with therapeutic outcomes, positioning psychedelics as adjuncts to psychotherapy rather than standalone cures. It advocates regulatory reform based on low toxicity profiles—evidenced by LD50 ratios exceeding 1000 for most psychedelics—contrasting them with conventional antidepressants' modest efficacy rates around 30-50%. Nutt's later works, such as updated iterations of his drug policy analyses in 2024 editions, extend these evidence-driven frameworks to broader brain science applications, offering accessible explanations of neurotransmitter dynamics and addiction circuits for non-specialist readers. These monographs collectively prioritize empirical metrics over anecdotal or ideological narratives, influencing public discourse on substance regulation.

Selected articles and reports

Nutt's 2010 article, "Drug harms in the UK: a multicriteria decision analysis," co-authored with Leslie A. King and Lawrence D. Phillips and published in The Lancet, applied multi-criteria decision analysis to rank 20 drugs by overall harm to users and others, influencing subsequent policy discussions on evidence-based classification despite methodological critiques from prohibition advocates.61462-6/abstract) The paper has garnered over 3,000 citations, underscoring its role in shifting academic and public discourse toward quantitative harm assessments rather than anecdotal or political criteria. In his 2009 commentary "Equasy—an overlooked addiction with implications for the current debate on drug harms," published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology, Nutt introduced the term "equasy" to equate the risks of chronic alcohol use with those of ecstasy, drawing on epidemiological data to argue for consistent harm evaluation across substances amid UK classification reviews. This piece, cited in over 100 subsequent works, amplified calls for reclassifying ecstasy while highlighting alcohol's under-regulated societal costs, contributing to tensions between scientific advisory bodies and government policy. Nutt's 2025 Lancet Psychiatry personal view, "Drug development in psychiatry: 50 years of failure and how to resuscitate it," critiques the stagnation in novel psychiatric pharmacotherapies since the 1970s, attributing it to regulatory hurdles, overreliance on monoamine hypotheses, and industry conservatism, while advocating repurposed serotonergic agents like psychedelics.00370-5/abstract) The article, drawing on historical trial data showing minimal efficacy gains, proposes streamlined trials and brain imaging biomarkers to accelerate innovation, positioning it as a catalyst for reforming psychopharmacology pipelines. Other notable contributions include Nutt's 2019 review "Psychedelic drugs—a new era in psychiatry?" in Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, which synthesizes neuroimaging evidence on 5-HT2A receptor mechanisms to support psychedelics' potential in treatment-resistant depression, emphasizing neuroplasticity over traditional antidepressants' limitations. In addiction neuroscience, his co-authored 2020 Cell perspective "Psychedelic Psychiatry's Brave New World" outlines empirical gaps in psychedelic trials while arguing for their disruption of entrenched psychiatric paradigms based on dependency and withdrawal metrics.30282-8) These works, with high citation rates in harm and efficacy debates, underscore Nutt's emphasis on data-driven metrics over consensus-driven orthodoxy.

Honors and Recognition

Awards and distinctions

Nutt was elected a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences (FMedSci) in recognition of his expertise in psychiatry, pharmacology, and brain imaging applications to addiction, neuropsychiatric disorders, sleep, and hypnotics. He holds fellowship in the Royal College of Physicians (FRCP) and the Royal College of Psychiatrists (FRCPsych), distinctions reflecting his clinical and research contributions to neuropsychopharmacology. He is also a Fellow of the British Pharmacological Society (FBPhS). In 2013, Nutt received the John Maddox Prize from Sense about Science and Nature Publishing Group for courageously advancing evidence-based drug classification and policy despite political opposition. The British Association for Psychopharmacology awarded Nutt its Outstanding Contribution Award in 2023, honoring over 30 years of service, including his role as editor of the Journal of Psychopharmacology from 1989 onward. In December 2016, the University of Bath conferred an honorary Doctor of Laws upon Nutt for his influential work on rational drug policy and harm assessment.

