COMMENTS: 144
Meth: The Overstated Addiction
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
First, methamphetamine use is not prevalent. Although some 12 million Americans have tried methamphetamine, this is far fewer than the number who have tried inhalants (23 million), hallucinogens (34 million), cocaine (34 million), or marijuana (96 million). Of those who have tried methamphetamine, only 1.5 million have used the drug in the last year; and only 583,000 have used it within the last 30 days.
There is no indication that methamphetamine use is increasing. The proportion of Americans who use methamphetamine on a monthly basis has hovered in the range of 0.2 percent-0.3 percent since 1999. In fact, according to the 2005 Monitoring the Future survey, the percentage of high school seniors who reported using methamphetamine in the last year fell to a low of 2.5 percent in 2005. (Use of depressants, meanwhile, increased from a low of 2.8 percent in 1992 to around 7 percent in 2005.)
Second, policing is not "taking care" of methamphetamine. While limits on purchases of precursors have pushed many illicit labs out of our neighborhoods, the drug is still being manufactured -- just now it's across the border. Indeed, methamphetamine is now as available and cheap as it has ever been. This comes as no surprise. As long as demand for an illegal drug exists, there will be supply to meet it.
While policing has failed to curtail use of methamphetamine, it has successfully overloaded our jails and prisons. In the 1980s-90s, California followed national trends by relying increasingly on punishment and prisons as its primary response to arrests for illicit drug use. The total number of people imprisoned in California for drug possession quadrupled between 1988 and 2000, peaking at 20,116.
It was in response to this trend that California voters decided to change tactics. In 2000, 61 percent of California voters passed Proposition 36, the treatment-instead-of-incarceration law, which provides treatment to over 35,000 Californians convicted of nonviolent low-level drug offenses each year. Over half (53 percent) of Prop. 36 participants -- over 19,000 people -- enter treatment for methamphetamine abuse each year.
Prop. 36 has provided valuable evidence that methamphetamine addiction is quite treatable. According to state data on Prop. 36, methamphetamine users have a treatment completion rate of 35 percent, higher than users of cocaine/crack (32 percent) or heroin (29 percent). Although this was an important learning opportunity for policymakers, it was not news to treatment specialists. In fact, there have been at least twenty recent studies showing the efficacy of methamphetamine treatment.
The next step for policymakers is to provide treatment on demand, so that people suffering from addiction have access to treatment outside of the criminal justice system. It is both cheaper and better for public safety to provide treatment to those who need it sooner rather than later.
Other evidence shows that California's public health measures have not gone far enough. Although the Governor signed the Pharmacy Syringe Sale and Disease Prevention Act in 2004, well under half of California's 58 counties have implemented the program to allow nonprescription purchases of up to ten syringes at pharmacies. This is literally killing some of our state's most vulnerable residents.
According to the California Society of Addiction Medicine, 30-50 percent of those with newly identified HIV-infection use methamphetamine. Increasing the availability of sterile syringes through syringe exchange programs, pharmacies, and other outlets is proven to reduce unsafe injection practices, curtail transmission of HIV/AIDS and hepatitis, increase safe disposal of used syringes, and help intravenous drug users obtain drug education and treatment.
The truth about methamphetamine is that its use is not growing exponentially, that addiction is treatable, and that the risks it poses to public health can be mitigated.
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rsaxto on Nov 30, 2006 1:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» exactly
Posted by: Donna_Darko
» RE: exactly
Posted by: jack alexander
» RE: exactly
Posted by: Lauren
» not always so
Posted by: spacecadet
» Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: pomes
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: jwg
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: purplelotus13
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: rsaxto
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Paul D on Nov 30, 2006 5:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that treatment as opposed to incarceration is the better course of action, and that the media tend to overhype minor problems. But around here, meth is very real and deserves every bit of attention it gets.
Also, for a good movie about meth, check out Spun. It's does for methamphetamine what Trainspotting or Requiem For a Dream did for heroine.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: meth IS prevalent
Posted by: Phenix
» RE: meth IS prevalent
Posted by: badkitty
» RE: meth IS prevalent
Posted by: oregoncharles
» I'm interested...
Posted by: Burton
» RE: I'm interested...
Posted by: Mr. Heathen
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SufiLizard on Nov 30, 2006 5:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My wife worked for years as a nurse on a med psych unit where she saw numerous cases of meth addiction. In her opinion the meth addicts were less likely to kick than even heroin addicts.
And meth is literally ripping apart small towns and rural communities. The number of children going into foster care as a result of meth is astounding (this is something else of which I have very personal knowledge).
And I'm not just a mindless "Just Say No" person. I realize the ridiculousness of the anti-pot propaganda and some of the other narcotic witch hunts of our era -- but I happen to believe Meth is in a little different league.
That being said, crowding our jails with addicts isn't doing anything to solve the problem and is probably making things worse. We certainly need a new approach, but that approach shouldn't include minimizing a very serious problem.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Meth IS a problem in Indiana as well
Posted by: btr
» problem
Posted by: Donna_Darko
» RE: Meth IS a problem in Indiana as well
Posted by: harris
» RE: Meth IS a problem in Indiana as well
Posted by: jmooney
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 30, 2006 6:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Methamphetamine is sold under the trade name 'Desoxyn'; other similar drugs include Ritalin and Wellbutrin - they all activate the same biochemical pathways in the brain. Kids won't sit still or pay attention, so the pharmaceutical industry, their drug-based psychotherapists and gullible parents give their kids meth to keep them occupied. See http://www.adhdfraud.org/ for more.
If you're going to write about substance abuse in America and ignore the complicity of the pharmaceutical industry then you're ignoring one of the central contributing cause. Then there's the heroin-based drugs like oxycontin, the favorite of Rush Limbaugh - he takes his oxycontin and then rages on the radio about cannabis-smoking liberals. Ridiculous!
And Viagra? Viagra is just pharmaceutical cocaine. The two drugs have similar effects on the sexual libido - it's just a matter of who you're giving your money to.
