Urgent warning after two suspected opioid deaths at the weekend: Met Police urge Brits to take care after pills '500 times stronger than heroin' are feared to be being used in nightclubs
A man, 28, and woman, 20, are thought to have taken Nitazenes, believed to be up to 500 times stronger than heroin, after partying at a south London nightclub during the Spring Bank Holiday weekend.
Their bodies were later discovered at a property in Southall, west London, after a concerned friend was unable to wake the pair.
The Met Police confirmed an investigation into their 'sudden deaths' had commenced but no arrests had been made yet.
The force added: 'This is following reports that the individuals allegedly passed away after taking an illicit substance in the form of a green pill.'
Drug testing charity The Loop has suggested these pills contain Nitazenes, which can be '50 to 500 times stronger than heroin'.
The organisation added that they are often sold under the pretence that they are oxycodone, a highly addictive prescription painkiller.
A theory is that the pair thought they were taking oxycodone to assist them in getting to sleep, The Times reports.
World famous south London club Ministry Of Sound warned its customers to 'stay safe' last week, just days after the deaths over Bank Holiday weekend.
The pills taken by the users over the weekend had the number 80 on one side and possibly an 'OP' on the other, Ealing Council said.
The Cause nightclub in east London has taken to its Instagram account to claim there had been 'several hospitalisations across multiple London venues' associated with the pills.
MailOnline has approached the London Ambulance Service (LAS) to verify this statement.
The Met Police has also been contacted for comment.
An Ealing Council spokesperson told people to avoid taking the pills 'even in small amounts' and that people considering consuming them should not do so by themselves.
Users should also think about carrying naloxone - an opioid overdose antidote.
Nitazenes were first created in the 1950s as opioid painkillers but were never approved for medical use. For 70 years, their existence was forgotten.
Then, after Britain and America's withdrawal from Afghanistan - and the Taliban's subsequent narcotics ban - they re-emerged as a way to strengthen low-purity heroin in case opium supplies dwindled.
Experts are united in their fear of the rising risk of nitazenes. Yet, while heroin users are still vulnerable, young people buying traditionally legal drugs such as Valium and Xanax as coping mechanisms are also at risk.
In fact, MailOnline analysis of data from the UK's only drug testing facility Wedinos has revealed that two-thirds of samples that contained nitazenes were supposed to be legal medications that could be purchased legally.
Two-thirds of that total were bought by people intending to buy Valium (diazepam).
So far, the number of nitazene-related deaths only stands at 458 in the last two years, up to April 13.
However, there was a 166 per cent increase from 2023 (125 deaths) to 2024 (333 deaths) - more than double in a single year, and even that total is expected to rise once toxicology and forensic testing improves and is finalised.
Steve Rolles, a senior policy analyst at the Transform Drug Policy Foundation, told MailOnline: 'The number of deaths is rising at an alarming rate. It's the tip of the iceberg.
'What has happened in the US should be a warning to policymakers in the UK. We could be heading to a US-style overdose crisis. We are talking thousands or tens of thousands dying.
'All the indications are that is what is happening. I'm very wary of scaremongering about drugs but I'm deeply worried about the potential carnage opioids could do in the UK.
'We already have the highest overdose rate in Europe. Nitazenes could make it way, way worse.
'This is a very serious public health emergency that's not being taken seriously enough.'
He added: 'I am scared. There's almost one person dying every day from nitazenes and most people haven't even heard of it.
'If it was anything else, there would be national panic. The government hasn't grasped the urgency of this.'
Rolles is starting to see heroin mixed with nitazenes on the streets of Britain.