Recent Developments and Broader Views

Critiques of psychiatric drug development

In a February 2025 personal view published in The Lancet Psychiatry, David Nutt contended that psychiatric drug development has stagnated for 50 years, yielding few novel mechanisms despite advances in somatic medicine, such as antihypertensive and oncology therapies.00370-5/abstract) He highlighted flawed clinical trial paradigms, including short-duration studies prioritizing symptomatic endpoints over sustained remission or biomarkers of underlying pathology, which obscure true efficacy signals amid high placebo responses averaging 30–40% in depression trials.00370-5/abstract) These designs, Nutt argued, perpetuate incremental "me-too" drugs rather than breakthroughs, as regulatory demands for superiority over existing agents deter investment in unproven targets.00370-5/abstract) Central to Nutt's critique is the dominance of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), which meta-analyses indicate provide only modest benefits—standardized mean differences of 0.3 or less versus placebo in mild-to-moderate depression—often failing to exceed thresholds for clinical meaningfulness.00370-5/abstract) This over-reliance stems from the entrenched monoamine hypothesis, yet causal evidence linking serotonin deficits to core symptoms remains weak, with drugs inadequately addressing root processes like impaired neuroplasticity, evidenced by reduced dendritic spine density in postmortem depression brains.00370-5/abstract) Side effect profiles further undermine utility, including 40–70% rates of sexual dysfunction and metabolic disruptions contributing to discontinuation in up to 50% of long-term users.00370-5/abstract) Nutt emphasized that conventional agents neglect causal realism by not targeting modifiable substrates such as synaptic remodeling or inflammatory pathways, where preclinical models show deficits but trials rarely incorporate plasticity metrics like BDNF levels or fMRI connectivity changes.00370-5/abstract) In contrast, meta-analyses of underexplored compounds reveal superior effect sizes (e.g., Cohen's d > 1.0 in select rapid-acting interventions) when assays include neurobiological endpoints, suggesting stalled progress reflects methodological conservatism rather than inherent therapeutic limits.00370-5/abstract) He advocated resuscitating development through adaptive trials integrating causal biomarkers, cautioning that without such shifts, psychiatry risks perpetual reliance on marginally effective palliatives.00370-5/abstract)

Ongoing advocacy and future directions

Nutt has intensified advocacy for regulatory reforms following Australia's July 2023 approvals of for and for PTSD, positioning these as models for shifting from to evidence-assessed therapeutic access. Through Drug Science, he leads campaigns urging reclassification of psychedelics and other substances via harm-based metrics, including 2023 submissions to parliamentary committees calling for reduced barriers to schedule 1 drug research and scheduling reviews to align with clinical potential. In July 2025, Nutt highlighted government endorsement of Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs recommendations as a step toward psychedelic integration in treatment. Future research directions encompass psilocybin-assisted trials launched in 2024 at to target opioid addiction relapse, employing controlled dosing to evaluate sustained behavioral changes. Parallel commercialization efforts via GABA Labs seek FDA and equivalent approvals for Alcarelle, a patented GABA agonist intended to replicate alcohol's convivial effects sans toxicity, with strategies centered on licensing to non-alcoholic beverage firms for market rollout anticipated post-2025 regulatory clearance. Nutt maintains that drug policies must prioritize causal empirical —such as longitudinal harm rankings—over moral or political biases, decrying prohibition's reliance on unverified assumptions that exacerbate black-market risks while permitting alcohol's normalized toll, evidenced by its top-tier societal damage in validated multi-dimensional scales. He contends this evidentiary disconnect sustains inefficient outcomes, urging frameworks that weigh probabilistic benefits against quantified to supplant ideologically driven restrictions.

Personal Life

Family and interests

Nutt resides in , near , in an ironstone country house on the edge of the Mendips, where the family keeps a grand . He shares the home with two Labrador retrievers, Boris and Sonny. His personal interests include , as evidenced by selections featured on BBC Radio 3's Private Passions programme, which included pieces by , , (specifically the Seventh Symphony), and .