One other point is this - by classifying cannabis and meth as similar drugs, people are misled. They try cannabis, they realize that it's more innocuous then alcohol, and then they think that meth and heroin aren't any worse - which isn't true; they're highly addictive and dangerous drugs (kind of like cigarettes).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» You're wrong about Wellbutrin (bupropion) - it's an amphetamine (not a "mild drug")
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: Meth and derivatives are given to kids every day by Big Pharma for 'ADHD'
Posted by: ignition
» RE: Meth and derivatives are given to kids every day by Big Pharma for 'ADHD'
Posted by: insulaparadigm
» Fact: you can buy meth at any pharmacy (under the name Desoxyn)
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: Fact: you can buy meth at any pharmacy (under the name Desoxyn)
Posted by: insulaparadigm
» RE: Fact: you can buy meth at any pharmacy (under the name Desoxyn)
Posted by: insulaparadigm
» RE: Meth and derivatives are given to kids every day by Big Pharma for 'ADHD'
Posted by: Madam Hatter
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Tink on Nov 30, 2006 7:16 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I think your wrong about this one
Posted by: autumnrealm1
» RE: I think your wrong about this one
Posted by: Tink
» RE: I think your wrong about this one
Posted by: insulaparadigm
» Numbers
Posted by: BlueTigress
Comments are closed-
Posted by: philobat on Nov 30, 2006 7:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If these steps were taken then people would not need to escape into a needle, bottle or a pipe.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Those are reasons For The War On Drugs?
Posted by: jwg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Tankerdeath on Nov 30, 2006 7:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My girlfriend and I don't even smoke pot, but we both have several freinds who have ruined thier lives with meth.
It's not as bad as you think, my ass.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Meth in Texas
Posted by: Burton
» Needles and Haystacks
Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Meth in Texas
Posted by: jwg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: AdamG on Nov 30, 2006 7:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even something like meth if it were made legal to manufacture, sell and use imagine the impact. If we take away the stigma of illegalness, it moves more into the public spotlight. Even the chemical byproducts made in it making could be dealt with by HazMat people instead of finding their way into the soil and water because of the dumping of them off the beaten path. In my area of Northern Cali, they commonly find them used chemmies in creeks, river, and deep in the woods. In some cases, you can see lab sites from the air because of all the dead trees poisoned by the chemicals.
Somethings like cocaine and heroin, if not illegal, would be cheaper then coffee. It would loosen the CIA's stranglehold on countries in Latin America and Central Asia. If you don't think protect the international drug trade is one of the CIA's biggest rackets, you're a fool.
Marijauna, it's just ridiculous that it's illegal. Besides it obviously being fairly benign, if it were legalised there would be no reason not to also legalise industrial hemp.
All the monies used for fighting the War on Drugs then could go elsewhere. Job training, social programs designed to really get people out of poverty and not push them farther into it or keeping them dependent, and treatment programs would be more then funded by all the money wasted fighting the Drug War. Just improving peoples socioeconomic lot would work wonders as people who have successful and meaningful lives tend not to abuse drugs. Not that they don't use them, they just aren't as likely abuse them causing negative impacts on society as a whole as their uses' impact moves beyond someone's personal life.
Legalising all drugs really would be the best policy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: LEGALISE ALL DRUGS NOW!
Posted by: autumnrealm1
» RE: LEGALISE ALL DRUGS NOW!
Posted by: aussidawg
» Sure, there is a powerful argument to be made for letting folks self-destruct...
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Sure, there is a powerful argument to be made for letting folks self-destruct...
Posted by: pomes
» Whatever works for you...your choice.
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» decriminalization
Posted by: Donna_Darko
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: AdamG
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: AdamG
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: bornxeyed
» momma mia, mea culpa!
Posted by: bornxeyed
» YES: LEGALISE ALL DRUGS NOW!
Posted by: Burton
» RE: YES: LEGALISE ALL DRUGS NOW!
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: YES: LEGALISE ALL DRUGS NOW!
Posted by: AdamG
» Drain the CIA of $$$
Posted by: pomes
» The CIA is all over Afganistan looking for somebody
Posted by: jwg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bookie on Nov 30, 2006 8:16 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: We're # one
Posted by: Burton
» good question
Posted by: bookie
» RE: We're # one
Posted by: Phenix
» RE: We're # one
Posted by: pomes
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ridebalanced on Nov 30, 2006 8:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: seen the damage
Posted by: autumnrealm1
» RE: seen the damage
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: autumnrealm1 on Nov 30, 2006 8:27 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JCR on Nov 30, 2006 8:30 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have personally never touched this shit but I know plenty of people who have. If people as far east as Kentucky and Indiana are attesting to its prevalence, imagine what it's like in Idaho, Nevada, California, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico and Wyoming? The stuff has been spreading west to east for quite some time so I think it suffices to say that the problem is much bigger than you have stated Alternet.
The solution is never incarceration however. I was very, very disappointed that Colorado didn't become the first state to legalize marijuana outright. This country is never going to learn!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I'll raise you another state....
Posted by: otis4
» RE: I'll raise you another state....
Posted by: otis4
» Good point
Posted by: JCR
» Law enforcement
Posted by: Donna_Darko
» RE: Missed the boat on this one Alternet . . .
Posted by: Lauren
» Jesus would smoke pot!
Posted by: JCR
» RE: Jesus would smoke pot!
Posted by: Burton
Comments are closed-
Posted by: anthonypapa on Nov 30, 2006 8:44 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Six states, including Washington, are considering joining Tennessee, Illinois, Montana and Minnesota in enacting a state methamphetamine offender registry. These registries will publicly display address and other information about convicted meth users, makers and dealers. In validating their call for registries, law enforcement officials have complained that the waste materials associated with clandestine meth labs are toxic and pose serious health threats to communities and emergency responders.
The manufacture, trafficking and abuse of meth have jumped to the forefront of national concern as the latest U.S. "drug epidemic." Cover stories depict meth as "America's Most Dangerous Drug." Alarmist media coverage of the dangers of meth and the draconian political responses that followed are reminiscent of the public reaction to crack cocaine in the 1980s. A new federal government Meth/Drug Hot Spots program was soon implemented. It offered local and state agencies almost $400 million to find and eradicate meth labs. Through financial incentives, policing policies were increased to take advantage of this new federal cash cow, all in the name of stopping the meth epidemic.