He said: 'It does seem it's getting more [prevalent] as the heroin supply dries up.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Trump tells Zelensky he can end Ukraine-Russia war 'immediately' as he lays out terms for peace with Putin ahead of White House summit
President Donald Trump has issued an extraordinary rebuke of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, telling him he can 'end the war with Russia.' Trump categorically ruled out Zelenskyy's desire to see Ukraine join NATO and indicated he has no desire to see Crimea returned to Ukrainian rule. His shock position comes just hours ahead of his scheduled meeting with Zelenskyy in Washington on Monday. 'President Zelenskyy of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight,' Trump wrote on Truth Social on Sunday night. 'Remember how it started. No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE. 'Some things never change!!!' Leaders from Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Finland are rallying around the Ukrainian president and will join him in Washington on Monday amid fears he is walking into a trap. Their pledge to be at Zelenskyy's side at the White House on Monday is an apparent effort to ensure the meeting goes better than the last one in February, when Trump berated Zelenskyy in a heated Oval Office encounter. 'The Europeans are very afraid of the Oval Office scene being repeated and so they want to support Mr. Zelenskyy to the hilt,' said retired French Gen. Dominique Trinquand, a former head of France's military mission at the United Nations. 'It's a power struggle and a position of strength that might work with Trump,' he said. Neil Melvin, director of international security at the London-based Royal United Services Institute, said European leaders are trying to 'shape this fast-evolving agenda.' After the Alaska summit, the idea of a ceasefire appears all-but-abandoned, with the narrative shifting toward Putin's agenda of ensuring Ukraine does not join NATO or even the EU. Zelenskyy earlier pushed back against Trump's assertion — which aligned with Putin's preference — that the two sides should negotiate a complete end to the war, rather than first securing a ceasefire. Zelenskyy said a ceasefire would provide breathing room to review Putin's demands. 'It's impossible to do this under the pressure of weapons,' he said. 'Putin does not want to stop the killing, but he must do it.'
The Independent
6 hours ago
- The Independent
Rachel Reeves to take aim at environmental protections in bid to speed up infrastructure projects, say reports
Rachel Reeves is preparing to strip back environmental protections in an attempt to accelerate infrastructure building and boost the economy, according to reports. The chancellor is considering major reforms that would make it more difficult for wildlife concerns to hold up developments, according to The Times. Treasury officials are said to be drafting another planning reform bill, the publication reported. The move reportedly involves tearing up parts of European environmental rules, which developers have argued slow down crucial projects. While Labour ministers have previously insisted their current planning overhaul would balance growth with nature, Ms Reeves is understood to believe that the government must go further. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill going through Parliament overrides existing habitat and nature protections, which, if passed, would allow developers to make general environmental improvements and pay into a nature restoration fund that improves habitats on other sites. But Ms Reeves is considering more contentious reforms that are likely to trigger further backlash from environmental groups, according to The Times. Among the changes under discussion are plans for a smaller, UK-only list of protected species, which would give less weight to wildlife considered rare across Europe but relatively common in Britain, The Times said. Ms Reeves is also reportedly considering abolishing the EU 'precautionary principle' that forces developers to prove projects will have no impact on protected natural sites. Instead, a new test would assess the risks and benefits of building. The chancellor is also exploring limits on legal challenges from environmental campaigners. Speaking to the House of Lords economic affairs committee last month, Ms Reeves said: 'The reason that HS2 is not coming to my city of Leeds anymore anytime soon, is because I'm afraid, as a country, we've cared more about the bats than we have about the commuter times for people in Leeds and West Yorkshire, and we've got to change that, 'Because I care more about a young family getting on the housing ladder than I do about protecting some snails, and I care more about my energy bills and my constituents than I do about the views of people from their windows.' High-profile examples of costly protections include the £100m Buckinghamshire 'bat tunnel' built to protect wildlife from HS2 trains and the so-called 'fish disco' at Hinkley Point C nuclear plant, which uses sound to deter fish from cooling system intakes. The existing Planning and Infrastructure Bill already proposes a 'nature restoration fund' under which developers could offset environmental damage by paying for conservation schemes elsewhere. But the bill has faced criticism from both environmental groups and developers, who fear it will fail to speed up construction. Paul Miner of the countryside charity CPRE told The Times that targeting habitats regulations would 'take us backwards rather than forwards on nature recovery'.