References

  1. https://profiles.imperial.ac.uk/d.nutt
  2. https://psychopharmacologyinstitute.com/author/david-nutt-880/
  3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21036393/
  4. https://www.nature.com/articles/nm1209-1337
  5. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/134466/david-nutt-wins-2013-john-maddox/
  6. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/196673/new-wave-psychedelic-research-yielding-exciting/
  7. https://sensiseeds.com/en/blog/celebrity-profile-prof-david-nutt/
  8. https://peterattiamd.com/davidnutt/
  9. https://www.bps.ac.uk/about/who-we-are/honorary-fellows-directory/profile?ID=8dfb56b2-d7f6-e311-88a7-001dd8b721a7
  10. https://sites.exeter.ac.uk/psychedelics/prof-david-nutt/
  11. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-psychiatrist/article/david-nutt/B953A1331700A6CC39B57D7DFF24EA5B
  12. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1286-1401
  13. https://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2004/566.html
  14. https://www.ukaan.org/david-nutt
  15. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5697606/
  16. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4731270/
  17. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Nutt
  18. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1053811914004005
  19. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0007125000269705
  20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17382831/
  21. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/47635105_Nutt_DJ_King_LA_Phillips_LD_Drug_harms_in_the_UK_a_multicriteria_decision_analysis_Lancet_376_1558-1565
  22. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6109763/
  23. https://norml.org/blog/2025/03/11/survey-adults-say-alcohol-poses-greater-risks-to-health-than-marijuana/
  24. https://www.marijuanamoment.net/most-americans-say-marijuana-is-a-healthier-option-than-alcohol-and-a-majority-expect-nationwide-legalization-within-five-years-poll-finds/
  25. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31081439/
  26. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10481626/
  27. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21652195/
  28. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673607608411/fulltext
  29. https://maudsleylearning.com/david-nutt/
  30. https://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2008/212017945336.html
  31. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7596dced915d506ee7ffc2/annual-report-2008-09.pdf
  32. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/advisory-council-on-the-misuse-of-drugs/about
  33. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6777c924d6bf3230d4af9428/Standard%2BOperating%2BProcedure%2B_SOP_%2BFor%2BClassification%2Band%2BScheduling.pdf
  34. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7b09fee5274a34770e8fa5/annual-report-2006-2007.pdf
  35. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0269881108099672
  36. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23806800_Equasy_-_An_overlooked_addiction_with_implications_for_the_current_debate_on_drug_harms
  37. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Nutt/publication/23806800_Equasy_-_An_overlooked_addiction_with_implications_for_the_current_debate_on_drug_harms/links/567be51d08ae051f9adf4166/Equasy-An-overlooked-addiction-with-implications-for-the-current-debate-on-drug-harms.pdf
  38. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/feb/10/ecstasy-drugs-policy
  39. https://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyle/uk-drugs-head-apologizes-over-ecstasy-danger-quip-idUSTRE5187GF/
  40. https://thehorse.com/133632/equasy-srsly/
  41. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/oct/30/david-nutt-drugs-adviser-sacked
  42. https://www.ias.org.uk/news/prof-david-nutt-sacked-from-advisory-council-on-the-misuse-of-drugs/
  43. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-11660210
  44. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/oct/30/drugs-adviser-david-nutt-sacked
  45. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/jan/15/david-nutt-drugs-independent-committee
  46. https://www.drugscience.org.uk/society-s-inconsistent-moral-judgements-of-potentially-harmful-activities
  47. https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/little-has-changed-in-uk-drug-policy-a-decade-on-from-sacking-of-david-nutt/4010605.article
  48. https://www.nature.com/articles/news.2009.1053
  49. https://2020science.org/2009/11/01/speaking-power-to-truth-the-unfortunate-case-of-david-nutt/
  50. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867410004344
  51. https://www.beckleyfoundation.org/science/collaborations/the-beckley-imperial-psychedelic-research-programme/
  52. https://imperialbrc.nihr.ac.uk/2019/04/26/imperial-launches-worlds-first-centre-for-psychedelic-research/
  53. https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674%2820%2930282-8.pdf