Now desperate measures are being enacted to tackle this "high priority" problem -- measures that sometimes invade the privacy and civil liberties of citizens in ways that seem far removed from the war on drugs. The idea of using criminal offender databases is not new. Sex offenders have been under a watchful public eye through online registries in all 50 states for some time now. Few would argue against their use in this manner. After all, we must protect our children from predators. But do we really need the same type of tool for the prohibition of meth?
Recent studies by several policy organizations such as the Sentencing Project have questioned the very existence this so-called epidemic, busting many of the myths perpetuated by the media. The studies concluded that meth is actually one of the rarest of illegal drugs used, with its use declining among youth, stabilizing among adults and demonstrating no increase in first-time users. Furthermore, even governmental data dispute the existence of an epidemic.
The war on drugs has created convenient vehicles of looking tough on crime while hiding behind the shield of public safety. But that shield gets worn down when our basic rights are curtailed through its use. On Sept. 30, a new federal law went into effect that forces cold sufferers to jump through ridiculous hoops to purchase what were originally over-the-counter medications.
Customers with colds now must present a photo ID and sign a log in order to purchase cold and allergy medicines containing pseudoephedrine, ephedrine and phenylephrine -- precursor drugs that can be used to manufacture meth. There are an estimated 34 different chemicals found in common household products such as lighter fluid, road flares and matches that can also be used to make meth. Are we going to create similar laws to restrict purchases of all those items as well?
We need to invest scarce public resources into educating the public about the use of meth and providing high quality treatment options to fight addiction, not create a intrusive public registry or layer on ineffective bureaucratic busy work. Just another law enforcement tool that leads to the further erosion of our precious civil liberties. It might not be apparent now, but neither was our right to not be hassled when buying cold medicine before the law changed.
Tony P
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Meth Day: A day Government Positions Itself to Take Away Your Rights!
Posted by: autumnrealm1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: OpinionsGetOld on Nov 30, 2006 8:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not sure I agree with legalizing Meth though..Marijuana, LSD, psychadelic mushrooms, cocaine, opium, heroin, MDMA, those are all fine by me...Asides, the main case meth has is a longer buzz than cocaine, so with legal cocaine and lower prices, folks could afford the occassional binge abit better.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: SE Texas Report
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: SE Texas Report
Posted by: harris
» RE: SE Texas Report
Posted by: aussidawg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Mamarianne on Nov 30, 2006 9:42 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have maintained since I began teaching in the sixties that the big marijuana lie is a major reason why kids won't listen when we try to warn them that some drugs are truly dangerous. I mean, if we are misrepresenting pot as something terribly dangerous, then many young folks see no reason to believe other messages about drugs, messages that are, in fact, accurate.
I would like to see this nation legalize and tax marijuana and use the funding to treat addictions.
Clearly, the war on drugs--like the war in Iraq--is a quagmire that (and this is no surprise) victimizes the poor and the young.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: How many ruined lives aren't significant?
Posted by: Burton
» Thank you!! We need leadership by the sensible and pragmatic, not mindless ideological crusades!
Posted by: Gakl
Comments are closed-
Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma on Nov 30, 2006 9:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: btr on Nov 30, 2006 10:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Meth use documentary in Arizona
Posted by: Burton
» And how many killed by drunk drivers? Media gets ad money from alcohol, not meth
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jamester on Nov 30, 2006 11:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This seems like just another case of "lies, damned lies, and statistics"...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Tweakers suck!
Posted by: catbut
» RE: Tweakers suck!
Posted by: ignition
» RE: Tweakers suck!
Posted by: catbut
» RE: Tweakers suck!
Posted by: Burton
Comments are closed-
Posted by: axjxhx on Nov 30, 2006 11:22 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: good discussion
Posted by: Burton
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VisionQuest on Nov 30, 2006 12:03 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rarely if ever do we wonder WHY so many Americans abuse drugs. We imbue the particular substance with magical powers to "ensare" people as if it doesn't have to be sought and actively pursued in order for people to become addicted to it.
The problem in America isn't meth, just as it wasn't crack, cocaine, heroin, morphine, opium or any of the other drugs that have inspired wide-spread panic and hysteria. The problem is that so many Americans want to escape from consciousness, and will thus find whatever means to that end that are available. People drink to excess or abuse prescription drugs; kids ingest massive amounts of cold medicine and huff the fumes from literally hundreds of household products. Is the problem the substances, or the impulse, and the inability to control it?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What is the Real Issue?
Posted by: jmooney
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aussidawg on Nov 30, 2006 12:31 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Drug Prohibition is Here To Stay.
Posted by: JCR
» RE: Drug Prohibition is Here To Stay.
Posted by: aussidawg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ignition on Nov 30, 2006 12:59 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lynned2002 on Nov 30, 2006 1:04 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: lynned2002
Posted by: Burton
» RE: lynned2002
Posted by: lynned2002
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Nov 30, 2006 1:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: insulaparadigm on Nov 30, 2006 2:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But the drug war as with everything else has just increased the economic incentive.
Media scare / hype and the legislative backlash response will not help. We have the highest prison pop per capita in the world and the drug problem get worse and worse.
We need more treatment - if meth users respond better than other typical drugs of abuse - that's great !
We should focus even more on that.
It's good that law enforcement focus on meth as opposed to other drugs but overall how much has it changed anything?
Not every meth user is an animal or eats their children, the person they are hurting is first and foremost is themselves. How is the law going to help?
And unless I'm wrong the south isn't a hotbed of progresive drug policy and has the worst problems- massively speculative at best and prolly not causative or perhaps even correlated but I'm still skeptical about more law... more punitive laws.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: owleyes on Nov 30, 2006 4:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Novellaidea on Nov 30, 2006 4:44 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: flashfast on Nov 30, 2006 7:11 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Methaphetamines are the worst drug in the world - people become violent not from its usage, but it's disusage. A typical scenario is a user gives it up ofr say 3 months. Then they might have a socail 'snort' and, when coming down from the high, they can become so irrational as to injure or even murder another.