Times
7 hours ago
- Times
Rachel Reeves to cut ‘bats and newts' in boost to developers
Rachel Reeves is preparing to strip back environmental protections in an effort to boost the economy by speeding up infrastructure projects. The chancellor is considering reforms that would make it far harder for concerns about nature to stop development, which she insists is crucial to restoring growth and improving living standards. The Treasury has begun preparing for another planning reform bill and is thinking about tearing up key parts of European environmental rules that developers say are making it harder to build key projects. Labour ministers have repeatedly insisted that their current planning overhaul will not come at the expense of nature, promising a 'win-win' system where developers will pay to offset environmental damage. But Reeves is understood to believe that the government must go significantly further, after expressing frustration that the interests of 'bats and newts' are being allowed to stymie critical infrastructure. She has tasked officials with looking at much more contentious reforms, which are likely to provoke a furious backlash from environmentalists and cause unease for some Labour MPs. A smaller, UK-only list of protected species is being planned, which would place less weight on wildlife — including types of newt — that is rare elsewhere in Europe but more common in Britain. Developers would also no longer have to prove that projects would have no impact on protected natural sites, under plans that would abolish the 'precautionary principle' enshrined in European rules. Instead, a new test would look at risks and benefits of potential projects. Further curbs to judicial review are also being considered by Reeves to stop key projects being delayed by legal challenges from environmentalists. No decisions have been made, but work is underway and Treasury sources acknowledged there was a growing belief that the government needed to go further, as Reeves says she wants to make boosting Britain's sluggish productivity the centrepiece of her autumn budget. She argued this week that building more infrastructure such as roads and railways were crucial to this aim. A Planning and Infrastructure Bill currently going through parliament attempts to encourage development through a 'nature restoration fund' through which developers will be allowed to press ahead with projects by setting up schemes elsewhere to offset their environmental impact. • The grid is struggling — and our green future hangs in the balance But the plan has been criticised by environmental groups while also attracting scepticism from some developers, who fear it will not work in practice and do little to speed up building. Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, who stood down as energy minister in May, is urging his former colleagues to go further to achieve Labour's promise of 150 major infrastructure projects. 'While I think the planning bill will work for housing, I don't think it is sufficiently focused on the major infrastructure projects, so it is encouraging that the Treasury is going to have another look at whether we've really got this right,' he said. 'The government has to face up to the tensions in the Habitat Regulations which are making it hard to build essential infrastructure and the reality is that at some point someone needs to make a hard decision and say 'on some things, you just have to press ahead'.' The rules, which incorporate the EU Habitats Directive into British law, ban killing of hundreds of species, including types of bats, news, voles, snails, spiders, insects and woodlice. Developers must prove there is no risk to protected sites and species before being allowed to go ahead with projects, under rules which critics say impose an 'impossibly high standard' on vital projects. Reeves is increasingly sympathetic to such criticism, after repeatedly hitting out at 'ridiculous' environmental protections. She said last month that she cared 'more about the young family getting on the housing ladder than I do about protecting some snails', after a speech in January in which she said developers should be able to 'focus on getting things built, and stop worrying about bats and newts'. Sir Keir Starmer has also expressed frustration with the ability of campaigners to delay projects through legal challenges, and is already introducing rules which limit judicial review to override the 'whims of nimbys'. Campaign groups and residents, who currently have three opportunities to apply for judicial review, which will be reduced to two, or one in cases deemed by a judge 'totally without merit'. Reeves is now considering allowing only one opportunity to bring any challenge. Some Labour MPs and peers want her to go further by using dedicated acts of parliament to prevent any legal challenge to specific named projects. The plans are at an early stage and are likely to cause tension with ministers in other departments who have pledged to protect the environment. Paul Miner, of the countryside charity CPRE, said targeting habitats regulations would 'take us backwards rather than forwards on nature recovery', adding: 'We urge the government to drop the worn-out 'builders versus blockers' narrative which wrongly frames climate and nature as being in conflict with economic growth.' Becky Pullinger, of the Wildlife Trusts, said maintaining environmental standards was 'essential if we are to achieve targets to protect and restore the natural world which is suffering huge declines, saying Reeves should abandon 'the myth that deregulation will lead to economic growth'. But Robbie Owen, head of infrastructure planning at Pinsent Masons, said: 'Ministers are finally realising that their rhetoric about reform doesn't match up up the reality of their bill. We have been saying to ministers and officials all year that the bill needs to go further and it seems that message has finally been heard.'