  54. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/a-z-research/psychedelic-research-centre/funding/
  55. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/a-z-research/psychedelic-research-centre/about/
  56. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27210031/
  57. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2032994
  58. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/219413/magic-mushroom-compound-performs-well-antidepressant/
  59. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/235514/magic-mushroom-compound-increases-brain-connectivity/
  60. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-023-02271-0
  61. https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN10232579
  62. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/250473/psychedelic-therapy-help-break-chains-gambling/
  63. https://psychedelichealth.co.uk/2024/10/30/landmark-uk-trial-psilocybin-opioid-addiction-relapse/
  64. https://journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/734585
  65. https://www.amazon.com/Psychedelics-revolutionary-drugs-change-expert/dp/1529360536
  66. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/jun/15/psychedelics-by-david-nutt-review-hope-or-hype
  67. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK586533/
  68. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11890197/
  69. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-34938-7
  70. https://www.mdpi.com/2813-1851/3/2/14
  71. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-41145-x
  72. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11039563/
  73. https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/prp2.70097
  74. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/psymed.2023.0028
  75. https://www.drugscience.org.uk/about
  76. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/dec/06/david-nutt-drugs-alcohol
  77. https://www.drugscience.org.uk/
  78. https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.n3114/rr
  79. https://www.drugscience.org.uk/cannabis
  80. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2025/feb/19/gaba-is-the-off-switch-of-the-brain-is-it-also-the-answer-to-better-sleep-sobriety-and-less-anxiety
  81. https://time.com/6131012/synthetic-alcohol-health-benefits/
  82. https://fortune.com/well/2023/07/29/synthetic-alcohol-alcarelle-buzz-without-side-effects-hangover-gaba/
  83. https://gabalabs.com/
  84. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-07-16/alcohol-free-drinks-could-get-the-buzz-of-booze-from-a-startup
  85. https://www.supplysidefbj.com/beverage-development/emerging-ingredient-aims-to-bring-the-functional-effects-of-alcohol-to-nonalcoholic-beverages
  86. https://www.ayming.co.uk/insights/opinion/futuretech-synthetic-alcohol-alcosynth/
  87. https://alcarelle.com/
  88. https://us.sentiaspirits.com/blogs/sentia-club-blog/quenching-your-thirst-for-knowledge-sentia-is-the-present-alcarelle-is-the-future
  89. https://www.amazon.com/Drugs-Without-Hot-David-Nutt/dp/1906860165
  90. https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/drugs-without-the-hot-air-9780857844989/
  91. https://www.amazon.com/Drugs-without-hot-air-illegal-ebook/dp/B081HZ1JZY
  92. https://www.amazon.com/Psychedelics-Revolutionary-Change-Life_A-Expert/dp/0306835282
  93. https://portlandpress.com/biochemist/article/46/1/11/234229/Psychedelics-reconnecting-the-brain-to-heal-the
  94. https://www.drugscience.org.uk/books
  95. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19158127/
  96. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0269881108099672
  97. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39952266/
  98. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6787540/
  99. https://acmedsci.ac.uk/fellows/fellows-directory/ordinary-fellows/fellow/Professor-David-Nutt-0006085
  100. https://www.drugscience.org.uk/prof-nutt-awarded-the-outstanding-contribution-award-by-the-bap
  101. https://www.bath.ac.uk/corporate-information/professor-david-nutt-oration/
  102. https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.17398
  103. https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/126574/pdf/
  104. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/POST-PB-0064/POST-PB-0064.pdf
  105. https://x.com/ProfDavidNutt/status/1950826455782363208
  106. https://x.com/ProfDavidNutt/status/1847228319420268611
  107. https://www.hlk-ip.com/news-and-insights/innovations-in-alcohol-free-living/
  108. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/42610011_Is_UK_drug_policy_evidence_based
  109. https://www.decanter.com/interviews/a-drink-with-professor-david-nutt-545873/
  110. https://www.drugscience.org.uk/blog/categories/david-nutt
  111. https://www.ft.com/content/2c4121de-c5d6-11e5-808f-8231cd71622e
  112. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001382y
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.