It is a plague, and as a casual observer I can honestly say it's use is widespread and growing. The majority use does not appear in any statistics, and academic argument is shallow.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: billfaster on Nov 30, 2006 9:03 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For most of the life of the study the only question
about methamphetamine use has been contained in
a single 12th-grade questionnaire form. Respondents
who indicated using any type of amphetamines
in the prior 12 months were asked in a
sequel question to check on a prespecified list the
types they had used during that period.
It would appear, then,
that the long-term method we had been using for
tracking methamphetamine use probably yielded
an understatement of the absolute prevalence level,
perhaps because some proportion of methamphetamine
users did not correctly categorize themselves
initially as amphetamine users (even though methamphetamine
was given as one of the examples of
the amphetamines).
This was taken from: http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/
pubs/monographs/overview2005.pdf
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Faulty Statistics
Posted by: insulaparadigm
» RE: Faulty Statistics
Posted by: billfaster
» RE: Faulty Statistics
Posted by: insulaparadigm
Comments are closed-
Posted by: BlueTigress on Nov 30, 2006 10:17 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But this doesn't change the fact that if I want to buy ONE stupid package of Sudafed at my local mass market retailer, I have to go pester a pharmacy tech and sign a register with my name and address, plus show ID if I want to take it so I can pay at one checkout. I always assure the pharmacy tech politely that I know they can't help it, it's the law.
It's a stupid law put in place in the last year in response to something that may have been a problem five years ago. Unless things have changed again, last I knew meth cookers were getting the precursors from people who imported them in mass quantities from Mexico.
But like a poster above said, this is the government trying to take our freedoms.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 30, 2006 10:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I tried finding these statistics and had little luck; it seems that as much as 1/2 of all violent crime is alcohol related, and in San Jose CA a report stated that 30% of detainees had meth in their system, but that was for all crimes, not just violent ones. Perhaps the criminal system doesn't want these statistics gathered - it would show that cannabis is a far safer drug (both socially and medically) then either alcohol or meth.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» See also DHHS/NIH research on rural meth use
Posted by: eddie torres
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dyspeptic on Dec 1, 2006 12:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What I see here is a BIG problem. I see a really tough to beat link between poverty and hunger and meth. Other drugs provide escape, maybe. But meth gives a feeling of energy and relieves hunger. So, there is then this cycle of hunger, meth, activity, hunger, meth... Then, too, doing a drug gives people the illusion of control of their circumstances.
I don't understand the motive to minimize this epidemic. What does anybody have to gain by denying it? It is real here, and it is incredibly destructive.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Meth IS a big problem - Oregon
Posted by: dnaylor
Comments are closed-
Posted by: drblack on Dec 1, 2006 1:29 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People who work in law enforcement or drug treatment only see the worst cases and have more hysterical opinions about drugs then most.
Every few years some other drug is "The worst problem ever ,and it is killing everybody>>>>WAAAAAA"
Drugs have been around forever and they always will be...let us get smart and end prohibition which makes a penny worth of some plant or chemical worth 10 bucks.
Also ,to study how to help drug abuse costs hundreds of thousands for a DEA license...this stops so much valuble research. Drugs are not and never have done anything...people do things and when we realize that treating people with compassion and recognizing that no one wants to hurt themselves we will be on track. Let us find out why some peoples makeup makes them go crazy for some drugs.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ignition on Dec 1, 2006 10:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MikeNSwiss on Dec 1, 2006 1:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.harmredux.org/conferencemedia.html.
Here, of particular interest is The History of Methamphetamine: An Epidemic In Context, by Patricia Case, Sc.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: forbzilla on Dec 1, 2006 3:02 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that treatment is the avenue of choice in any drug addiction, but have personal experience with ten to twenty individuals, struggling, on the margin: street people who do part time work. I see the results of a cheap, highly addictive, long term function-smashing drug close hand. It's not like smoking a joint. It takes over a year for brain cells to heal from meth, and in the meantime, even if they can stay off meth, these people are not as they were. Addiction to this drug takes the larger values--diligence, trust, care of children--and throws them to the curb. The problem is huge precisely because meth is so cheap and so available to people who have so little. Marginalizing it and comparing it to the recreational drugs that people toy with relatively safely does not help. This is very bad stuff, and though regrettable, better in jail than using. Please check your calibration before writing such things!
Spokane, Washington.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LtL on Dec 1, 2006 4:50 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I just wish
Posted by: dnaylor
» moron
Posted by: alterhead
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bookworm8571 on Dec 2, 2006 8:34 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» meth started in Calif.
Posted by: alterhead
Comments are closed-
Posted by: RealActivist on Dec 3, 2006 8:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The question is: what are WE going to do about that?
I will give you one idea. Dooley works for the Drug Policy Alliance, which is doing more to try to end the drug war than anyone else. They were the key force behind virtually all of the ballot initiatives to legalize medical marijuana, and also -- as Dooley -- says, behind Prop 36, which is the biggest piece of sentencing reform in the US since the repeal of alcohol Prohibition. They've also been successful in legalizing needle exchanges to reduce HIV/AIDS, reforming mandatory minimum laws, and getting the California PTA involved in more honest drug education. The folks who work there and support them disagree about legalization (although mostly agree about marijuana legalization) -- but they all agree we need to end the current madness and put all options on the table.
One of the best things any of us can do is get involved in the movement to end the war on drugs. Go to DPA's website, www.drugpolicy.org, sign up for their enewsletter and action alerts, and send them some money -- so fewer people can spend next Christmas behind bars for nothing more than violating a drug law.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Thank you
Posted by: insulaparadigm
Comments are closed-
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Dec 3, 2006 9:48 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jadelynn on Dec 4, 2006 7:00 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hole11 on Dec 5, 2006 5:24 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those that want to be left alone on their own accord don't want to be bothered by someone who knows better than them and has the power to push them around.
That's the war on drugs. Drugs that supposed to pollute the mind and body.
