Science brings solutions and controversy to UNODC

Tensions flared Saturday as the on-going meeting of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime delved into debate on the prevention of drug use by minors. The body’s members have split into several factions, but the two that are most diametrically opposed are the TEAM and the PEACE blocs.

Both blocs have employed technology to some degree in their solutions. The PEACE bloc, led by the United Kingdom, Malaysia and the United States, has proposed the use of Ion Mobility Spectrometry (IMS) in large arch-shaped installations at border crossings. The intent is to use this scanning mechanism, which is already used by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration to scan moving vehicles for smuggled drugs and illicit substances.

This multifaceted supply reduction strategy is a part of the bloc’s broader strategy.

“[Our goal is] to respect sovereignty while stopping the flow of illicit drugs into our nations,” said the Nigerian delegation.

By contrast, the TEAM bloc has adopted a demand-reduction strategy with a strong focus on medical technology. The cornerstone of this medical approach involves a developing form of gene therapy that will target genetic predispositions in those affected by addiction.

The therapy utilizes CRISPR, a gene editing chemical that has already been used in experimental cancer treatments. The bloc, led by China, Germany, Japan and New Zealand, has also included treatments with cocaine neutralizing enzymes and engineering antibodies to neutralize illicit substances in the body.

Defending the need for such measures, the Chinese delegation said, “There are already so many educational programs in the world that are clearly not working, so medical alternatives need to be developed further.”

However, the bloc’s proposals regarding gene therapy have been met with skepticism and opposition by the rest of the body. Indonesia’s delegation called into question the viability of the approach, citing the UNODC’s limited jurisdiction in implementing medical policy as a negative of the plan.

Furthermore, India’s delegation gave a speech reminding the body that genetic technology still faces moral and religious opposition in many developing countries. They note that this could be a significant impediment to the deployment of such a plan on a global scale.

The opposition’s intensity reached a high when the Austrian delegation yielded their time with the explicit request that the Chinese delegate answer to the cultural opposition to gene therapy. The Chinese delegate was undeterred as she took the microphone.

“The use of gene therapy will spread like wildfire,” she said, harkening back to the introduction of the vaccine.

The TEAM and PEACE blocs remain divided on this issue and other blocs have announced their opposition to gene therapy on the grounds that it does not sufficiently address the issue of youth and adolescent drug use.

Nonetheless, the impact of scientific innovation on the solutions ultimately implemented by UNODC will likely be immense.