I noticed that many have said it's a problem in their state like Indiana and Kentucky. There was a time when the Ohio river had cleaner water. There was a time when coal burning power plants didn't dot the meandering river. No one stopped them and no one is complaining about cancer rates and all those dangerous factories spewing cancer causing chemicals in your lungs.
So why would anyone care about a persons choice to chose their own poison? I imagine a person does these things because the opportunity presents itself or the person is naturally curious.
Man has high expectations to improve himself and his condition. When that isn't possible he might try to escape. One way to escape is drugs. Or if it just feels good he does it.
Then the majority decides for us that they are just going to remove the undesirables. See no evil. But the necessary evil goes on filling our air and water with pollution.
Thanks for your concern but who do I send the bill to when my lifestyle changes to the worse because the majority want that pollution? That is going to be the next epidemic.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Darkrose on Dec 6, 2006 3:39 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I came down with a sinus infection recently. In order to get some Sudafed, I had to:
1. Go to the pharmacy and stand in line.
2. Request the one pack I'm allowed to buy per month.
3. Swipe my driver's license.
4. Sign the log with my name and address, which must be kept by the pharmacy for two years.
I bought the stuff because I'm coughing up green goo and I can't breathe. The procedure made me feel like a criminal.
Yes, meth addiction kills. So does alcohol addiction, but I can go into the same drugstore and buy a bottle of vodka--I've got enough grey hair that I probably wouldn't get carded to see if I'm over 21.
Meth addiction is clearly a big problem, but the current attempt by the government to solve it is mainly punishing people who haven't done anything.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rsaxto on Nov 30, 2006 1:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» exactly
Posted by: Donna_Darko
» RE: exactly
Posted by: jack alexander
» RE: exactly
Posted by: Lauren
» not always so
Posted by: spacecadet
» Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: pomes
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: jwg
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: purplelotus13
» RE: Yes - 12 step fascists!
Posted by: rsaxto
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Paul D on Nov 30, 2006 5:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that treatment as opposed to incarceration is the better course of action, and that the media tend to overhype minor problems. But around here, meth is very real and deserves every bit of attention it gets.
Also, for a good movie about meth, check out Spun. It's does for methamphetamine what Trainspotting or Requiem For a Dream did for heroine.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: meth IS prevalent
Posted by: Phenix
» RE: meth IS prevalent
Posted by: badkitty
» RE: meth IS prevalent
Posted by: oregoncharles
» I'm interested...
Posted by: Burton
» RE: I'm interested...
Posted by: Mr. Heathen
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SufiLizard on Nov 30, 2006 5:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My wife worked for years as a nurse on a med psych unit where she saw numerous cases of meth addiction. In her opinion the meth addicts were less likely to kick than even heroin addicts.
And meth is literally ripping apart small towns and rural communities. The number of children going into foster care as a result of meth is astounding (this is something else of which I have very personal knowledge).
And I'm not just a mindless "Just Say No" person. I realize the ridiculousness of the anti-pot propaganda and some of the other narcotic witch hunts of our era -- but I happen to believe Meth is in a little different league.
That being said, crowding our jails with addicts isn't doing anything to solve the problem and is probably making things worse. We certainly need a new approach, but that approach shouldn't include minimizing a very serious problem.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Meth IS a problem in Indiana as well
Posted by: btr
» problem
Posted by: Donna_Darko
» RE: Meth IS a problem in Indiana as well
Posted by: harris
» RE: Meth IS a problem in Indiana as well
Posted by: jmooney
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 30, 2006 6:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Methamphetamine is sold under the trade name 'Desoxyn'; other similar drugs include Ritalin and Wellbutrin - they all activate the same biochemical pathways in the brain. Kids won't sit still or pay attention, so the pharmaceutical industry, their drug-based psychotherapists and gullible parents give their kids meth to keep them occupied. See http://www.adhdfraud.org/ for more.
If you're going to write about substance abuse in America and ignore the complicity of the pharmaceutical industry then you're ignoring one of the central contributing cause. Then there's the heroin-based drugs like oxycontin, the favorite of Rush Limbaugh - he takes his oxycontin and then rages on the radio about cannabis-smoking liberals. Ridiculous!
And Viagra? Viagra is just pharmaceutical cocaine. The two drugs have similar effects on the sexual libido - it's just a matter of who you're giving your money to.
One other point is this - by classifying cannabis and meth as similar drugs, people are misled. They try cannabis, they realize that it's more innocuous then alcohol, and then they think that meth and heroin aren't any worse - which isn't true; they're highly addictive and dangerous drugs (kind of like cigarettes).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» You're wrong about Wellbutrin (bupropion) - it's an amphetamine (not a "mild drug")
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: Meth and derivatives are given to kids every day by Big Pharma for 'ADHD'
Posted by: ignition
» RE: Meth and derivatives are given to kids every day by Big Pharma for 'ADHD'
Posted by: insulaparadigm
» Fact: you can buy meth at any pharmacy (under the name Desoxyn)
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: Fact: you can buy meth at any pharmacy (under the name Desoxyn)
Posted by: insulaparadigm
» RE: Fact: you can buy meth at any pharmacy (under the name Desoxyn)
Posted by: insulaparadigm
» RE: Meth and derivatives are given to kids every day by Big Pharma for 'ADHD'
Posted by: Madam Hatter
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Tink on Nov 30, 2006 7:16 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I think your wrong about this one
Posted by: autumnrealm1
» RE: I think your wrong about this one
Posted by: Tink
» RE: I think your wrong about this one
Posted by: insulaparadigm
» Numbers
Posted by: BlueTigress
Comments are closed-
Posted by: philobat on Nov 30, 2006 7:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If these steps were taken then people would not need to escape into a needle, bottle or a pipe.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Those are reasons For The War On Drugs?
Posted by: jwg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Tankerdeath on Nov 30, 2006 7:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My girlfriend and I don't even smoke pot, but we both have several freinds who have ruined thier lives with meth.
It's not as bad as you think, my ass.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Meth in Texas
Posted by: Burton
» Needles and Haystacks
Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Meth in Texas
Posted by: jwg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: AdamG on Nov 30, 2006 7:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even something like meth if it were made legal to manufacture, sell and use imagine the impact. If we take away the stigma of illegalness, it moves more into the public spotlight. Even the chemical byproducts made in it making could be dealt with by HazMat people instead of finding their way into the soil and water because of the dumping of them off the beaten path. In my area of Northern Cali, they commonly find them used chemmies in creeks, river, and deep in the woods. In some cases, you can see lab sites from the air because of all the dead trees poisoned by the chemicals.
Somethings like cocaine and heroin, if not illegal, would be cheaper then coffee. It would loosen the CIA's stranglehold on countries in Latin America and Central Asia. If you don't think protect the international drug trade is one of the CIA's biggest rackets, you're a fool.
Marijauna, it's just ridiculous that it's illegal. Besides it obviously being fairly benign, if it were legalised there would be no reason not to also legalise industrial hemp.
All the monies used for fighting the War on Drugs then could go elsewhere. Job training, social programs designed to really get people out of poverty and not push them farther into it or keeping them dependent, and treatment programs would be more then funded by all the money wasted fighting the Drug War. Just improving peoples socioeconomic lot would work wonders as people who have successful and meaningful lives tend not to abuse drugs. Not that they don't use them, they just aren't as likely abuse them causing negative impacts on society as a whole as their uses' impact moves beyond someone's personal life.
Legalising all drugs really would be the best policy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: LEGALISE ALL DRUGS NOW!
Posted by: autumnrealm1
» RE: LEGALISE ALL DRUGS NOW!
Posted by: aussidawg
» Sure, there is a powerful argument to be made for letting folks self-destruct...
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Sure, there is a powerful argument to be made for letting folks self-destruct...
Posted by: pomes
» Whatever works for you...your choice.
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» decriminalization
Posted by: Donna_Darko
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: AdamG
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: AdamG
» RE: decriminalize cannabis, but not heroin or methamphetamine
Posted by: bornxeyed
» momma mia, mea culpa!
Posted by: bornxeyed
» YES: LEGALISE ALL DRUGS NOW!
Posted by: Burton
» RE: YES: LEGALISE ALL DRUGS NOW!
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: YES: LEGALISE ALL DRUGS NOW!
Posted by: AdamG
» Drain the CIA of $$$
Posted by: pomes
» The CIA is all over Afganistan looking for somebody
Posted by: jwg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bookie on Nov 30, 2006 8:16 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: We're # one
Posted by: Burton
» good question
Posted by: bookie
» RE: We're # one
Posted by: Phenix
» RE: We're # one
Posted by: pomes
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ridebalanced on Nov 30, 2006 8:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: seen the damage
Posted by: autumnrealm1
» RE: seen the damage
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: autumnrealm1 on Nov 30, 2006 8:27 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JCR on Nov 30, 2006 8:30 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have personally never touched this shit but I know plenty of people who have. If people as far east as Kentucky and Indiana are attesting to its prevalence, imagine what it's like in Idaho, Nevada, California, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico and Wyoming? The stuff has been spreading west to east for quite some time so I think it suffices to say that the problem is much bigger than you have stated Alternet.
The solution is never incarceration however. I was very, very disappointed that Colorado didn't become the first state to legalize marijuana outright. This country is never going to learn!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I'll raise you another state....
Posted by: otis4
» RE: I'll raise you another state....
Posted by: otis4
» Good point
Posted by: JCR
» Law enforcement
Posted by: Donna_Darko
» RE: Missed the boat on this one Alternet . . .
Posted by: Lauren
» Jesus would smoke pot!
Posted by: JCR
» RE: Jesus would smoke pot!
Posted by: Burton
Comments are closed-
Posted by: anthonypapa on Nov 30, 2006 8:44 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Six states, including Washington, are considering joining Tennessee, Illinois, Montana and Minnesota in enacting a state methamphetamine offender registry. These registries will publicly display address and other information about convicted meth users, makers and dealers. In validating their call for registries, law enforcement officials have complained that the waste materials associated with clandestine meth labs are toxic and pose serious health threats to communities and emergency responders.
The manufacture, trafficking and abuse of meth have jumped to the forefront of national concern as the latest U.S. "drug epidemic." Cover stories depict meth as "America's Most Dangerous Drug." Alarmist media coverage of the dangers of meth and the draconian political responses that followed are reminiscent of the public reaction to crack cocaine in the 1980s. A new federal government Meth/Drug Hot Spots program was soon implemented. It offered local and state agencies almost $400 million to find and eradicate meth labs. Through financial incentives, policing policies were increased to take advantage of this new federal cash cow, all in the name of stopping the meth epidemic.
Now desperate measures are being enacted to tackle this "high priority" problem -- measures that sometimes invade the privacy and civil liberties of citizens in ways that seem far removed from the war on drugs. The idea of using criminal offender databases is not new. Sex offenders have been under a watchful public eye through online registries in all 50 states for some time now. Few would argue against their use in this manner. After all, we must protect our children from predators. But do we really need the same type of tool for the prohibition of meth?
Recent studies by several policy organizations such as the Sentencing Project have questioned the very existence this so-called epidemic, busting many of the myths perpetuated by the media. The studies concluded that meth is actually one of the rarest of illegal drugs used, with its use declining among youth, stabilizing among adults and demonstrating no increase in first-time users. Furthermore, even governmental data dispute the existence of an epidemic.
The war on drugs has created convenient vehicles of looking tough on crime while hiding behind the shield of public safety. But that shield gets worn down when our basic rights are curtailed through its use. On Sept. 30, a new federal law went into effect that forces cold sufferers to jump through ridiculous hoops to purchase what were originally over-the-counter medications.
Customers with colds now must present a photo ID and sign a log in order to purchase cold and allergy medicines containing pseudoephedrine, ephedrine and phenylephrine -- precursor drugs that can be used to manufacture meth. There are an estimated 34 different chemicals found in common household products such as lighter fluid, road flares and matches that can also be used to make meth. Are we going to create similar laws to restrict purchases of all those items as well?
We need to invest scarce public resources into educating the public about the use of meth and providing high quality treatment options to fight addiction, not create a intrusive public registry or layer on ineffective bureaucratic busy work. Just another law enforcement tool that leads to the further erosion of our precious civil liberties. It might not be apparent now, but neither was our right to not be hassled when buying cold medicine before the law changed.
Tony P
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Meth Day: A day Government Positions Itself to Take Away Your Rights!
Posted by: autumnrealm1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: OpinionsGetOld on Nov 30, 2006 8:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not sure I agree with legalizing Meth though..Marijuana, LSD, psychadelic mushrooms, cocaine, opium, heroin, MDMA, those are all fine by me...Asides, the main case meth has is a longer buzz than cocaine, so with legal cocaine and lower prices, folks could afford the occassional binge abit better.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: SE Texas Report
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: SE Texas Report
Posted by: harris
» RE: SE Texas Report
Posted by: aussidawg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Mamarianne on Nov 30, 2006 9:42 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have maintained since I began teaching in the sixties that the big marijuana lie is a major reason why kids won't listen when we try to warn them that some drugs are truly dangerous. I mean, if we are misrepresenting pot as something terribly dangerous, then many young folks see no reason to believe other messages about drugs, messages that are, in fact, accurate.
I would like to see this nation legalize and tax marijuana and use the funding to treat addictions.
Clearly, the war on drugs--like the war in Iraq--is a quagmire that (and this is no surprise) victimizes the poor and the young.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: How many ruined lives aren't significant?
Posted by: Burton
» Thank you!! We need leadership by the sensible and pragmatic, not mindless ideological crusades!
Posted by: Gakl
Comments are closed-
Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma on Nov 30, 2006 9:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: btr on Nov 30, 2006 10:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Meth use documentary in Arizona
Posted by: Burton
» And how many killed by drunk drivers? Media gets ad money from alcohol, not meth
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jamester on Nov 30, 2006 11:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This seems like just another case of "lies, damned lies, and statistics"...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Tweakers suck!
Posted by: catbut
» RE: Tweakers suck!
Posted by: ignition
» RE: Tweakers suck!
Posted by: catbut
» RE: Tweakers suck!
Posted by: Burton
Comments are closed-
Posted by: axjxhx on Nov 30, 2006 11:22 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: good discussion
Posted by: Burton
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VisionQuest on Nov 30, 2006 12:03 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rarely if ever do we wonder WHY so many Americans abuse drugs. We imbue the particular substance with magical powers to "ensare" people as if it doesn't have to be sought and actively pursued in order for people to become addicted to it.
The problem in America isn't meth, just as it wasn't crack, cocaine, heroin, morphine, opium or any of the other drugs that have inspired wide-spread panic and hysteria. The problem is that so many Americans want to escape from consciousness, and will thus find whatever means to that end that are available. People drink to excess or abuse prescription drugs; kids ingest massive amounts of cold medicine and huff the fumes from literally hundreds of household products. Is the problem the substances, or the impulse, and the inability to control it?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What is the Real Issue?
Posted by: jmooney
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aussidawg on Nov 30, 2006 12:31 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Drug Prohibition is Here To Stay.
Posted by: JCR
» RE: Drug Prohibition is Here To Stay.
Posted by: aussidawg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ignition on Nov 30, 2006 12:59 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lynned2002 on Nov 30, 2006 1:04 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: lynned2002
Posted by: Burton
» RE: lynned2002
Posted by: lynned2002
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Nov 30, 2006 1:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: insulaparadigm on Nov 30, 2006 2:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But the drug war as with everything else has just increased the economic incentive.
Media scare / hype and the legislative backlash response will not help. We have the highest prison pop per capita in the world and the drug problem get worse and worse.
We need more treatment - if meth users respond better than other typical drugs of abuse - that's great !
We should focus even more on that.
It's good that law enforcement focus on meth as opposed to other drugs but overall how much has it changed anything?
Not every meth user is an animal or eats their children, the person they are hurting is first and foremost is themselves. How is the law going to help?
And unless I'm wrong the south isn't a hotbed of progresive drug policy and has the worst problems- massively speculative at best and prolly not causative or perhaps even correlated but I'm still skeptical about more law... more punitive laws.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: owleyes on Nov 30, 2006 4:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Novellaidea on Nov 30, 2006 4:44 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: flashfast on Nov 30, 2006 7:11 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Methaphetamines are the worst drug in the world - people become violent not from its usage, but it's disusage. A typical scenario is a user gives it up ofr say 3 months. Then they might have a socail 'snort' and, when coming down from the high, they can become so irrational as to injure or even murder another.
It is a plague, and as a casual observer I can honestly say it's use is widespread and growing. The majority use does not appear in any statistics, and academic argument is shallow.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: billfaster on Nov 30, 2006 9:03 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For most of the life of the study the only question
about methamphetamine use has been contained in
a single 12th-grade questionnaire form. Respondents
who indicated using any type of amphetamines
in the prior 12 months were asked in a
sequel question to check on a prespecified list the
types they had used during that period.
It would appear, then,
that the long-term method we had been using for
tracking methamphetamine use probably yielded
an understatement of the absolute prevalence level,
perhaps because some proportion of methamphetamine
users did not correctly categorize themselves
initially as amphetamine users (even though methamphetamine
was given as one of the examples of
the amphetamines).
This was taken from: http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/
pubs/monographs/overview2005.pdf
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Faulty Statistics
Posted by: insulaparadigm
» RE: Faulty Statistics
Posted by: billfaster
» RE: Faulty Statistics
Posted by: insulaparadigm
Comments are closed-
Posted by: BlueTigress on Nov 30, 2006 10:17 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But this doesn't change the fact that if I want to buy ONE stupid package of Sudafed at my local mass market retailer, I have to go pester a pharmacy tech and sign a register with my name and address, plus show ID if I want to take it so I can pay at one checkout. I always assure the pharmacy tech politely that I know they can't help it, it's the law.
It's a stupid law put in place in the last year in response to something that may have been a problem five years ago. Unless things have changed again, last I knew meth cookers were getting the precursors from people who imported them in mass quantities from Mexico.
But like a poster above said, this is the government trying to take our freedoms.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 30, 2006 10:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I tried finding these statistics and had little luck; it seems that as much as 1/2 of all violent crime is alcohol related, and in San Jose CA a report stated that 30% of detainees had meth in their system, but that was for all crimes, not just violent ones. Perhaps the criminal system doesn't want these statistics gathered - it would show that cannabis is a far safer drug (both socially and medically) then either alcohol or meth.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» See also DHHS/NIH research on rural meth use
Posted by: eddie torres
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dyspeptic on Dec 1, 2006 12:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What I see here is a BIG problem. I see a really tough to beat link between poverty and hunger and meth. Other drugs provide escape, maybe. But meth gives a feeling of energy and relieves hunger. So, there is then this cycle of hunger, meth, activity, hunger, meth... Then, too, doing a drug gives people the illusion of control of their circumstances.
I don't understand the motive to minimize this epidemic. What does anybody have to gain by denying it? It is real here, and it is incredibly destructive.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Meth IS a big problem - Oregon
Posted by: dnaylor
Comments are closed-
Posted by: drblack on Dec 1, 2006 1:29 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People who work in law enforcement or drug treatment only see the worst cases and have more hysterical opinions about drugs then most.
Every few years some other drug is "The worst problem ever ,and it is killing everybody>>>>WAAAAAA"
Drugs have been around forever and they always will be...let us get smart and end prohibition which makes a penny worth of some plant or chemical worth 10 bucks.
Also ,to study how to help drug abuse costs hundreds of thousands for a DEA license...this stops so much valuble research. Drugs are not and never have done anything...people do things and when we realize that treating people with compassion and recognizing that no one wants to hurt themselves we will be on track. Let us find out why some peoples makeup makes them go crazy for some drugs.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ignition on Dec 1, 2006 10:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MikeNSwiss on Dec 1, 2006 1:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.harmredux.org/conferencemedia.html.
Here, of particular interest is The History of Methamphetamine: An Epidemic In Context, by Patricia Case, Sc.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: forbzilla on Dec 1, 2006 3:02 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that treatment is the avenue of choice in any drug addiction, but have personal experience with ten to twenty individuals, struggling, on the margin: street people who do part time work. I see the results of a cheap, highly addictive, long term function-smashing drug close hand. It's not like smoking a joint. It takes over a year for brain cells to heal from meth, and in the meantime, even if they can stay off meth, these people are not as they were. Addiction to this drug takes the larger values--diligence, trust, care of children--and throws them to the curb. The problem is huge precisely because meth is so cheap and so available to people who have so little. Marginalizing it and comparing it to the recreational drugs that people toy with relatively safely does not help. This is very bad stuff, and though regrettable, better in jail than using. Please check your calibration before writing such things!
Spokane, Washington.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LtL on Dec 1, 2006 4:50 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I just wish
Posted by: dnaylor
» moron
Posted by: alterhead
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bookworm8571 on Dec 2, 2006 8:34 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» meth started in Calif.
Posted by: alterhead
Comments are closed-
Posted by: RealActivist on Dec 3, 2006 8:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The question is: what are WE going to do about that?
I will give you one idea. Dooley works for the Drug Policy Alliance, which is doing more to try to end the drug war than anyone else. They were the key force behind virtually all of the ballot initiatives to legalize medical marijuana, and also -- as Dooley -- says, behind Prop 36, which is the biggest piece of sentencing reform in the US since the repeal of alcohol Prohibition. They've also been successful in legalizing needle exchanges to reduce HIV/AIDS, reforming mandatory minimum laws, and getting the California PTA involved in more honest drug education. The folks who work there and support them disagree about legalization (although mostly agree about marijuana legalization) -- but they all agree we need to end the current madness and put all options on the table.
One of the best things any of us can do is get involved in the movement to end the war on drugs. Go to DPA's website, www.drugpolicy.org, sign up for their enewsletter and action alerts, and send them some money -- so fewer people can spend next Christmas behind bars for nothing more than violating a drug law.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Thank you
Posted by: insulaparadigm
Comments are closed-
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Dec 3, 2006 9:48 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jadelynn on Dec 4, 2006 7:00 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hole11 on Dec 5, 2006 5:24 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those that want to be left alone on their own accord don't want to be bothered by someone who knows better than them and has the power to push them around.
That's the war on drugs. Drugs that supposed to pollute the mind and body.
I noticed that many have said it's a problem in their state like Indiana and Kentucky. There was a time when the Ohio river had cleaner water. There was a time when coal burning power plants didn't dot the meandering river. No one stopped them and no one is complaining about cancer rates and all those dangerous factories spewing cancer causing chemicals in your lungs.
So why would anyone care about a persons choice to chose their own poison? I imagine a person does these things because the opportunity presents itself or the person is naturally curious.
Man has high expectations to improve himself and his condition. When that isn't possible he might try to escape. One way to escape is drugs. Or if it just feels good he does it.
Then the majority decides for us that they are just going to remove the undesirables. See no evil. But the necessary evil goes on filling our air and water with pollution.
Thanks for your concern but who do I send the bill to when my lifestyle changes to the worse because the majority want that pollution? That is going to be the next epidemic.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Darkrose on Dec 6, 2006 3:39 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I came down with a sinus infection recently. In order to get some Sudafed, I had to:
1. Go to the pharmacy and stand in line.
2. Request the one pack I'm allowed to buy per month.
3. Swipe my driver's license.
4. Sign the log with my name and address, which must be kept by the pharmacy for two years.
I bought the stuff because I'm coughing up green goo and I can't breathe. The procedure made me feel like a criminal.
Yes, meth addiction kills. So does alcohol addiction, but I can go into the same drugstore and buy a bottle of vodka--I've got enough grey hair that I probably wouldn't get carded to see if I'm over 21.
Meth addiction is clearly a big problem, but the current attempt by the government to solve it is mainly punishing people who haven't done anything.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Vancouver's Games Will Be the Gayest Olympics Ever
Trial Begins for Activist Who Fought to Protect Federal Lands from Drilling -- Join the Protest
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped




