Posted July 21, 2025 by Mark S Gold, M.D.

Key points

Youth overdose deaths are high as illicit drugs are often contaminated with fentanyl and other synthetics.
The “One Pill Can Kill” initiative warns—especially youth and parents—of counterfeit pills with fentanyl.
Recent Baltimore mass casualties remind us the overdose landscape is changing, but fentanyl is a constant.

On July 10, 2025, first responders in Baltimore discovered numerous individuals simultaneously overdosing in the same neighborhood. Twenty-five people ages 25-55 were hospitalized, five in critical condition. There were no deaths. All victims had bought and used a neighborhood street sample of opioids, and testing revealed the drug mixture included fentanyl, N‑methylclonazepam (a benzodiazepine not approved in the United States), acetaminophen, mannitol, quinine, and caffeine. The benzodiazepine caused prolonged unconsciousness, even after naloxone was given.

Baltimore has one of the highest overdose rates of any city in the United States. One reason for this is that illicit drug manufacturers constantly add new substances, prolonging the drug’s effects, making users feel different or more powerful. Adding xylazine or medetomidine created the zombie drug crisis in Philadelphia. But combining opioids with benzodiazepines is dangerous because both drugs cause sedation, making it harder to breathe. In 2021, nearly 14 percent of fatal opioid overdoses in the United States involved benzodiazepines, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). Most recently, fentanyl has been used with methamphetamine, the synthetic speedball, or cocaine, but more recently, Canadians have reported that their fentanyl has become contaminated with benzodiazepines. This synthetic benzodiazepine-laced opioid concoction is often called “benzodope.” It poses amplified risks for people who use fentanyl.

While national overdose fatalities declined in 2024, fentanyl alone or in combination remains a leading cause of preventable death in young people. Over the past decade, drug overdoses among young people have surged, killing 230,000+ people under 35 years old. Opioids, particularly fentanyl and other synthetics, are driving the high overdose death rate among adolescents and adults.

Julie Gaither, Ph.D., from the Yale School of Medicine, analyzed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data on children and teens under 20. She found that 13,861 youths died from opioids from 1999-2021—about 37.5 percent of those deaths involved fentanyl. Teens ages 15-19 years made up 90 percent of the fentanyl deaths. In about 17 percent of cases, the child or teen also had ingested benzodiazepines. Yale’s analysis showed there were 175 pediatric opioid deaths in 1999, and 5 percent involved fentanyl. In 2021, there were 1,657 pediatric opioid deaths, and 94 percent (1,557) involved fentanyl.

This frightening trend was confirmed in a recent 2025 study in Pediatrics, which reported on synthetic opioid–involved youth overdose deaths in the United States over 2018–2022. This study proved fentanyl alone is the primary and fastest-rising cause of overdose deaths in adolescents. Worse, overdose rates among young adults ages 20–24 were even higher: a 168 percent increase in deaths involving synthetic opioids alone (primarily fentanyl).

There have been some changes in the victims. In 2018, white non-Hispanic youth had the highest synthetic opioid–only death rates. But by 2022, synthetic opioid–only death rates surged among Black, American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN), and Hispanic youth, surpassing opioid deaths of white youth.

Overview by Age Group: Some Good News

Accidents/unintentional injuries remain the leading cause of death among adolescents and youth, with continued high risks from vehicles and firearms. The good news is that alcohol, cannabis, and nicotine use remained at historic lows in 2024. Also, in the first significant drug decline since the pandemic, overdose deaths plummeted from about 110,000 in 2023 to 80,000 in 2024.

In the Monitoring the Future (MTF) study of adolescents (8th, 10th, 12th graders), prescription narcotics misuse among 12th graders was less than 1 percent (0.6 percent), a record low. Factors driving this decline were the extended effects of COVID-19 (reduced peer pressure/socializing), rising health risk awareness, increased health consciousness, and shifts toward online engagement.

Sean Esteban McCabe, Ph.D., at the University of Michigan, and colleagues analyzed data from the annual MTF study from 2009 to 2022. This data revealed that the nonmedical use of prescription opioids, benzodiazepines, and stimulants significantly declined over that time frame.

McCabe and colleagues provided solid explanations for the decline in medical and nonmedical use of prescription opioids. For example, over the past decade, treatment guidelines and other sources have discouraged prescribing of opioids for chronic pain and sometimes even acute pain. Also, they have recommended limited quantities of drugs if opioids are prescribed.

One question is whether the much more circumscribed prescribing of opioids is solely responsible for current declines in use, or if the key factor is changing attitudes toward using opioids among adolescents. Additional research is needed.

The One Pill Can Kill Initiative

The “One Pill Can Kill” (OPCK) initiative was launched by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in September 2022 as part of a public safety prevention initiative to alert Americans to a surge in counterfeit pills laced with fentanyl. DEA lab analyses had revealed an alarming trend: In 2021, around 4 of every 10 fake pills contained potentially lethal fentanyl doses; by 2022, that number rose to 6 of 10. In 2024 alone, U.S. law enforcement intercepted 60+ million fentanyl-laced pills.

The OPCK campaign includes social media tools, educational materials, partnerships (e.g., NFL Alumni Health), and urging people to trust only prescribed pills dispensed by licensed pharmacists.

The initiative is credited with raising public awareness and increasing demand for interventions like fentanyl test strips and naloxone.

CADCA (Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America) supports a network of 5,000+ community-based coalitions spanning all states, territories, and 30+ countries that actively embrace the DEA’s One Pill Can Kill messaging through educational materials, public health toolkits, and visible co-branding at national events. CADCA reinforces messages and embeds core warnings from the DEA initiative within its broader community prevention strategies. Nationally, award-winning coalitions have reported measurable reductions in youth substance misuse and environmental changes supporting prevention strategies.

These combined interventions may be contributing to reductions in opioid overdose deaths. A notable illustrative case comes from Laredo, Texas, where fentanyl-related deaths dropped by half, from 67 in 2023 down to 34 in 2024.

Summary

New data reveal fentanyl is the principal driver in adolescent overdose deaths. Adolescent substance use has declined to levels not seen in decades. However, overdose deaths involving synthetic opioids only (predominantly fentanyl) rose significantly in youths. Methamphetamine is also a growing concern, and 70+ percent of drug poisonings involving methamphetamine in both 2023 and 2024 included one or more opioids. These findings highlight the urgent need for age-specific and culturally informed prevention strategies like the One Pill Can Kill Initiative.

Source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/addiction-outlook/202507/increased-youth-overdose-deaths-from-fentanyl

About the Author

Mark S. Gold, M.D., is a pioneering researcher, professor, and chairman of psychiatry at Yale, the University of Florida, and Washington University in St Louis. His theories have changed the field, stimulated additional research, and led to new understanding and treatments for opioid use disorders, cocaine use disorders, overeating, smoking, and depression.

Filed under: Fentanyl,USA,Youth :

OPENING COMMENT by NDPA:

This file comes in three parts:

A. Post from Minister Mark Butler

B. Response to Minister Butler by Herschel Baker

C. Press Interview by Minister Butler

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A. Post from Minister Mark Butler

Sent: 16 July 2025 10:16

Subject: Good news from Australia Regarding both Vaping and Border Control success stopping illegal drugs importance.

Please find attached Vaping Update from MARK BUTLER, MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND AGEING, MINISTER FOR DISABILITY AND THE NDIS; Chris Picton, the Minister for Health in South Australia, and Andrea Michaels who has responsibility for enforcement in South Australia. Also joined by Assistant Commissioner. Tony Smith from the ABF and Professor Becky Freeman from the University of Sydney.

First of all, we put in import control to ban the import of

disposable vapes. And the work that Border Force and the TGA have done in

particular has been exemplary. Today, we can say that more than 10 million

vapes have been seized by those two Commonwealth agencies, and I want to

thank the officials at Border Force and TGA for their hard work. We have

resourced them to do that job, and they have provided a great return to

the community on that investment and I thank them for it.

More broadly though, and most importantly perhaps, the research

that Professor Freeman and some others have done is showing that this is making

a difference for young Australians. As I said, vaping rates were exploding

year on year when we were coming to Government. We can now say that the

peak of vaping is behind us, and most research is showing that fewer young

people are vaping and fewer young people are smoking as well. Professor Freeman

will talk about the latest wave of the research she leads out of the

University of Sydney, research that’s supported by the Commonwealth

Government as well as the New South Wales Government and the Cancer

Council.

3.Big Tobacco on the one hand and serious organised crime that is

determined to continue to make money from these very dangerous products, vaping but

also illicit tobacco as well. We know it’s going to be a tough fight. We

know there’s a lot more to do, and we have to do that in close concert

between the Commonwealth and the state governments and territory

governments. But I’m really pleased to say that it looks like we have

turned the corner and at least stopped the explosion in vaping among young

Australians that was emerging as one of the most significant public health

challenges for our community.

BECKY FREEMAN, PROFESSOR UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY: Thanks so much for

having me here today. Young people were sold a lie. They were told that

vapes were harmless, they were fun, they were part of a young person’s

lifestyle, and they didn’t need to worry about any impacts on their

health.

That was a lie. We know that young people now, when they look at vaping,

their attitudes have changed. Just a few short years ago when we started

the Gen Vapes study, young people thought, you know, everyone vapes. “It’s

something just young people do. It’s for us, it’s not like your

grandfather’s stinky cigarette.” When we talk to young people now, those

attitudes have shifted. They’re almost ashamed of the fact that they’re

addicted. They can’t believe that something that they were just using at

parties for fun on the weekends, that they were told if they took to music

festivals or used with their friends at parties would be a great way to

enhance their good time. Now their wellbeing is being impacted. They’re

waking up with a vape under their pillow. They can’t believe they can’t go

all day at their lectures or at school without having a vape. I think it’s

really important to remember those public health impacts.

BUTLER: The Gen Vape research? The really pleasing thing about the latest

wave of research from Gen Vape is it shows fewer young people are vaping

and fewer young people are smoking. When we introduced this package of

measures in concert with Ministers like Chris Picton, there was a concern that if

we stopped young people vaping that they might turn to smoking cigarettes.

And I think the really pleasing thing we’re seeing from a number of different

pieces of research is that twin achievement of fewer young people vaping

and fewer young people smoking.

Now, again, I say and I stress this fight is far from over. We still have

a long way to go. The explosion in illicit tobacco around the country,

cheap, illegal cigarettes, is probably now, I think, the biggest threat we have

to our most important public health objective, which is to stop people

smoking.

It’s still the biggest preventable killer of Australians, 60 or 70

Australians will die today and tomorrow and the day after because of

cigarettes. We’ve got a lot more to do to get to those very, very low

rates of smoking that are set out as targets in the National Tobacco Strategy

across all age cohorts, including young Australians. But the fact we

haven’t seen smoking rates increase markedly as we’ve started to clamp down on

vaping rates among young people, I think is one of the really heartening

things that comes out of Gen Vape. I’m not sure whether Professor Freeman

wants to add to that.

FREEMAN: I fully agree. The only thing I would add is let’s remember that

vaping is actually a risk factor for future smoking as well. We know from

the Gen Vape study that young people who vape are at five times the risk

of going on to smoke. So if you can prevent vaping, you’re also going to

prevent future smoking. And this is why you can’t really consider them as

separate behaviours, really, as well. Let’s remember, it’s the same industry

often behind these products as well. There’s a great quote from the study

from a young person. She said: “you know, when I was a young teen, I

absolutely hated smoking. I could not believe anyone would smoke. I’d had

it drilled into me from a very young age, those gross packets. And then I

tried vaping, and it sort of loosened me up. And I thought, oh, well, if I’m

going to vape, maybe I could smoke too.” So I think that prevention of vaping

and prevention of smoking together is super important.

Kind Regards – Minister Mark Butler

B. Response to Minister Butler by Herschel Baker

Herschel Baker

International Liaison Director

Queensland Director

Drug Free Australia

M: 0412988835Prevent.

Don’t Promote Drug

mailto:drugfreeaust@drugfree.org.au

mailto:drugfree@org.au

Web https://drugfree.org.au/

C. Press Interview by Minister Butler

To access the full document:

Click on the ‘Source’ link below.
An image – the front page of the full document will appear.
Click on the image to open the full document.

Source: Good news from Australia Regarding both Vaping and Border Control

Filed under: Australia,Political Sector,Vaping :

by Charles Fain Lehman – Wall Street Journal – July 2, 2025

President Trump should halt Biden’s attempt to make pot a ‘Schedule III’ substance.

Whether to loosen the government’s ultra-tight controls on marijuana is among the matters President Trump inherited from Joe Biden.

Under law, marijuana is a Schedule I substance, meaning it has no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Mr. Biden initiated a process to move pot to Schedule III, thereby labelling it a medicine with only moderate abuse potential. Mr. Trump must decide whether to move ahead with the change.

He shouldn’t. Rescheduling would bolster a socially disastrous legal weed industry that has spread crime and disorder in the streets. Containing that chaos instead of spreading it would be in line with the president’s mandate.

Rescheduling wouldn’t mean legalization. Marijuana would still be a federally controlled substance, subject to the same restrictions as drugs like ketamine and anabolic steroids. Rescheduling also wouldn’t mean increasing the medical availability of marijuana. Medical cannabis is legal in 40 states, and the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment, which became law in 2014, prohibits spending money to enforce federal laws against these operations. Marijuana is already more available to “medical” users than other Schedule III substances.

The primary effect of rescheduling, as the Congressional Research Service has shown, would be a tax break to fuel the growth of state-legal marijuana businesses. That’s because a provision of the tax code, Section 280E, which provides that businesses can’t deduct the costs of trafficking in Schedule I or II controlled substances. But that’s not the case for Schedule III.

That affects state-legal marijuana businesses. Because of 280E, these firms can pay effective tax rates as high as 70%. Shifting pot to schedule III would alleviate the tax burden, and give the firms more room to operate. That would be good if these were normal companies, and if their business wasn’t socially and individually harmful. But the state-legal marijuana business has been a catastrophe.

Legalization has increased rates of marijuana addiction—typically called “marijuana use disorder”—including rates of heavy use among teens. State-legal businesses have a profit-motivated reason to nurture addiction. Due to legalization, today’s pot is far more potent than it was decades ago. Research links marijuana use, especially in young adulthood, to IQ loss, schizophrenia, heart attacks, strokes and lung disease.

As important, legalization is already socially toxic. Research by the Kansas City Federal Reserve found it has increased homelessness, addiction and arrests by double-digit percentages. Other research, on Seattle and Vancouver, British Columbia, finds that dispensary proximity causally reduces property values. There’s also the odor, which nearly half of New York City residents reported smelling “often” in a recent poll.

Legalization hasn’t even killed the black market. By expanding the consumer base while regulating the supply, it has made the illicit alternative more appealing than ever. Cannabis forecaster Whitney Economics has projected that in 2026 the black market will still account for 60% of sales.

Much of that money flows to Chinese criminal groups, which “have come to dominate the cultivation and distribution of marijuana throughout the United States,” according to the Drug Enforcement Administration’s recent National Drug Threat Assessment. Maybe that is why a majority of Americans now say that pot is bad for its users and society, according to Gallup.

The rescheduling decision rests with the Justice and Health and Human Services departments, which both take marching orders from the president. Mr. Trump should end Mr. Biden’s dangerous social experiment.

Source: https://www.wsj.com/opinion/legal-marijuanas-disastrous-legacy-policy-law-7c727c22

Filed under: Cannabis/Marijuana,Drug use-various effects,Political Sector,Prevalence,Prevention and Intervention,USA :

Opening comment by John Coleman – DWI.

This article raises some good points. While it’s reasonable to compare today’s commercial cannabis industry with the Big Tobacco industry of the 20^th century – indeed there are many similarities – we should also consider comparing it to the prescription opioid “epidemic” (as the White House called it) of the 2000s. We will not be alone in drawing the comparisons – I’m sure the cannabis industry and their lawyers understand the history and chronology as well as we do but, of course, they are looking at it from a different perspective.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Putatively, the “first” pill mill was discovered in June 2001 at a “pain clinic” in Myrtle Beach, SC. The official name of the clinic was the Comprehensive Care and Pain Management Center and it was run by a group of physicians led by the owner, David Michael Woodward, MD. In 1994, Woodward opened a sleep center but quickly found that there was more money to be made prescribing opioids and switched his operation to a pain clinic. When his medical license was suspended in 1996 for improper relationships with female patients, he turned to hiring physicians facing difficult personal and financial problems to write his opioid prescriptions for him.

Myrtle Beach is a small seaside summer resort with a permanent population of 35,000 but, as would later be shown in court, it led the region and entire state in Purdue’s sales of OxyContin – mostly the result of Woodward and his band of troubled docs. In June 2001, DEA raided the clinic, arrested Woodward and eight other physicians and charged them with “conspiracy to distribute controlled substances [and] unlawfully distributing and dispensing … oxycodone, a Schedule II controlled substance,[etc.]”(USA v. Woodward)

One of the docs subsequently took his life, another ran off to New Zealand, was captured, and returned to face the music. Most cooperated and testified against Woodward who was sentenced to 15 years in prison (later reduced to 13 years). The others received lesser sentences of two years or more.

Woodward was not the first or only entrepreneur looking to cash in on the burgeoning prescription opioid craze. There were people thinking of doing the same thing in Florida, a state that had few, if any, restrictions on pain clinics. It wasn’t long before Florida became the epicenter of the pain clinic aka pill mill industry. Its pill dispensing docs often had dozens and dozens of people lined up before the mill opened each morning. Some, as shown on TV news, drove to the Florida clinics from as far away as Ohio and further west.

“Patients” would often exit the mills carrying gallon-sized clear Ziploc bags of hundreds of loose pills, mostly OxyContin tablets or a generic form of a 30mg oxycodone tablet made and sold by Mallinckrodt. This was a blue tablet with the company’s traditional “M” logo and quickly became known on the street as “M&Ms.”

For several years, Florida and its lax pharmacy and medical laws led the nation in pill mill activity. At the same time, it was becoming a national scourge, with parents and policymakers from surrounding states demanding action. Even the Florida media mocked the state as depicted in this cartoon (my favorite) from the South Florida Sentinel:

The Florida pill mill era came to an abrupt halt in July 2011 when the state legislature enacted an emergency health act that immediately closed down about half of the state’s estimated 1,000 pill mills and severely affected the status of the other half. The emergency legislation prohibited physician-dispensing of controlled substances, meaning the pill mills no longer could prescribe and dispense pills from the same location at the same time.

Florida’s anti-pill mill act increased penalties for dispensing drugs on an invalid prescription and turned misdemeanor pharmacy offenses into felonies. Pharmacists were required to call the local sheriff to report all fraudulent prescriptions. Clinics were required to have a medical director, a medical physician, in residence or in ownership.

Importantly, Florida’s emergency legislation requires distributors of controlled substances to inform the state health department when distributions over a set amount of drugs are delivered to customers.

The results were dramatic:

While the pill mill era was centered in Florida, corrupt medical professionals in other states operated similar “pain clinics” but with a much lower exposure. Over time, many of these were identified via complaints or PDMPs that revealed improper prescribing practices.

Now, how does this brief history of the U.S. pill mill industry compare with what we now see in the commercial cannabis industry? Several similarities come to mind and I’ll mention them briefly to save time:

The pharmaceutical industry, led by Purdue Pharma, spent huge sums of money generating the notion that pain in America was not treated or undertreated;
Medical schools in the 1990s were still teaching in the 1940s mode that narcotics should be used only in terminal cancer patients;
Modern opioids, like Purdue’s new extended-release OxyContin, were promoted as less addictive;
Pain patients, according to JAMA (“Porter & Jick”), rarely became addicted to their opiates;

The industry successfully “sold” these ideas to the public and to Congress, subtly suggesting that obsolete government regulations might be why chronic pain was undertreated in the U.S. Feeling the heat, if not the pain, the government caved and became the pharmaceutical industry’s new best friend. On Halloween (October 31), 2000, industry lobbyists were successful in getting President Bill Clinton to sign into law a bill creating the Decade of Pain Control and Research.

(Ironically, by the end of the “pain” decade some ten years later, FDA records would show that of 219 drugs and biologics designated and approved during the decade as “new molecular entities,” only nine were indicated for treating acute pain, including three for treating migraine. Only one, Tapentadol®, was indicated for the treatment of moderate to severe acute pain. NONE was indicated for treating chronic pain. Later, after the decade was over, an extended-release form of Tapentadol would receive an additional indication for treating chronic pain.)

The same month, October 2000, perhaps to curry favor with the President, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) published a 57-page booklet titled, “Pain as the 5^th Vital Sign Toolkit.” Authorship was given in the booklet to James Campbell, MD, president of the American Pain Society. Next on industry’s list of who’s nice was the Joint Commission for Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO), a professional organization of medical experts who certify hospitals and clinics in the U.S. Its “best practices” are viewed as important for attracting federal grants and other forms of federal aid for treating the elderly, disabled, and poor under Medicaid or Medicare. Performance reviews of hospital facilities are conducted regularly by JCAHO members and certification is considered a requisite for continued operation.

In 2001, JCAHO issued new standards for pain care in response to what it called “the national outcry about the widespread problem of undertreatment.” Henceforth, upon admission to the hospital, each patient was to receive as assessment of their “fifth vital sign – pain” along with the normal assessment of their other four vital signs.

With the government squarely in the pocket (literally) of the industry, the private sector was covered. Not to be undone by the competition, the prestigious Institute of Medicine (IOM, since renamed National Academy of Medicine) was commissioned by HHS to study pain in America. Its publication, “Relieving Pain in America: A Blueprint for Transforming Prevention, Care, Education, and Research,” was published in 2011 and reported, among other things, that 100 million Americans suffered from chronic pain.

Later, several watchdog groups would show that many of the experts associated with these and other famous public and private pain organizations were secretly on the payroll of the pharmaceutical industry.

By 2011, when the IOM published its report, the industry was moving rapidly and cashing in on the media’s trashing of anyone who dared to be “anti-pain.” It was a movement, an ideology, a belief system, that threatened to excommunicate anyone who differed in any way with the orthodoxy of pain treatment.

Agencies like the DEA that regulated the manufacture, distribution, prescribing, and dispensing of controlled substances was the enemy and the physicians the agency cited were often called “martyrs” by their peers and the public. To counter this, DEA published a booklet for several years (since discontinued) that was titled, simply enough, “Cases Against Doctors.” This booklet was available on the DEA website and catalogued charges and errant behaviors of hundreds of registrant-doctors each year charged and convicted of state or federal law violations involving the prescribing and/or dispensing of controlled substances. (I have an archived copy of this publication if anyone wants to email me for a copy.)

What brought this to an end (or at least to a manageable state) were several factors that can be reduced to these (there may be more but these are what come to mind):

The emergency legislation in 2011 in Florida closing up half the state’s 1,000 pill mills overnight and the strict regulation of the remaining 500 clinics to prohibit physician-dispensing of controlled substances;
The rising death toll attributed to prescription opioid overdoses (ironically, this was miscalculated by the CDC that until 2016 mistakenly counted all fentanyl-related death cases as involving prescribed or administered pharmaceutical fentanyl, not the street version);
The prosecution and conviction of Purdue Pharma and its top three executives (President, Chief Medical Officer, and General Counsel) for federal criminal law violations by the United States Attorney for the Western District of VA in 2007;
Item #3 set the stage for the 2017 Multi-District Litigation (MDL) case involving approximately 3,000 plaintiffs, including state attorneys general, private and public health plans, unions, towns, cities, municipalities, individuals, Indian tribes, etc., brought against Purdue and other companies involved in making, distributing, and dispensing prescription opioids. This case was assigned to the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland) and is currently in negotiations for an omnibus settlement along the lines of what came out of the Big Tobacco settlement of the 1990s. A number of companies have settled individual “pilot” cases thus far and the total settlement is estimated to eventually reach the $26 billion mark;
Purdue and Mallinckrodt entered and exited bankruptcy as a result of settlements and judgments related to the MDL;
The companies have largely abandoned the freewheeling and unlawful sales of opioids that they promoted in the heyday of the previous decade;
Personnel changes at the top of many defendant companies have resulted in folks at the top being more responsible today than ever for what the company is doing at the retail level;
While prescription opioid overdose deaths are down substantially compared with what they once were, unfortunately the craving for a substitute drug in the form of heroin or fentanyl-laced heroin has increased leading to only a modest decrease in overdose opiate-involved deaths.

Conclusion:

From the above brief (and this is brief for a story that took almost two decades to happen) analysis, the comparisons with today’s commercial cannabis industry are stark and unmistakable. We have been led (or more correctly, misled) by the previous HHS leadership that our control of cannabis for medical purposes was outdated, too narrow, and did not comport with modern ways of evaluating the safety and efficacy of medicinal drugs.

This, by the way, from the same crowd that told us pain was our “Fifth Vital Sign.” States that have approved commercial cannabis “dispensaries” have done so in the finest tradition of helping entrepreneurs in the early 2000s establish pill mills to care for undertreated pain.

And the DEA? Congress has enjoined appropriations for the agency that might be directed against medical marijuana. The FDA? Forget it. The agency’s “Warning Letters” to online cannabinoid dealers are used by the dealers and published online in some cases, to boast about the high THC/CBD content of their products, according to cited FDA lab tests.

As in the cases of Big Tobacco and Big Opiates, at some point, the commercial cannabis industry will reach a point where going after its resources will take it down or reduce it considerably. The analogy I’ve used before compares this with the fermentation of yeast, a process that any home maker of wine or beer understands well. The single cell yeast consumes the sugars of the starting material and in the process excretes alcohol. This continues until the amount of alcohol in the mix reaches a certain level at which time it kills off the yeast producing it. At some point in the future, hopefully soon, the commercial cannabis industry will reach a point whereby its success kills it off – just as in the Big Tobacco and Big Opiates cases.

Source: drug-watch-international – P.O. Box 45218, Omaha, NE 68145-0218, USA

Filed under: Cannabis/Marijuana,Economic,Medicines,USA :

OPENING REMARK BY NDPA.

This article involves several prestigious authors – not least Bertha K Madras. We therefore recommend readers to its contents, albeit they are lengthy and sometimes complex.

To access the full document:

Click on the ‘Source’ link below.
An image – the front page of the full document will appear.
Click on the image to open the full document.

Source: Rescheduling Cannabis – Medicine or Politics

Filed under: Cannabis/Marijuana,Drug use-various effects,Marijuana and Medicine,Political Sector,Prevalence,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction :

OPENING STATEMENT BY NDPA

We repeat this 2004 article by Stanton Peele as a useful position statement for us all. Peele’s classic 1975 text ‘Addiction and Love’ (Peele and Brosky – Published: Taplinger, New York) is also well worth reading in this context.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

By Stanton Peele Ph.D. published May 1, 2004

More people quit addictions than maintain them, and they do so on their own. People succeed when they recognize that the addiction interferes with something they value—and when they develop the confidence that they can change.

Change is natural. You no doubt act very differently in many areas of your life now compared with how you did when you were a teenager. Likewise, over time you will probably overcome or ameliorate certain behaviors: a short temper, crippling insecurity.

For some reason, we exempt addiction from our beliefs about change. In both popular and scientific models, addiction is seen as locking you into an inescapable pattern of behavior. Both folk wisdom, as represented by Alcoholics Anonymous, and modern neuroscience regard addiction as a virtually permanent brain disease. No matter how many years ago your uncle Joe had his last drink, he is still considered an alcoholic. The very word addict confers an identity that admits no other possibilities. It incorporates the assumption that you can’t, or won’t, change.

But this fatalistic thinking about addiction doesn’t jibe with the facts. More people overcome addictions than do not. And the vast majority do so without therapy. Quitting may take several tries, and people may not stop smoking, drinking or using drugs altogether. But eventually they succeed in shaking dependence.

Kicking these habits constitutes a dramatic change, but the change need not occur in a dramatic way. So when it comes to addiction treatment, the most effective approaches rely on the counterintuitive principle that less is often more. Successful treatment places the responsibility for change squarely on the individual and acknowledges that positive events in other realms may jump-start change.

Consider the experience of American soldiers returning from the war in Vietnam, where heroin use and addiction was widespread. In 90 percent of cases, when GIs left the pressure cooker of the battle zone, they also shed their addictions—in vivo proof that drug addiction can be just a matter of where in life you are.

Of course, it took more than a plane trip back from Asia for these men to overcome drug addiction. Most soldiers experienced dramatically altered lives when they returned. They left the anxiety, fear and boredom of the war arena and settled back into their home environments. They returned to their families, formed new relationships, developed work skills.

Smoking is at the top of the charts in terms of difficulty of quitting. But the majority of ex-smokers quit without any aid––neither nicotine patches nor gum, Smokenders groups nor hypnotism. (Don’t take my word for it; at your next social gathering, ask how many people have quit smoking on their own.) In fact, as many cigarette smokers quit on their own, an even higher percentage of heroin and cocaine addicts and alcoholics quit without treatment. It is simply more difficult to keep these habits going through adulthood. It’s hard to go to Disney World with your family while you are shooting heroin. Addicts who quit on their own typically report that they did so in order to achieve normalcy.

Every year, the National Survey on Drug Use and Health interviews Americans about their drug and alcohol habits. Ages 18 to 25 constitute the peak period of drug and alcohol use. In 2002, the latest year for which data are available, 22 percent of Americans between ages 18 and 25 were abusing or were dependent on a substance, versus only 3 percent of those aged 55 to 59. These data show that most people overcome their substance abuse, even though most of them do not enter treatment.

How do we know that the majority aren’t seeking treatment? In 1992, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism conducted one of the largest surveys of substance use ever, sending Census Bureau workers to interview more than 42,000 Americans about their lifetime drug and alcohol use. Of the 4,500-plus respondents who had ever been dependent on alcohol, only 27 percent had gone to treatment of any kind, including Alcoholics Anonymous. In this group, one-third were still abusing alcohol.

Of those who never had any treatment, only about one-quarter were currently diagnosable as alcohol abusers. This study, known as the National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey, indicates first that treatment is not a cure-all, and second that it is not necessary. The vast majority of Americans who were alcohol dependent, about three-quarters, never underwent treatment. And fewer of them were abusing alcohol than were those who were treated.

This is not to say that treatment can’t be useful. But the most successful treatments are nonconfrontational approaches that allow self-propelled change. Psychologists at the University of New Mexico led by William Miller tabulated every controlled study of alcoholism treatment they could find. They concluded that the leading therapy was barely a therapy at all but a quick encounter between patient and health-care worker in an ordinary medical setting. The intervention is sometimes as brief as a doctor looking at the results of liver-function tests and telling a patient to cut down on his drinking. Many patients then decide to cut back—and do!

As brief interventions have evolved, they have become more structured. A physician may simply review the amount the patient drinks, or use a checklist to evaluate the extent of a drinking problem. The doctor then typically recommends and seeks agreement from the patient on a goal (usually reduced drinking rather than complete abstinence). More severe alcoholics would typically be referred out for specialized treatment. A range of options is discussed (such as attending AA, engaging in activities incompatible with drinking or using a self-help manual). A spouse or family member might be involved in the planning. The patient is then scheduled for a future visit, where progress can be checked. A case monitor might call every few weeks to see whether the person has any questions or problems.

The second most effective approach is motivational enhancement, also called motivational interviewing. This technique throws the decision to quit or reduce drinking—and to find the best methods for doing so—back on the individual. In this case, the therapist asks targeted questions that prompt the individual to reflect on his drinking in terms of his own values and goals. When patients resist, the therapist does not argue with the individual but explores the person’s ambivalence about change so as to allow him or her to draw his own conclusions: “You say that you like to be in control of your behavior, yet you feel when you drink you are often not in charge. Could you just clarify that for me?”

Miller’s team found that the list of most effective treatments for alcoholism included a few more surprises. Self-help manuals were highly successful. So was the community-reinforcement approach, which addresses the person’s capacity to deal with life, notably marital relationships, work issues (such as simply getting a job), leisure planning and social-group formation (a buddy might be provided, as in AA, as a resource to encourage sobriety). The focus is on developing life skills, such as resisting pressures to drink, coping with stress (at work and in relationships) and building communication skills.

These findings square with what we know about change in other areas of life: People change when they want it badly enough and when they feel strong enough to face the challenge, not when they’re humiliated or coerced. An approach that empowers and offers positive reinforcement is preferable to one that strips the individual of agency. These techniques are most likely to elicit real changes, however short of perfect and hard-won they may be.

Source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/articles/200405/the-surprising-truth-about-addiction

Filed under: Addiction,Brain and Behaviour,Culture,Treatment and Addiction,UK :

Published: 06 July 2025

Cannabis dependence affects millions globally, with over 23 million people worldwide struggling with problematic use patterns. As treatment demand continues rising, understanding which psychological interventions for cannabis dependence work best has become increasingly important. This comprehensive guide examines the latest evidence on therapeutic approaches that help individuals overcome cannabis-related difficulties.

Understanding Cannabis Dependence and Treatment Needs

Cannabis use becomes problematic when it significantly interferes with daily life, relationships, and responsibilities. The World Health Organisation recognises that whilst brief interventions may help casual users, those with established dependence require specialised psychological treatments for cannabis problems.

Recent statistics reveal the growing need for effective interventions:

Treatment admissions in Europe increased by 30% between 2010 and 2019
Young adults aged 20-24 show the highest rates of problematic use
Cannabis is now the most frequently cited substance among those entering treatment programmes

Evidence-Based Psychological Interventions for Cannabis Users

A major systematic review from the University of Bristol analysed 22 clinical trials involving over 3,300 participants, providing crucial insights into which therapeutic approaches demonstrate real effectiveness.

Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy with Motivational Enhancement

The most extensively researched approach combines cognitive restructuring with motivation-building techniques. This integrated therapy helps individuals:

Identify triggers and high-risk situations
Develop practical coping strategies
Build internal motivation for change
Master skills to prevent relapse

Research demonstrates this approach can increase abstinence rates nearly threefold compared to no intervention, establishing it as a cornerstone of evidence-based care.

Third-Wave Therapies: DBT and ACT Approaches

Newer psychological interventions for cannabis problems incorporate mindfulness and acceptance-based strategies. These therapies teach:

Mindfulness skills for managing cravings
Emotional regulation techniques
Distress tolerance without substance use
Values clarification and committed action

Studies show these approaches can quadruple abstinence rates when compared to basic psychoeducation alone.

Community Reinforcement Strategies

This approach restructures the individual’s environment to support recovery through:

Leveraging community resources
Building substance-free social networks
Creating natural reinforcements for positive change
Addressing multiple life domains simultaneously

Effectiveness of Psychological Treatments for Cannabis Dependence

The research reveals important findings about treatment outcomes:

Abstinence Achievement

Structured psychological interventions significantly improve abstinence rates. Individuals receiving cognitive-behavioural therapy are 18 times more likely to achieve abstinence compared to those awaiting treatment.

Reducing Use Frequency

For individuals not ready for complete abstinence, certain therapies effectively reduce consumption patterns. Acceptance-based approaches can decrease usage frequency by approximately 60%.

Treatment Duration and Structure

Effective programmes typically include:

6-52 sessions (average of 14)
Weekly meetings over 2-6 months
Individual or group formats
Structured, manualised approaches

Key Components of Successful Psychological Interventions for Cannabis

Research identifies several critical elements that enhance treatment effectiveness:

Skills Training

Teaching practical techniques for managing triggers, cravings, and high-risk situations proves essential for lasting change.

Motivational Enhancement

Building intrinsic motivation through personalised feedback and collaborative goal-setting improves engagement and outcomes.

Relapse Prevention

Comprehensive planning for potential setbacks helps maintain gains achieved during active treatment.

Environmental Modification

Addressing social and environmental factors that maintain problematic use patterns enhances long-term success.

Challenges in Delivering Effective Treatment

Despite proven effectiveness, several challenges affect treatment delivery:

Engagement and Retention

Maintaining participant engagement throughout treatment remains challenging, with completion rates varying significantly across different approaches.

Individual Differences

Treatment response varies based on:

Severity of dependence
Co-occurring mental health conditions
Social support availability
Personal motivation levels

Access to Services: Many individuals face barriers accessing evidence-based psychological treatments for cannabis problems, including geographical limitations and resource constraints.

Future Directions for Cannabis Treatment Research

As cannabis potency increases and use patterns evolve, treatment approaches must adapt accordingly. Priority areas include:

Developing age-specific interventions for adolescents
Creating culturally adapted treatments
Integrating technology-enhanced delivery methods
Addressing co-occurring conditions simultaneously

Implications for Treatment Seekers

For individuals considering treatment, research suggests:

Evidence-based psychological interventions offer genuine hope for recovery
Different approaches suit different individuals
Professional assessment helps match treatment to personal needs
Persistence often proves necessary, as initial attempts may not succeed

The growing evidence base confirms that specialised psychological interventions for cannabis dependence can produce meaningful, lasting change when properly implemented and tailored to individual needs.

Conclusion: Current research provides strong support for several psychological approaches in treating cannabis dependence. Whilst cognitive-behavioural therapy with motivational enhancement shows the most consistent evidence, acceptance-based therapies and community reinforcement approaches also demonstrate effectiveness. As our understanding grows, these evidence-based treatments offer real pathways to recovery for those struggling with cannabis-related problems.

Source: https://nobrainer.org.au/index.php/resources/i-need-to-stop-this-help/1471-psychological-interventions-for-cannabis-dependence-latest-research-on-effective-therapies?

Filed under: Addiction,Australia,Brain and Behaviour,Cannabis/Marijuana,Drug use-various effects,Mental Health,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction :

Published: 02 July 2025

New allegations have emerged about China’s role in the global fentanyl supply chain, highlighting the complex nature of international drug trafficking and the urgent need for comprehensive prevention strategies.

What We Know About Project Zero

According to Yuan Hongbing, a former Chinese academic now living in Australia, sources within Beijing’s political circles have described a coordinated effort called “Project Zero.” This alleged initiative represents one aspect of the broader China fentanyl crisis that has contributed to America’s ongoing opioid epidemic.

Yuan’s claims suggest that some Chinese officials view the current drug crisis through the lens of historical grievances, particularly the 19th-century Opium Wars. Whether accurate or not, these allegations underscore the complexity of the Chinese fentanyl trade and its impact on communities worldwide.

The Evolution of Supply Routes

The China fentanyl crisis has evolved significantly since 2019, when Beijing officially banned fentanyl production under international pressure. Rather than ending the problem, this led to a shift in tactics within the Chinese fentanyl trade.

Companies began focusing on precursor chemicals instead of finished products. These substances travel from manufacturing facilities to Mexico, where they’re processed into fentanyl before reaching American markets. This indirect approach complicates efforts to address the China fentanyl crisis at its source.

Impact on Communities

The human cost of the ongoing crisis is staggering. More than 107,000 Americans died from drug overdoses in 2023, with synthetic opioids like fentanyl being the primary cause. These deaths represent families torn apart and communities struggling with the consequences of widespread addiction.

The China fentanyl crisis affects people from all backgrounds. Parents lose children, children lose parents, and entire neighbourhoods face increased crime and social instability. Understanding these impacts is crucial for developing effective Chinese fentanyl trade prevention strategies.

Government Responses and Investigations

Congressional investigations have revealed concerning patterns in how some aspects of the Chinese fentanyl trade operate. The House Select Committee found evidence that certain companies receive government benefits for exporting precursor chemicals, raising questions about official oversight.

These findings suggest that addressing the China fentanyl crisis requires diplomatic engagement alongside enforcement measures. The complexity of international trade makes it challenging to distinguish between legitimate chemical exports and those intended for illicit use.

Economic Measures and Trade Relations

The current trade tensions between the US and China reflect broader concerns about the Chinese fentanyl trade. Recent tariffs include specific measures targeting fentanyl-related commerce, with most Chinese goods facing increased duties.

These economic responses acknowledge that the China fentanyl crisis extends beyond traditional criminal justice approaches. However, trade measures alone cannot solve the underlying issues that drive demand for these substances in affected communities.

International Cooperation Challenges

Addressing the Chinese fentanyl trade requires unprecedented international cooperation. Different legal systems, varying enforcement capabilities, and complex diplomatic relationships all complicate efforts to tackle the China fentanyl crisis effectively.

Success depends on finding common ground between nations with different perspectives on regulation, enforcement, and prevention. This includes sharing intelligence, coordinating investigations, and developing consistent approaches to precursor chemical controls.

The Role of Prevention

Prevention remains the most effective long-term response to the China fentanyl crisis. Community-based programmes that educate young people about the dangers of substance use can reduce demand for these deadly drugs.

Effective prevention strategies address the root causes that make individuals vulnerable to addiction. This includes mental health support, educational opportunities, and strong community connections that provide alternatives to substance use.

When communities invest in prevention, they create protective factors that help people resist the appeal of drugs, regardless of their source. The Chinese fentanyl trade thrives where demand exists, making prevention efforts crucial for breaking this cycle.

Treatment and Recovery

For those already affected by the China fentanyl crisis, accessible treatment services provide hope for recovery. Evidence-based approaches that combine medical treatment with psychological support offer the best outcomes for people struggling with addiction.

Recovery programmes that involve families and communities tend to be more successful than those focusing solely on individual treatment. This holistic approach recognises that addiction affects entire social networks, not just individual users.

The Path to Prevention and Recovery

The allegations about Chinese involvement in fentanyl trafficking highlight the need for sustained international cooperation on drug prevention. Whether through diplomatic channels, trade measures, or community-based initiatives, addressing this crisis requires coordinated action.

Prevention must remain at the centre of any effective response to the China fentanyl crisis. By reducing demand through education and community support, we can address the root causes that make these supply chains profitable in the first place.

The Chinese fentanyl trade represents a complex challenge that requires nuanced solutions. Success will depend on combining international cooperation with strong local prevention efforts that protect vulnerable individuals and strengthen community resilience.

Only through sustained commitment to prevention, treatment, and community support can we hope to reduce the devastating impact of the China fentanyl crisis on families and communities worldwide.

Source: https://nobrainer.org.au/index.php/resources/wheelbarrows/1469-china-fentanyl-crisis-a-global-challenge-requiring-prevention?

Filed under: Australia,Fentanyl,Others (International News),Prevention and Intervention,Strategy and Policy,Treatment and Addiction :

Email From: Drug Free America Foundation – 11 July 2025

Some hopeful news has come to light in the latest Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Annual Report: overdose deaths dropped more than 20% nationwide in 2024, which is the largest yearly decrease in four decades of tracking. Although this decrease in overdose deaths is good news, it does not mean the crisis is over. Changes in drug mixtures, independent regional shifts in overdose patterns, and the alarming rise in new chemical contaminants—many of which users don’t even know they’re taking—makes this ever-evolving issue complex and increasingly more dangerous than ever before.

The DEA found that 1 in 8 samples of methamphetamine now contains fentanyl, and 1 in 4 samples of cocaine samples are similarly contaminated. And while deaths from fentanyl may be decreasing, fentanyl is increasingly being mixed into other drugs, often with deadly result.

In a regional assessment of fentanyl-related deaths, stimulants such as cocaine and methamphetamine were found to be contaminated with fentanyl and linked to 1 out of every 2 drug-related deaths in the west and 1 out of every 3 drug-related deaths in the east. Contaminated drug mixtures are especially dangerous given that naloxone, one of the key measures in reducing opioid overdose deaths, is ineffective against non-opioid drugs such as stimulants.

Among the surprising findings was that between 2018 and 2022, fentanyl-only overdose among 15-24 year olds increased approximately 168%. This age group, which is one that generally does not seek fentanyl, are suspected to be unknowingly consuming drugs laced with it. The low production cost of fentanyl continues to fuel the shift between already dangerous plant-based drugs to lab-made substances. The emergence of additives that cause prolonged sedation such as xylazine and medetomidine increase the dangers associated with the consumption of these drugs as some these mixtures may also render naloxone ineffective.

Despite the drop in overall overdose deaths the U.S. still has the highest drug overdose rate in the world, with 324 deaths per million people. Most states are showing promising progress with decreases in drug-related deaths. However, Nevada is an exception, experiencing an increase largely driven by methamphetamines, which have now surpassed fentanyl as the leading cause of drug-related deaths in the state.

Although overall trends seem to show a positive promising future, the drug supply is evolving faster than available tools can manage. And overdose risks are no longer about misuse, but also about unknowing exposure to potent synthetic chemicals hidden in recognizable drugs.

Source: Drug Free America Foundation | 333 3rd Ave N Suite 200 | St. Petersburg, FL 33701 US

Filed under: Cocaine,Drug use-various effects,Fentanyl,Methamphetamine/GHB/Hallucinogens/Oxycodone,Prevalence,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

by Cairo Scene Jul 13, 2025

A nationwide campaign has launched to raise awareness among drivers about the dangers of drug use, aiming to boost road safety and reduce traffic accidents across Egypt.

The initiative – spearheaded by the Fund for Drug Control and Treatment of Addiction (FDCTA), in collaboration with the Ministry of Social Solidarity – is active at taxi stands, transport hubs, and major public squares, where educational materials are being distributed to both professional and private drivers. Volunteers and officials are engaging directly with motorists, offering information and support services.

This move is part of Egypt’s broader strategy to combat drug-related traffic accidents and promote a culture of safety on the roads. In addition to awareness efforts, the government continues to carry out random drug testing campaigns targeting drivers of school buses, commercial vehicles, and public transport.

Minister of Social Solidarity Nevine El-Qabbaj emphasised that prevention through awareness is a key part of Egypt’s anti-drug policy, particularly amongst high-risk groups like transport workers.

Source: https://cairoscene.com/Buzz/New-Anti-Drug-Awareness-Campaign-Targets-Drivers-in-Egypt

Filed under: Addiction,Crime/Violence/Prison,Others (International News),Prevalence,Prevention and Intervention :

by Yousef al Habsi – Oman Observer – Muscat, Jul 13, 2025

6,741 narcotic cases recorded in Oman between 2023 and 2024

The Public Prosecution disclosed that 6,741 drug cases were recorded in the Sultanate of Oman between 2023 and 2024, warning of an increase in drug abuse among various society segments including women.

The Public Prosecution called for increased awareness and family monitoring to protect children from falling into drug addiction.

Dr Rashid al Kaabi, the official spokesperson for the Public Prosecution, said that international criminal networks use social media to lure young people, turn them into addicts and then exploit them in drug trafficking or committing crimes. He explained that drugs are smuggled into the country via land, sea and air, noting that the Sultanate of Oman’s strategic location makes it a potential transit point for drugs.

The most common types of drugs are: hashish, shabu, heroin and painkillers, he said, pointing to the devastating health, social and economic impacts of drugs including psychological and physical illnesses, family disintegration, theft and violence as well as the economic loss. He called for a greater role for the family, educational, religious and media institutions.

He added that the Sultanate of Oman is applying the national strategy (2023–2028) for combating drugs and is intensifying prevention, treatment and rehabilitation efforts. He praised the role of the Royal Oman Police, the Ministry of Health, the Public Prosecution, the Ministry of Education, and other relevant authorities in combating the drug phenomenon.

The Public Prosecution spokesman stressed the importance of monitoring children, adding that families should not hesitate to seek treatment when necessary as addiction is not just a deviation but a disease that requires early and comprehensive intervention.

The Sultanate of Oman had taken a series of important legislative and regulatory steps, the first of which was passing the Law on Combating Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances pursuant to Royal Decree No 99/17.

In addition, the National Strategy for Combating Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances (2023-2028) was laid out, outlining the policies, programmes and regulatory activities necessary to address contemporary challenges in this field, the Public Prosecution spokesman said.

The Royal Oman Police (ROP), through the Directorate-General for Combating Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances, continues making significant efforts to implement the necessary security measures to prevent drug smuggling across land, sea and air. The ROP has significant capabilities to confront cross-border smuggling networks.

In the same context, the Public Prosecution is responsible for handling drug and addiction cases through the Drug Cases Department, he said, adding that the number of drug cases reported in 2024 saw a significant increase compared to 2023.

Source: https://www.omanobserver.om/article/1173442/oman/call-for-awareness-as-drug-abuse-hits-a-high

Filed under: Addiction,Drug use-various effects,Health,Others (International News),Prevalence,Prevention and Intervention :

by WRD News Team – July 17, 2025

Australia has achieved a remarkable milestone in youth substance abuse prevention, with border authorities seizing over 10 million vapes since implementing world-leading import controls in January 2024. The comprehensive crackdown has successfully turned the corner on what was described as “one of the most significant public health challenges” facing Australian communities.

Vaping Rates Plummet as Enforcement Delivers Results

Health Minister Mark Butler confirmed that “the peak of vaping is behind us,” with research showing fewer young people are now vaping and fewer young people are smoking. When the current government took office three years ago, vaping was “exploding as a public health menace,” with year-on-year increases at “alarming rates”.

School communities had reported vaping as their “number one behavioural concern,” with suspensions climbing and schools implementing extraordinary measures including “rostering teachers to stand inside school toilets during recess and lunchtimes” to combat the crisis.

Young Australians Recognise They Were “Sold a Lie”

Professor Becky Freeman from the University of Sydney, who leads the landmark Gen Vapes research study, revealed the dramatic shift in youth attitudes: “Young people were sold a lie. They were told that vapes were harmless, they were fun, they were part of a young person’s lifestyle”.

The research shows young people’s attitudes have fundamentally changed. Freeman noted: “They’re almost ashamed of the fact that they’re addicted. They can’t believe that something that they were just using at parties for fun on the weekends… Now their wellbeing is being impacted. They’re waking up with a vape under their pillow”.

Coordinated Government Response Targets Criminal Networks

The comprehensive strategy included banning imports of disposable vapes and outlawing retail sales outside therapeutic settings. Previously, “nine out of 10” vape stores were located “in walking distance of schools because they knew that was their target market”.

Assistant Commissioner Tony Smith from the Australian Border Force emphasised the criminal elements involved: “Every vape and every cigarette that is illegally purchased fuels the black market… and sends profits into the hands of organised crime”.

Border Force officers now make “on average 120 detections a day,” contributing to the 10 million vapes seized alongside “2.5 billion cigarette sticks and 435 tonnes of illicit tobacco”.

South Australia Leads Enforcement Excellence

South Australia has emerged as the national leader in enforcement, receiving top marks in an independent assessment. The state has seized over 100,000 vapes worth $4.5 million in just 12 months.

Minister Andrea Michaels revealed the state now has “the ability to shut stores for 28 days” and has already “closed almost 20 stores for 28 days” since the enhanced powers took effect in June 2025. Penalties for violations can reach up to $6.6 million for repeat offences.

Research Confirms Gateway Effect Prevention

Critical research findings demonstrate that vaping serves as a gateway to smoking, with “young people who vape are at five times the risk of going on to smoke”. As one young participant in the study explained: “when I was a young teen, I absolutely hated smoking… And then I tried vaping, and it sort of loosened me up. And I thought, oh, well, if I’m going to vape, maybe I could smoke too”.

The success in reducing both vaping and smoking rates simultaneously addresses earlier concerns that restricting vapes might drive young people toward cigarettes instead.

International Partnerships Disrupt Supply Chains

Australia has deployed Border Force officers internationally, including to “the UK, to Thailand and also through to Hong Kong” to work with international partners to stem the flow of vape products. Recent referrals contributed to the seizure of “over 630,000 vapes from reaching our borders”.

The products are arriving from multiple countries including “China, from the UAE, Singapore” and “other locations such as the UK as well”, often using “mis-declaration or mis-description of goods” to evade detection.

Ongoing Challenges Acknowledged

Despite the remarkable progress, officials stressed the fight continues. Minister Butler acknowledged: “We know it’s going to be a tough fight. We know there’s a lot more to do… We’re up against two very strong opponents, Big Tobacco on the one hand and serious organised crime”.

Professor Freeman emphasised the need for sustained action: “We always have to be mindful of the tobacco industry tactics and what product they’re going to bring in next. We know that they are not going to give up on this market”.

Global Implications for Youth Protection

Australia’s comprehensive approach demonstrates that decisive government action can successfully combat youth substance abuse epidemics. The combination of import controls, retail restrictions, enforcement measures, and international cooperation provides a blueprint for other nations grappling with similar challenges.

The transformation from a crisis where vaping was “exploding year on year” to confirmed evidence that “the peak of vaping is behind us” offers hope for communities worldwide seeking effective prevention strategies.

Source: https://wrdnews.org/australia-seizes-10-million-vapes-world-leading-crackdown-shows-dramatic-results-in-youth-prevention/

Filed under: Addiction,Australia,Prevalence,Prevention and Intervention,Vaping,Youth :

by The Daily Telegraph, London, UK – 16 Jul 2025

Sadiq Khan wants to decriminalise the Class-B drug, but families and doctors warn that smoking it is ‘playing Russian roulette with your brain’. By Gwyneth Rees

For retired charity director Terry Hammond, 78, the issue of cannabis-induced psychosis has come to dominate his life. About 25 years ago, his teenage son Steven, now 42, began smoking skunk – a highly potent strain of the drug – at friends’ houses, without his parents knowing.

“He was like so many young boys,” recalls Hammond from his home in Leicestershire. “He was bingeing on it in secret and thought it would be fine.” But around six months later, in the autumn of 1999, Steven suddenly became paranoid. “We were watching the BBC news, and he turned to me and accused me of ringing them. He was convinced the presenters were talking about him.”

The psychosis didn’t stop there. “He began to think aliens had taken over everybody,” adds Hammond. “Then he began mumbling in an incomprehensible language, shouting at the walls and locking himself in his room. He was a boy gripped by absolute fear and terror, and his beautiful mind had just been destroyed.”

At 21, and with no family history of mental health problems, Steven was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia – psychosis that continues indefinitely. He spent three months in the department of psychiatry at the Royal South Hants Hospital in Southampton, where he was put on the antipsychotic drug Olanzapine and given talking therapy. But even now – two decades on – Steven, who lives in a studio flat in his parents’ garden, is still affected by his early drug use.

“He cannot work and struggles socially,” says Hammond, who has Steven’s permission to share his story and has also written a book, Gone to Pot, to help others in similar circumstances. “He is still on antipsychotic drugs but continues to hear voices, although he now has the skills to rationalise them.

“It has completely ruined his life, and as parents we have had to suffer the bereavement of losing our son. Fundamentally, it has damaged his brain for good. Young people need to know smoking cannabis is playing Russian roulette with brain damage.”

It is a harrowing story. But the issue of how to tackle the growing problem of ever-more potent cannabis on our streets divides those in power. Sir Sadiq Khan, London’s mayor, has backed a report by the London Drugs Commission stating that possession of small amounts of cannabis should be decriminalised. He said there was a “compelling, evidencebased case” for decriminalisation.

But on July 7, Britain’s leading police chiefs rejected this and urged their officers to crack down on the drug. Last month, David Sidwick, the Conservative police and crime commissioner for Dorset, wrote a letter to the police minister Diana Johnson – signed by 13 other police and crime commissioners – calling cannabis a “chronically dangerous drug” that is as harmful as cocaine and crack.

Evidence shows that cannabisinduced psychosis has substantially increased in recent years. A 2019 study published in The Lancet by Prof Marta Di Forti shows that cannabis is responsible for 30 per cent of first-time psychosis cases in south London (it is 50 per cent in Amsterdam).

Further research, not yet published, by Dr Diego Quattrone and Dr Robin Murray, professors of psychiatric research at King’s College London, reveals that cannabis-induced psychosis in the

‘In America, the THC content is so strong, you can go psychotic in one night’

UK is three times more common than in the 1960s. Their research suggests that 75 per cent of this increase is down to the use of skunk, which accounts for 94 per cent of cannabis on the UK market.

“Violence is also associated with psychosis, and of the psychotic people who go on to kill, 90 per cent are using either alcohol or cannabis,” says Murray.

More experts are now linking cannabis use to violence, which they attribute to a chemical component in the plant – tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) – which can trigger hallucinations and paranoid ideas in vulnerable individuals. Worryingly, THC levels in cannabis have been rising sharply. In the 1960s, THC levels in “weed” were around 3 per cent. Today, most UK cannabis has THC levels of 16 to 20 per cent. In Holland, the figure is between 30 and 40 per cent, and in California, where cannabis is legal, levels can reach 80 per cent.

“It is not easy to get psychosis,” says Murray. “Typically, someone may smoke skunk for five years before it kicks in. But in America, the THC is so strong, you can go psychotic in one night. It will hit those who already have a history of mental health problems the worst. We are braced for an epidemic of psychosis.”

Dr Niall Campbell, a consultant psychiatrist at the Roehampton Priory Clinic, believes looser cannabis regulation combined with increased potency have led to more patients suffering psychosis. “I don’t think this rise is that surprising given how easy skunk is to buy online, and how ubiquitous it has become,” he says.

“Psychosis often begins with young people smoking a few joints and feeling a bit paranoid. But if they don’t stop, over time they can reach a psychotic state which won’t go away, even if they stop smoking. Sadly, this psychosis may last a lifetime and once people are told that they can get very depressed or suicidal.”

Linsey Rafferty, 42, from Paisley near Glasgow, is one of those to have experienced damage firsthand. She had three short psychotic episodes over the decades she smoked, but in 2020, during the Covid lockdown, she suffered an extreme episode. “I was hearing things and writing all over the walls of my home,” she says. “I threw my phone away because I thought it had been tapped and was eating out of bins. It all made total sense to me at the time, and I can understand why people go violent.”

Rafferty was sectioned and put on antipsychotics. Five years on, she has stopped smoking.

“When I stopped smoking, the psychosis went away,” she says. “But still, the episode was deep and long-lasting, and the scars haven’t gone. I never realised it could make me so vulnerable. I used to think drugs should be legalised, but not anymore.”

Source: https://www.pressreader.com/uk/features/20250716/281548001918086?

Filed under: Brain and Behaviour,Cannabis/Marijuana,Drug use-various effects,Mental Health,UK,Youth :

Photo: Jimmy Dean // Unsplash

Parents are the No. 1 influence in their child’s life and in their decisions regarding alcohol, making early conversations and clear expectations essential for keeping kids safe

SUMMIT COUNTY, Utah — Parents and caregivers play a crucial role in helping kids stay safe from alcohol and other drug use. In fact, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends talking to kids about underage drinking as early as age 9. Kids are making up their minds about alcohol between the ages of 9 and 13. If your child is older, it’s never too late to start the discussion. Often, though, we don’t know where to begin. Here are some ideas and resources.

Know the harms

Research from the National Library of Medicine indicates that alcohol can harm the developing brain, impairing memory, learning, and judgment.

Have fun together

When you spend quality time with your child, you build strong bonds – this creates trust between you and your child so that they come to you and you can talk with them about the difficult things in life, like underage drinking and drug use.

Set clear expectations

Parents Empowered reports that “Most children naturally become more independent as they mature. Yet parental involvement drops by half between the 6th and 12th grades when kids need their parents’ help most to stay alcohol-free. Parents are the No. 1 influence in their child’s life and in their decisions regarding alcohol, too.”

“We urge parents to be clear with their children that underage drinking and drug use are never acceptable, especially not in their own home,” says Betty Morin, Substance Abuse Prevention Program Specialist at Summit County Health Department. “Children should also know what to do if they find themselves in a risky situation.”

Keeping your kids in a safe, alcohol-free environment is essential because we know that the folks we hang out with influence our choices. Brainstorm ways for your child to have fun with their friends without using substances, encourage them to avoid situations where there might be drugs or alcohol, and never allow underage use in your own home.

Teach refusal skills

You can practice “refusal skills” with your child by role-playing different situations and helping them say “no” in various ways. They can change the subject, suggest an alternative activity, create an excuse, or even walk away.

Be a safe place for your child. Let them know that they could text or call you if they’re in a situation where drugs or alcohol are present and that you will pick them up. It’s even a great idea to have a safe word with your child that they can call, say the word, and they know you’re on your way.

Be involved in your child’s life

In addition to setting expectations, parents can foster safety by getting to know their child’s friends and their families, attending school events, staying engaged with their child’s online activities, and consistently enforcing agreed-upon rules.

Source: https://townlift.com/2025/07/underage-drinking-prevention-5-essential-strategies-every-parent-needs/

Filed under: Alcohol,Education,Health,USA,Youth :

by Hailey M. Warner and Kelly Corr

ESSAY — Volume 22 — July 17, 2025

Although cigarette use among high school students and adults has declined since its peak in 1997, in North Dakota, nearly 1 in 3 high school students instead use e-cigarettes, and approximately 1 in 5 adults continue to smoke (1). The prevalence of tobacco and nicotine dependence poses substantial public health challenges, especially in rural communities (2).

More than 480,000 people, equivalent to the average capacity of 8 professional football stadiums, die from cigarette smoking annually in the US (3). In North Dakota, 1,000 adult deaths annually are attributed to cigarette use (1). Of cancer-related deaths in North Dakota, approximately 1 in 4 are associated with smoking (1). Cigarette use results in a high economic burden: in 2018, it cost the US more than $600 billion, including $240 billion in health care spending and nearly $185 billion in lost productivity due to smoking-related illnesses and health conditions (4). In 2021, health care expenditures attributed to tobacco use in North Dakota totaled $326 million, approximately equivalent to spending $421 for each person living in the state that year (1). Annual smoking-related lost productivity equates to nearly $185 billion in the US and $233 million in North Dakota (1,4). It is clear why the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cites cigarette smoking as the leading cause of preventable disease, disability, and death in the US (3).

Smoking is a behavior that can harm nearly every organ in the human body, increasing the risk of heart disease, stroke, lung disease, diabetes, and cancer, and resulting in a substantial impact on population health (3). This essay explores and promotes providing tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment in the community pharmacy setting to increase patient care opportunities and improve health outcomes, particularly in rural areas.

The Profession of Pharmacy

Pharmacists are highly accessible and trusted health care professionals (5). Community pharmacies are a key component of the health care system, especially in rural, medically underserved areas, and they present an opportunity to help people quit using tobacco and nicotine products (5). Our ethnographic graduate research focuses on piloting an education-based intervention to assist independent community pharmacies in North Dakota in addressing tobacco and nicotine use among their clients. Our preliminary research results support the concept that in smaller communities, people often have close relationships with each other, including their local pharmacist. In one of our research pilot sites, a pharmacy in a rural town, a staff pharmacist said, “We care about our patients, and we want the best for their health.” To expand their scope of practice and fill gaps in access to health care services, independent community pharmacies are increasingly offering clinical services and improving patient outcomes (6).

Tobacco and Nicotine Dependence Treatment

Smoking cessation, the process of quitting the use of cigarettes, is more formally called tobacco dependence treatment (7). To encompass cigarette use as well as use of other tobacco or nicotine products, we use the term “tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment.” The main components of this treatment are behavioral therapies and medications. Among the behavioral therapy options are cognitive behavioral therapy, motivational interviewing, mindfulness practices, and support from technology-based options such as telephone quitlines, text message communications, or online media platforms (7). Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products are offered in various formulations, including patches, gum, lozenges, and nasal spray. All NRT products are deemed equally effective and are estimated to increase treatment success by 50% to 70% (7). Multiple NRT products can be used concurrently and are thought to provide better relief of withdrawal symptoms and cravings (7). The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved bupropion and varenicline as oral tobacco cessation medications. Bupropion and NRT have been shown to be equally effective, and some studies suggest varenicline is more effective than bupropion alone or the use of a single form of NRT (7). Bupropion and varenicline can be used in combination with NRT, which allows prescribers to tailor a person’s tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment plan to their individual needs (7).

Implementing Tobacco and Nicotine Dependence Treatment in Community Pharmacies

The implementation of tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment in community pharmacies can bolster the clinical capabilities and public health impact of community pharmacies. As of March 2025, eighteen states had implemented legislation allowing pharmacists prescriptive authority to provide patients with tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment medications (8). Of these, 9 states allow pharmacists to prescribe all medications approved by the FDA for smoking cessation, and the other 9 allow NRT only (8). In 2021, pharmacists in North Dakota were granted the authority to independently prescribe all FDA-approved medications, including varenicline, bupropion, and NRT (9). In the following year, the state’s Medicaid program expanded their coverage to include tobacco and nicotine dependence counseling provided by pharmacists (10). This expanded coverage broadened the impact of pharmacists on the adult Medicaid population in North Dakota, whose prevalence of smoking is more than double the prevalence among all adults in the state (39.1% vs 17.4%) (10).

Other insurers permit pharmacists to become recognized as medical providers, which allows them to submit reimbursement claims for tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment consultations as well as for the medications and NRT products they prescribe (5). These additional incentives may increase the number of encounters between pharmacists and people who smoke and lead to a reduction in cigarette use. During an unstructured interview conducted as part of our ethnographic graduate research, a pharmacist offering tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment services said, “These people have control over it [their tobacco and nicotine use]. If we can get them to stop, they can have such a better life. I honestly . . . I feel very strongly about this.”

Some independently owned community pharmacies in North Dakota have become pioneers in offering tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment to their patients. They use Ask-Advise-Refer/Connect, a method that combines the approaches of Ask-Advise-Refer and Ask-Advise-Connect (11). Both approaches share the steps of engaging patients by asking about tobacco use and advising them to quit. The difference lies in what actions are taken in the last step. In Ask-Advise-Refer, the patient is given a referral to a resource for quitting, whereas in Ask-Advise-Connect, the patient is directly connected to a resource for quitting (11). A pharmacist using Ask-Advise-Refer/Connect can choose to make a referral or connect with the patient to provide treatment at the pharmacy, whichever the patient prefers (11). Referrals can be made to state quitlines or local public health units, which assist in providing behavioral counseling and free NRT products. Because pharmacists in North Dakota have the authority to prescribe tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment medications, patients who are ready to quit can be immediately connected to pharmacists and receive treatment at the pharmacy. Regardless of whether a patient is provided with a referral or a connection, the pharmacist should follow up with patients on their progress toward cessation during future pharmacy visits. The second author (K.C.) developed a flowchart describing how a patient progresses through a tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment support process.

Figure.
Basic pharmacy workflow for tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment in North Dakota. NDQuits is the state tobacco quitline. Over-the-counter (OTC) products refer to nicotine replacement products that can be acquired without a prescription. [A text version of this figure is available.]

Call to Action

Pharmacists are called to be public health professionals and capitalize on opportunities to provide tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment for their patients, especially in rural areas. This expansion of services necessitates strengthening knowledge of tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment medications, learning how to provide behavioral counseling, and completing the requirements to be recognized as a provider of tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment services by health insurers.

The training of pharmacy students should be studied to ensure they can take the initiative to offer new services, apply population health strategies, and as a result, better serve their patients’ health care needs. Practicing pharmacists may need to refresh their knowledge and skills to provide tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment. Continuing education is a professional requirement, and pharmacists should actively seek opportunities to learn about topics such as motivational interviewing, tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment counseling, and current trends in tobacco use. In states where tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment provided by pharmacists is not yet authorized, pharmacists are encouraged to work with their board of pharmacy and local pharmacy organizations to advocate for expanding patients’ access to clinical services in community pharmacy settings.

Billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives are lost to cigarette smoking every year in the US. Promoting pharmacy services and ensuring future pharmacists’ readiness for success should be a top priority for the profession. The next step toward preventing the disease, disability, and death attributable to tobacco use lies with pharmacists implementing tobacco and nicotine dependence treatment in community pharmacies across the country.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2025/25_0088.htm

Filed under: Addiction,Brain and Behaviour,Nicotine,Tobacco, smoking,USA :

by Journal of Substance Use & Addiction Treatment, 2025,

Authors: Josh Aleksanyan, Zobaida Maria, Diego Renteria, Adetayo Fawole, Ashly E. Jordan, Vanessa Drury, … Charles J. Neighbors

Abstract:

Introduction: Transition-age (TA) adults, aged 18-25, have the highest prevalence of substance use disorder (SUD) among all age groups yet they are less likely to seek treatment and more likely to discontinue it than older adults, making them a high-priority treatment population. While structural barriers and varying expectations of recovery may affect treatment initiation, insights from providers working with TA adults can reveal what further impels and impedes treatment engagement.

Methods: We conducted two focus groups with 14 front-line treatment providers, representing urban and rural outpatient, residential, and inpatient SUD care settings across New York State. Providers were selected through stratified sampling using restricted-access treatment registry data. A semi-structured interview guide facilitated discussions, and transcripts were analyzed to identify key themes.

Results: Providers report that TA adults prefer briefer, innovative treatment approaches over traditional modalities like A.A./12-step recovery, driven by a desire to rebuild their lives through education and career. Post-pandemic social disruptions were cited as exacerbating engagement challenges and increasing the need for integrating mental health support. Providers highlighted the potential of technology to enhance treatment engagement, though expressed concerns regarding social isolation and the fraying of childhood safety nets and support systems (e.g., housing) undermining successful treatment outcomes and transitions to adulthood more broadly.

Conclusions: Providers report and perceive various challenges-unmet mental health needs, social alienation, and housing insecurity-that impede TA adults from successful SUD treatment. Understanding providers’ perceptions of the needs of young adults can inform patient and clinical decision-making, lead to the development of innovative treatment approaches tailored to TA adults and contribute to improved health outcomes over the life course.

To read the full text of this article, please visit the link below:

Source: https://drugfree.org/drug-and-alcohol-news/research-news-roundup-july-17-2025/

Filed under: Addiction,Brain and Behaviour,Mental Health,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA,Youth :

by Vivek Ramaswamy <news@editor.thepostmillennial.com> 01 July 2025 14:34

THE KIDS WILL BE OK

You will never guess what’s happening with young people. ‌ Believe it or not, the younger generation is finally rejecting woke and radical leftism. You saw this during Trump’s election – a major shift in the 18-29 year old voters.‌ ‌ And the media hates it! ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

Here’s a major reason why this is happening … an organization called Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) is identifying, recruiting, and training college students to Make Liberty Win. YAL is the most active and effective pro-liberty youth organization advancing liberty on campus. …..

YAL is doing this, first and foremost, by reaching students where they’re at. By focusing on the issues important to twenty-year-olds – affordable groceries and gas, healthcare, and guns, YAL is able to show young people that socialism is not the answer to all of their life’s problems.

Here are a few of the articles, supporting this initiative, published in other publications:

“America’s Youngest Voters Turn Right” – Axios;
“The Not-So-Woke Generation Z” – The Atlantic;
“Are Zoomers Shifting Right?” – Newsweek; and
“Analysis: Young and Non-White Voters Have Shifted Right Since 2020” – Washington Post.

Below is a step-by-step layout showing how Young Americans for Liberty is advancing the ideas of freedom with college students.

STEP 1: Expand the number of YAL chapters across the country to over 500 nationwide. America’s college campuses are covered with YAL chapters actively recruiting and educating hundreds of thousands of students.

STEP 2: Recruit 10,000 NEW YAL members and collect more than 150,000 student sign-ups. YAL is building a massive network and a strong foundation to reach the next generation for years to come.

STEP 3: Train an ELITE group of top 1,7000 student leaders on how to WIN ON PRINCIPLE. YAL’s top student leaders receive exclusive training on the strategies and tactics to win and advance the ideas of liberty.

STEP 4: Mobilize YAL-trained activists who have knocked on more than 6,000,000 doors to promote liberty causes and candidates. It’s called OPERATION WIN AT THE DOOR, and through it, YAL-trained students have knocked doors to help nearly 400 pro-liberty legislators win crucial races and push for important pro-liberty legislation.

STEP 5: Fight tyrannical campus policies and college administrators through YAL’s Student Rights Campaign. YAL chapters and members have made major policy changes on free speech, self-defense, and defunding woke campus programs, which now impact more than 3,100,000 students every year.

Young Americans for Liberty, 3267 Bee Cave Rd, Ste 107-65, Austin, TX 78746, United States

Source: Post Millennial, 2515 Waukegan Road #1ABC, Deerfield, IL 60015

Filed under: Strategy and Policy,USA,Youth :

Dear Surgeon General Adams,

I am an Australian Professor of Addiction Medicine and researcher at the University of Western Australia and Edith Cowan University both in Perth, Western Australia.

I have been becoming increasingly concerned at the implications of cannabis legalization across USA for patterns of congenital anomalies both in USA and across the world.

The incidence of many congenital anomalies are rising in many places. This rise is even more marked if therapeutic early termination for anomaly (ETOPFA) are taken into account.

In 2007 the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a position statement which noted that cannabis was a known teratogen for cardiovascular anomalies based on three studies. They cited ASD, VSD and Ebstein’s anomaly in particular as major concerns. This is also important as cardiovascular anomalies form the largest single group of congenital anomalies. As you would be well aware foetal anomalies is the single major cause of death in the first year of life. The aetiological pathway is further strengthened by the fact that the endocardial cushions have high density expression of CB1R’s cannabinoid type 1 receptors from very early in embryonic life. This fits with the significant association of cannabis with defects of structures derived from the endocardial cushions and the associated conoventricular ridges including the cardiac valves and the interatrial and interventricular septa.

Prof. Peter Fried in Ottawa has headed up a comprehensive, careful and detailed longitudinal study of brain damage in children exposed to cannabis in utero. They have been publishing positive findings from this study for forty years showing documented deficits of executive and higher brain function, the need to recruit more brain to perform tested tasks documented on fMRI, in primary school, middle school, high school and even into young adulthood. It has now been convincingly demonstrated that endocannabinoids send the “off” signal halting synaptic neurotransmission at both stimulatory and inhibitory synapses and hence shutting down the brain’s normal oscillatory processes. Brain oscillations are known to form a key an pivotal function early in brain development guiding the migration and axonal projection of developing neuronal progenitor cells, and also guiding synapse formation.

As you would be aware many neural progenitor cells fail to integrate into the neural network and die due to lack of circuit stimulated connectivity. This applies to both stimulatory and inhibitory synapses. Hence synaptic firing is therefore critical for synapse formation and integration and survival of the new nerve cells. Since cannabis and its constituent cannabinoids shut down this firing and resultant neural oscillations they necessarily impede brain development both in the cortex and in key subcortical major centres including the thalamus and hypothalamus. Hence the demonstration by the Fried group that cannabis users have smaller cortical thickness and hippocampal volumes – the hippocampus first encodes memory – fits well with the known developmental biological mechanisms.

Given that cannabis in Colorado now is commonly at or above 30%, and was historically only 1-2% when most of its epidemiological studies were done; and given also that cannabis oils at up to 99% THC content are also increasingly widely available the conclusion becomes inescapable that the vast majority of children significantly exposed to these concentrations of cannabis in utero will be adversely and permanently affected. Importantly no population measure of this very important damage I easily accessible.

10 studies have linked cannabis exposure to incidence or severity of gastroschisis. This case is strengthened by the high density of CB1R’s on the omphalovitelline artery, and the many studies now which implicate vasoactive drugs in the pathogenesis of this condition. Indeed although the activity of cannabinoids on arterial structure is not widely understood is has been documented in minute detail by no lesser a resource that Nature Reviews of Cardiology. And obviously cannabis arteriopathy underlies the elevated rate of both myocardial infarction and stroke seen in adults with cannabis exposure about which Dr Nora Volkow, Director of NIDA has commented in New England Journal of Medicine.

A spectacular study from Hawaii in 2007 demonstrated that cannabis use was associated with Down’s syndrome incidence at a rate 526% elevated above background.

This is significant for several reasons. Firstly a substantial body of evidence shows that cannabis has been known to test positive in the micronucleus assay since the 1960’s. This is a major test for genotoxicity. The implications of this devastating genetic damage were worked out for the whole world to see by David Pellman’s lab in New York and links cannabis exposure directly with abnormalities of cellular division including the three major clinical trisomies – trisomies 21, 18 and 13 – and Turner’s syndrome, XO.

Furthermore this implies that since cannabis is linked with cardiovascular, neuropsychiatric and chromosomal defects, these being the three major groups of congenital disorders.

If one goes to Colorado as a rather obvious test case indeed one finds a rise there of 70% in both total major congenital anomalies, and also cardiovascular anomalies, especially atrial septal defect and ventricular septal defects, which are the most common, exactly as predicted by the embryology.

Indeed, the particular thoroughness of the way in which all kinds of social and health data is collected and made available in the USA, together with the very considerable spread in attitudes to drug legalization in different states, make USA the perfect teratological laboratory to study the mutagenic and genotoxic effects of cannabinoid exposure. My colleagues in addiction medicine and I at my university, aided by some of the top statisticians in this country have now commenced the enormous task of analyzing the US cannabis exposure data by state from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, together with cannabis concentration data quoted by Dr Nora Volkow the Director of NIDA in New England Journal of Medicine, together with projections of the applicable therapeutic termination rates taken from the Western Australian Register of Developmental Anomalies are analyzing this data at this time.

Whilst our findings have not been finalized the following remarks can already be made:

In socially conservative states cannabis use is falling or flat whilst it is rising in more liberal states;
When one takes into account the dramatically increased cannabis concentration – to only 15% in 2015 in this series – the population exposure to cannabinoids has risen in all states regardless of social ethos;
The rate of almost all congenital anomalies in the USA has risen when reasonable estimates for ETOPFA rates are employed;
Cannabis exposure is significant for all 62 anomalies combined considered as a group;
Not only are congenital anomalies uniformly rising against time, they are also rising against this metric of community cannabis exposure – defined as the product of the national mean cannabis concentration and the state based cannabis use rates;
If one considers the groups of:

1. Cannabis related disorders (as defined by the Hawaiian investigators);
2. Chromosomal defects;
3. Cardiovascular defects;
4. Derivatives of the endocardial cushions

The population exposure to cannabinoids remains highly significant including consideration of state and year

Considering all 62 defects collected by the US National Birth Defects Prevention Network :
1. In 43 cases (69.3%) the community cannabinoid exposure remains significant on linear regression testing before correction for multiple testing;
2. When one adjusts for multiple testing 38 defects (61.3%) remain significant – mostly as described by the Hawaiian researchers;
3. For example the national rate of the effect of cannabis exposure on Ebsteins anomaly is P<0.0001 for the effect of cannabis exposure alone and P<0.0001 for the interaction between cannabis exposure and time (multiple testing corrected results). The beta estimate for this effect is 18%, and the P value is much less than P < 10 ^-16 .

Please note that none of these metrics quantitate what I regard as the most serious area of all – the neurobehavioural toxicology so carefully documented and chronicled with every imaginable psychological and imaging test at every developmental stage into young adult by the methodical Ottawa investigators referenced above.

I am aware of course of the signal service performed in this area by your predecessor Dr Murthy in relation to his report on “Facing Addiction in America.”

Naturally I am very concerned indeed that the USA, having avoided the horrors of thalidomide directly due to the due diligence of your FDA staff at the time, is sailing directly into an even worse teratological morass related to the legalization of cannabis in your country, which apparently even your President appears to be powerless to avert. It is of the greatest concern to me that the carefully orchestrated US cannabis legalization campaign seems to be operating is such a manner as to at once bypass and simultaneously intimidate the FDA quality control and checks and safety balances processes.

The medical conclusion appears inescapable to me that cannabis use should be avoided by males and females in the reproductive age group especially if involved in pregnancy or even considering pregnancy – because of the long half lives involved and its sluggish release from the body’s fat stores. It is well known that these same young adults is the group most keen to use cannabis products! Indeed it is well documented that cannabis both increases sexual libido and reduces inhibitions; albeit after time and habituation it reduces both sexual desire and performance. This sets up an inescapable and unavoidable reproductive and genotoxic paradox – which also greatly escalates the present discussion beyond the arena of personal civil liberties to the future of our coming generations.

Naturally I am particularly keen to discuss these issues with yourself at your earliest available opportunity.

The teratological aspects of this epidemic seem to have been completely and systematically overlooked in the current discussions.

Please help me assist your wonderful, beautiful, noble and courageous nation at this critical juncture in your history.

And I am sure it will be self-evident to you that anything that happens in USA has enormous ramifications around the world, as you are obviously that world’s leading democratic nation.

Hence USA is not only legislating for America – but for all citizens of the planet – present and future. Because of the epigenetic implications – not discussed above but very well substantiated nonetheless – for the next four generations – this is the next 100 years.

In such a circumstance – truth can be your only meaningful defence. And it must be your final bastion – and the last great hope of civilization.

I am very keen to set up a time which would be suitable to yourself to discuss these issues on the phone.

Oddly it seems to me that few professionals understand these issues thoroughly.

And even more strangely – it seems to me strange that USA, having alone amongst the family of nations done so extremely well with thalidomide, at the present time gives every appearance of acting before she has thought carefully, methodically and deeply about the ramifications of her present actions in this field.

With very best wishes,

Yours sincerely,

Dr. Stuart Reece,

Australia.

Email sent in copy to Drug Watch International June 2018 drug-watch-international@googlegroups.com

Filed under: Cannabis/Marijuana,Drug use-various effects on foetus, babies, children and youth,Genes,Global Drug Legalisation Efforts,Health,Legal Sector,Political Sector,USA :

Alcohol damages the brain, heart, liver and pancreas, and it increases the risk of some cancers, such as mouth and bowel cancer. It also weakens the immune system, making people more vulnerable to infectious diseases, such as pneumonia and tuberculosis. Taken in excess, it can kill.

Given these significant health consequences, it’s not surprising that many people who are addicted to the substance, try to quit. However, if it’s not done properly, withdrawal from alcohol can have terrible health consequences of its own, including death.

The body adapts to long-term change in order to survive. An example of this is angina, where the vessels supplying the heart with blood become narrow. Evidence suggests that people with the condition can slowly improve and adapt to the reduced blood flow by developing new blood vessels.

Similarly, there are physiological changes as a result of long-term alcohol abuse.

Alcohol suppresses the production of certain neurotransmitters (chemicals that carry messages between nerve cells). After a while, the body adjust to the continual presence of high amounts of alcohol by producing more of these neurotransmitters and their receptors – the proteins on the surface of nerve cells that neurotransmitters latch on to.

When people who are dependent on alcohol suddenly quit drinking, there is a surge in neurotransmitters, way above what the body needs. This surge explains many of the symptoms of sudden withdrawal, including sweating, racing heart, restlessness and feelings of anxiety.

Alcohol affects neurotransmitters – the chemicals that send signals between nerve cells. Andrii Vodolazhsky/Shutterstock.com

The sudden removal of alcohol can cause fatal arrhythmias, where the heartbeat becomes so irregular the heart fails. This complicated biological process is due to the fact that alcohol interferes with the balance of GABA (an inhibitory neurotransmitter) and glutamate (an excitatory neurotransmitter).

The excitatory and inhibitory pathways in the brain control the central nervous system and heart. Once alcohol is removed, the huge levels of neurotransmitters that are present can overstimulate organs, including the heart.

This is often made worse by the fact that the heart’s structure changes with long-term alcohol use. Muscle strength and thickness, for example, are significantly reduced in people who consume more than 90g of alcohol per day (one unit of alcohol is equal to 8g of pure alcohol) over a period of five years or more.

The sudden removal of alcohol can also cause kidney failure. Alcohol has to be broken down and cleared from the body as urine. This needs water, as the products of the breakdown have to be in solution.

Alcohol also inhibits the production of an anti-diuretic hormone, so large quantities of alcohol make you urinate a lot and become dehydrated. Electrolytes in the body, such as sodium, magnesium, calcium and potassium, are usually in solution (water) and excessive amounts of alcohol can cause an imbalance in these electrolytes as well as an acid-base imbalance. These imbalances can eventually lead to acute kidney failure.

Dangerous drug

The risk of dying from sudden alcohol withdrawal are very real and very high, with estimates ranging from 6% to 25%, depending on their symptoms. Sadly, the unpleasant experience of withdrawal – both physical and mental – causes many addicts to relapse to heavy drinking.

If you drink alcohol, it is advisable that you stick to the government guidelines of not drinking more than 14 units of alcohol a week, which equates to about six pints of lager or six glasses of wine (175ml).

Source: https://theconversation.com/alcohol-withdrawal-can-be-deadly-heres-why-96487 June 2018

Filed under: Alcohol,Health :

Some hopeful news has come to light in the latest Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Annual Report: overdose deaths dropped more than 20% nationwide in 2024, which is the largest yearly decrease in four decades of tracking. Although this decrease in overdose deaths is good news, it does not mean the crisis is over. Changes in drug mixtures, independent regional shifts in overdose patterns, and the alarming rise in new chemical contaminants—many of which users don’t even know they’re taking—makes this ever-evolving issue complex and increasingly more dangerous than ever before.

The DEA found that 1 in 8 samples of methamphetamine now contains fentanyl, and 1 in 4 samples of cocaine samples are similarly contaminated. And while deaths from fentanyl may be decreasing, fentanyl is increasingly being mixed into other drugs, often with deadly result.

In a regional assessment of fentanyl-related deaths, stimulants such as cocaine and methamphetamine were found to be contaminated with fentanyl and linked to 1 out of every 2 drug-related deaths in the west and 1 out of every 3 drug-related deaths in the east. Contaminated drug mixtures are especially dangerous given that naloxone, one of the key measures in reducing opioid overdose deaths, is ineffective against non-opioid drugs such as stimulants.

Among the surprising findings was that between 2018 and 2022, fentanyl-only overdose among 15-24 year olds increased approximately 168%. This age group, which is one that generally does not seek fentanyl, are suspected to be unknowingly consuming drugs laced with it. The low production cost of fentanyl continues to fuel the shift between already dangerous plant-based drugs to lab-made substances. The emergence of additives that cause prolonged sedation such as xylazine and medetomidine increase the dangers associated with the consumption of these drugs as some these mixtures may also render naloxone ineffective.

Despite the drop in overall overdose deaths the U.S. still has the highest drug overdose rate in the world, with 324 deaths per million people. Most states are showing promising progress with decreases in drug-related deaths. However, Nevada is an exception, experiencing an increase largely driven by methamphetamines, which have now surpassed fentanyl as the leading cause of drug-related deaths in the state.

Although overall trends seem to show a positive promising future, the drug supply is evolving faster than available tools can manage. And overdose risks are no longer about misuse, but also about unknowing exposure to potent synthetic chemicals hidden in recognizable drugs.

Source: Drug Free America Foundation | 333 3rd Ave N Suite 200 | St. Petersburg, FL 33701 US

Filed under: Drug use-various effects,Prevention and Intervention,Strategy and Policy,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

Every year the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes releases the World Drug Report (WDR) on World Drug Day, which is observed annually on June 26^th. The WDR provides updates on international drug markets, policy changes across the world, and summarizes gathered data on ongoing issues caused by drugs on all fronts.

This year’s report calls for communities around the world to break the cycle and #StopOrganizedCrime, stressing the intricacy and ever-expanding reach of organized crime networks on a global scale currently exacerbated by increased global instability.

Among this year’s highlights, the World Drug Report finds a 28% increase in people who use drugs over the past 10 years, with marijuana the top used substance with 244 million users, followed by opioids, amphetamines, cocaine, and ecstasy.

The report also highlights a 13% increase in people suffering from drug use disorders over the past 10 years and the disproportionate imbalance among men and women with substance use disorders (SUD) who receive treatment. While 1 in 7 men with a substance use disorder receive treatment, only 1 in 18 women with SUD receive treatment.

But the most sobering reality is that youth continue to show a steady rise in drug use over the past decade. Vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt of illegal exploits and are falling prey to the cycle of poverty and crime created by underfunded systems and increased criminal activity.

Stimulant-related criminal activity is growing at an alarming rate. Between 2013-2023, global cocaine production rose 34%, global cocaine seizures rose 68%, and the number of people who use cocaine jumped from 17 million to 25 million. The steady expansion of cocaine use and rise in production continues to break records year after year. Additionally, the synthetic drug market led by methamphetamines and captagon continues to grow with drug and human trafficking feeding criminal networks that are constantly adapting to new intelligence and technological advances. The influence of this global drug crisis is reflected not only on the financial costs to communities, but on health systems, the environment, public safety, and above all, the loss of life.

Now more than ever, prevention plays a vital role in breaking the harmful cycles created by substance use. While local organizations witness the impact of drugs firsthand in their communities, and governments work to address supply and demand on a global scale, civil society is uniquely positioned to listen, respond, and offer immediate support to local leaders and at-risk populations.

By collaborating with organizations and building a network of support, we can empower individuals with evidence-based resources that strengthen protective factors, promote education, and foster long-term resilience.

Drug Free America Foundation leads the Global Task Force, uniting international non-governmental organizations with this shared mission. If you are interested in joining, please reach out to clincoln@dfaf.org .

If you would like to read the full World Drug Report click here

Source: Drug Free America Foundation | 333 3rd Ave N Suite 200 | Saint Petersburg, FL 33701 US

Filed under: All countries,Strategy and Policy,USA :

Key points

Substance use prevention is not just focused on the absence of a disease or illness but on promoting wellness.
Funding cuts from DOJ for substance use and treatment services may have long-term consequences.
These cuts represent the latest cycle of punitive sentiments towards substances use.

On April 22, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the termination of 365 awards that “no longer effectuate Department priorities.” Among these cuts were $88 million in Office of Justice Programs (OJP) funded programs administering substance use and mental health services. During Preisdent Trump’s first term, we witnessed a shift away from behavioral health models toward scare tactics and increased law enforcement activities — strategies known to be ineffective at preventing substance use. This term appears to be following that same trajectory.

America has a long history of reactively and emotionally addressing substance use in ways inconsistent with research and best practices. Large swings in political views and funding are not new and have detrimental effects on prevention efforts and communities. This latest rollback represents a reversion back to failed, punitive models, which threatens to unravel decades of progress in promoting community health and wellness.

Substance Use Prevention

Today’s substance use prevention activities are not the mass media scare campaigns seen during the 1960s to the 1990s or as simple as “Just Say No.” Substance use prevention takes a public health approach to promoting wellness and preventing substance use problems.

Unlike early iterations of “prevention,” the ultimate goal of prevention activities today is to promote wellness. Promoting wellness is not the same as advocating for the absence of a disease or illness but the presence of purpose in life, involvement in satisfying work and play, having joyful relationships, a healthy body and living environment, as well as general happiness. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), drawing on Swarbrick’s wellness approach, describes wellness as having eight different dimensions – emotional, spiritual, intellectual, physical, environmental, financial, occupational, and social.

Effective prevention programs work across these dimensions to reduce factors that put people at risk of developing behavioral health disorders (i.e., risk factors) as well as promote or strengthen factors that protect people from these disorders (i.e., protective factors).

The Cycle of Prevention Activities

The way we have responded to substance use has always been reactionary and punitive. Responses to substance use in the U.S. has stretched back over a century and followed a repeating cycle of panic, punishment, and progress. A new drug “hits the streets,” a news article highlights the death of a young, innocent victim, or a new political ringleader will enter the scene spouting “tough on crime” rhetoric that causes a moral panic among the masses and calls for increased punishment. Those sentiments take hold for several years and lead to prison overcrowding and an increase in arrest rates. Eventually, scientific advancements push responses to substance use back into the behavioral health realm. Then, a political campaign or story regresses the U.S. back to failed models of addressing substance use with punishment and the cycle repeats.

The 1950s/1960s are generally seen as the beginning of the modern era of prevention — an era dominated by fear-based approaches. School talks aimed at “scaring kids straight” and media campaigns and movies painted exaggerated horror stories about drug use. But scare-based tactics never work, particularly when youth can see that the lessons don’t reflect their lived experience. By the 1970s, the “War on Drugs” had been launched, and President Nixon had called drugs America’s “public enemy number one” and ushered in a wave of punishment over support. One of the most popular mantras of prevention originated in the 1980s with Nancy Reagan’s famous phrase: ‘Just Say No.’ It was catchy, simple, and widespread, but ultimately ineffective.

In the 1990s, science began to shape prevention and we saw large drops in youth substance use rates ever since. Researchers began to examine risk and protective factors associated with substance use. These studies led to a more structured approach to prevention. New, evidence-based school curricula focused on building life skills, resilience, and relationships were implemented. Community coalitions like the Communities That Care model gained traction. This progress continued in the early 2000s, when prevention finally got a seat at the table in public health. Prevention efforts became evidence-based and multi-layered. Programs began to see substance use as due to a complex interaction between systems and started addressing the risk at the family-, peer-, school-, and individual-level, such as the Seattle Social Development Project.

But this progress is often undermined by political agendas.

The punitive spirit of the War on Drugs remains deeply embedded in U.S. policy. The first Trump administration marked a clear pivot away from behavioral health and back toward criminal justice responses. Law enforcement became the answer while programs focused on research and wellness were deprioritized. Youth substance use trends began to stabilize despite the steady decline they had been on since the 1980s, marking an early sign that prevention was losing its momentum. The Biden-Harris administration brought in a new wave of the War on Drugs by naming a specific adulterated substance, fentanyl combined with xylazine, as an “emerging threat to the United States,” a term traditionally held for matters of homeland security.

Why This Matters Now

This new Trump administration brings new challenges and likely worse consequences as we witness an unprecedented time of widespread cuts to federal funding. Many communities rely heavily on these programs to help their fellow residents promote wellness in their area. Without these programs, improvements in trends in substance use will likely plateau, then potentially worsen. The challenge is that the consequences of cutting prevention are long-term, not immediate. As a result, many will turn to this time period in the next year to point out that there was no visible crisis or dramatic increase in substance use but that is based on a deep misunderstanding in evaluation research. The kids that would have relied on these programs will reach adulthood in the next few years which will be when we see the effects of not having these programs. People who relied on federally funded programs for treatment and support will experience worsening symptoms and rates of fatal overdoses will rise. Our schools will likely witness lower rates of attendance and a higher number of students dropping out or failing. Issues of overcrowding in jails and prisons will continue to worsen as increases in law enforcement activity will lead to greater arrests.

The defunding of mental health and substance use programming is a mistake. When prevention works, it’s invisible — no one sees the overdoses that didn’t happen, hears the fights that were avoided, or reads headlines about the crisis that never occurred. The invisibility of its effects does not mean it is not important.

Mobilizing the Community

We are at risk of repeating history by cutting prevention and returning to failed punitive models. Communities must lead where the federal government is failing. The momentum for prevention has always lain in the power of the community. The earliest substance use prevention movements started with everyday people who cared. Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) and other grassroots organizations started taking an active role in prevention in the 1980s, and ever since we have seen more communities taking the reins when it comes to promoting wellness in their area. Prevention is not an activity reserved solely for those in power; it is the duty and responsibility of every individual. Prevention is more than a policy or program; it is a promise to keep showing up for each other. If you are not sure where to start, start by telling your story and making space for others to lead. Prevention is strongest when it is shared.

Source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-nature-of-substance-use/202505/defunding-prevention-a-setback-for-science-and-public

Filed under: Drug use-various effects,Political Sector,Prevention and Intervention,Strategy and Policy,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

A police officer said that no motive is currently known and that Chesser was compliant at the time of her arrest. Police believe he was killed around midnight on Tuesday, June 17.

Australian Reality Star Charged With Murder After Boyfriend's Headless Body Found

Tamika Sueann-Rose Chesser, a 34-year-old former Australian reality TV star, has been charged with murdering her 39-year-old boyfriend, Julian Story. According to a report by The Telegraph, authorities discovered Mr Story’s headless body at their South Australia home in Port Lincoln on June 19, following a report of a small fire. The investigation led to Chesser’s arrest and murder charge after his dismembered remains were found at the apartment. Police are still searching for Mr Story’s severed head.

“It was a confronting scene for police and emergency services personnel as Julian’s body had been dismembered. Julian’s head had been removed during the dismemberment and, despite extensive searches, has not yet been located,” South Australia Police said in a statement Friday.

Police believe he was killed around midnight on Tuesday, June 17.

A witness reported seeing smoke coming from the apartment and approached Chesser, who claimed she was doing nothing. She then took her dogs for a walk and locked the door. Police released surveillance footage showing a woman, believed to be Chesser, dressed in black and walking with three dogs, just hours after the alleged murder on June 17, around midnight.

Police are urging residents to review their surveillance or dashcam footage to aid in the ongoing investigation.

“I can only imagine, and I want you to imagine, the grief this news is causing Julian’s family. Recovering Julian’s head to return it to his family so they can have a peaceful outcome, have a funeral and lay him to rest is a really important aspect for us,” Detective Superintendent Darren Fielke added.

She was taken into custody after police found her in a catatonic and unresponsive state in the backyard of the crime scene, according to court documents. Mr Fielke said there was no obvious motive at this stage, and Chesser was cooperative at the time of the arrest, the ABC reported.

A spokesperson for Mr Story’s family said they were “navigating an unimaginable loss” as they thanked police and first responders for their “compassion and professionalism during this devastating time”.

“We are also deeply grateful to our family and friends and this extraordinary community, whose kindness and support have helped carry us through. Your prayers, presence, and quiet strength mean more than words can say,” the statement added.

Chesser was the runner-up on the 2010 season of Beauty and the Geek and later modelled for men’s magazines including Playboy, Ralph and FHM.

She remains in custody under a mental health detention order and due to appear in court again in December.

Sources:

India news: https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/australian-reality-star-charged-with-murder-after-boyfriends-headless-body-found-8795479

Australia news: https://www.aol.com/australian-reality-tv-star-charged-121626759.html

Filed under: Australia,Brain and Behaviour,Crime/Violence/Prison,Drug use-various effects :

Los Angeles — Inside a bright new building in the heart of Skid Row, homeless people hung out in a canopy-covered courtyard — some waiting to take a shower, do laundry, or get medication for addiction treatment. Others relaxed on shaded grass and charged their phones as an intake line for housing grew more crowded.

The new Skid Row Care Campus offers homeless people health care and a place to rest, charge their phones, grab some

food, or even get connected with housing.Angela Hart / KFF Health News

The Skid Row Care Campus officially opened this spring with ample offerings for people living on the streets of this historically downtrodden neighborhood. Pop-up fruit stands and tent encampments lined the sidewalks, as well as dealers peddling meth and fentanyl in open-air drug markets. Some people, sick or strung out, were passed out on sidewalks as pedestrians strolled by on a recent afternoon.

For those working toward sobriety, clinicians are on site to offer mental health and addiction treatment. Skid Row’s first methadone clinic is set to open here this year. For those not ready to quit drugs or alcohol, the campus provides clean syringes to more safely shoot up, glass pipes for smoking drugs, naloxone to prevent overdoses, and drug test strips to detect fentanyl contamination, among other supplies.

As many Americans have grown increasingly intolerant of street homelessness, cities and states have returned to tough-on-crime approaches that penalize people for living outside and for substance use disorders. But the Skid Row facility shows Los Angeles County leaders’ embrace of the principle of harm reduction, a range of more lenient strategies that can include helping people more safely use drugs, as they contend with a homeless population estimated around 75,000 — among the largest of any county in the nation. Evidence shows the approach can help individuals enter treatment, gain sobriety, and end their homelessness, while addiction experts and county health officials note it has the added benefit of improving public health.

“We get a really bad rap for this, but this is the safest way to use drugs,” said Darren Willett, director of the Center for Harm Reduction on the new Skid Row Care Campus. “It’s an overdose prevention strategy, and it prevents the spread of infectious disease.”

Despite a decline in overdose deaths, drug and alcohol use continues to be the leading cause of death among homeless people in the county. Living on the streets or in sordid encampments, homeless people saddle the health care system with high costs from uncompensated care, emergency room trips, inpatient hospitalizations, and, for many of them, their deaths. Harm reduction, its advocates say, allows homeless people the opportunity to obtain jobs, taxpayer-subsidized housing, health care, and other social services without being forced to give up drugs. Yet it’s hotly debated.

Politicians around the country, including Gov. Gavin Newsom in California, are reluctant to adopt harm reduction techniques, such as needle exchanges or supervised places to use drugs, in part because they can be seen by the public as condoning illicit behavior. Although Democrats are more supportive than Republicans, a national poll this year found lukewarm support across the political spectrum for such interventions.

Los Angeles is defying President Trump’s agenda as he advocates for forced mental health and addiction treatment for homeless people — and locking up those who refuse. The city has also been the scene of large protests against Mr. Trump’s immigration crackdown, which the president has fought by deploying National Guard troops and Marines.

Mr. Trump’s most detailed remarks on homelessness and substance use disorder came during his campaign, when he attacked people who use drugs as criminals and said that homeless people “have no right to turn every park and sidewalk into a place for them to squat and do drugs.” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reinforced Mr. Trump’s focus on treatment.

“Secretary Kennedy stands with President Trump in prioritizing recovery-focused solutions to address addiction and homelessness,” said agency spokesperson Vianca Rodriguez Feliciano. “HHS remains focused on helping individuals recover, communities heal, and help make our cities clean, safe, and healthy once again.”

A comprehensive report led by Margot Kushel, a professor of medicine at the University of California-San Francisco, this year found that nearly half of California’s homeless population had a complex behavioral health need, defined as regular drug use, heavy drinking, hallucinations, or a recent psychiatric hospitalization.

The chaos of living outside, she said — marked by violence, sexual assault, sleeplessness, and lack of housing and health care — can make it nearly impossible to get sober.

Skid Row Care Campus

The new care campus is funded by about $26 million a year in local, state, and federal homelessness and health care money, and initial construction was completed by a Skid Row landlord, Matt Lee, who made site improvements on his own, according to Anna Gorman, chief operating officer for community programs at the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services. Operators say the campus should be able to withstand potential federal spending cuts because it is funded through a variety of sources.

Glass front doors lead to an atrium inside the yellow-and-orange complex. It was designed with input from homeless people, who advised the county not just on the layout but also on the services offered on-site. There are 22 recovery beds and 48 additional beds for mostly older homeless people, arts and wellness programs, a food pantry, and pet care. Even bunnies and snakes are allowed.

John Wright, 65, who goes by the nickname Slim, mingled with homeless visitors one afternoon in May, asking them what they needed to be safe and comfortable.

“Everyone thinks we’re criminals, like we’re out robbing everyone, but we aren’t,” said Wright, who is employed as a harm reduction specialist on the campus and is trying, at his own pace, to stop using fentanyl. “I’m homeless and I’m a drug addict, but I’m on methadone now so I’m working on it,” he said.

Nearby on Skid Row, Anthony Willis rested in his wheelchair while taking a toke from a crack pipe. He’d just learned about the new care campus, he said, explaining that he was homeless for roughly 20 years before getting into a taxpayer-subsidized apartment on Skid Row. He spends most of his days and nights on the streets, using drugs and alcohol.

The drugs, he said, help him stay awake so he can provide companionship and sometimes physical protection for homeless friends who don’t have housing. “It’s tough sometimes living down here; it’s pretty much why I keep relapsing,” said Willis, who at age 62 has asthma and arthritic knees. “But it’s also my community.”

Willis said the care campus could be a place to help him kick drugs, but he wasn’t sure he was ready.

Research shows harm reduction helps prevent death and can build long-term recovery for people who use substances, said Brian Hurley, an addiction psychiatrist and the medical director for the Bureau of Substance Abuse Prevention and Control at the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. The techniques allow health care providers and social service workers to meet people when they’re ready to stop using drugs or enter treatment.

“Recovery is a learning activity, and the reality is relapse is part of recovery,” he said. “People go back and forth and sometimes get triggered or haven’t figured out how to cope with a stressor.”

Swaying public opinion

Under harm reduction principles, officials acknowledge that people will use drugs. Funded by taxpayers, the government provides services to use safely, rather than forcing people to quit or requiring abstinence in exchange for government-subsidized housing and treatment programs.

Los Angeles County is spending hundreds of millions to combat homelessness, while also launching a multiyear “By LA for LA” campaign to build public support, fight stigma, and encourage people to use services and seek treatment. Officials have hired a nonprofit, Vital Strategies, to conduct the campaign including social media advertising and billboards to promote the expansion of both treatment and harm reduction services for people who use drugs.

The organization led a national harm reduction campaign and is working on overdose prevention and public health campaigns in seven states using roughly $70 million donated by Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York.

“We don’t believe people should die just because they use drugs, so we’re going to provide support any way that we can,” said Shoshanna Scholar, director of harm reduction at the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services. “Eventually, some people may come in for treatment but what we really want is to prevent overdose and save lives.”

Los Angeles also finds itself at odds with California’s Democratic governor. Newsom has spearheaded stricter laws targeting homelessness and addiction and has backed treatment requirements for people with mental illness or who use drugs. Last year, California voters approved Proposition 36, which allows felony charges for some drug crimes, requires courts to warn people they could be charged with murder for selling or providing illegal drugs that kill someone, and makes it easier to order treatment for people who use drugs.

Even San Francisco approved a measure last year that requires welfare recipients to participate in treatment to continue receiving cash aid. Mayor Daniel Lurie recently ordered city officials to stop handing out free drug supplies, including pipes and foil, and instead to require participation in drug treatment to receive services. Lurie signed a recovery-first ordinance, which prioritizes “long-term remission” from substance use, and the city is also expanding policing while funding new sober-living sites and treatment centers for people recovering from addiction.

“Harm encouragement”

State Sen. Roger Niello, a Republican who represents conservative suburbs outside Sacramento, says the state needs to improve the lives of homeless people through stricter drug policies. He argues that providing drug supplies or offering housing without a mandate to enter treatment enables homeless people to remain on the streets.

Proposition 36, he said, needs to be implemented forcefully, and homeless people should be required to enter treatment in exchange for housing.

“I think of it as tough love,” Niello said. “What Los Angeles is doing, I would call it harm encouragement. They’re encouraging harm by continuing to feed a habit that is, quite frankly, killing people.”

Keith Humphreys, who worked in the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations and pioneered harm reduction practices across the nation, said that communities should find a balance between leniency and law enforcement.

“Parents need to be able to walk their kids to the park without being traumatized. You should be able to own a business without being robbed,” he said. “Harm reduction and treatment both have a place, and we also need prevention and a focus on public safety.”

Just outside the Skid Row Care Campus, Cindy Ashley organized her belongings in a cart after recently leaving a local hospital ER for a deep skin infection on her hand and arm caused by shooting heroin. She also regularly smokes crack, she said.

She was frantically searching for a home so she could heal from two surgeries for the infection. She learned about the new care campus and rushed over to get her name on the waiting list for housing.

“I’m not going to make it out here,” she said, in tears.

Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/los-angeles-harm-reduction-drugs-homelessness/

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

Filed under: Addiction,Brain and Behaviour,Crime/Violence/Prison,Drug use-various effects,Harm Reduction,Needle Exchange,Prevention and Intervention,Strategy and Policy,USA :

by Robyn Oster – Associate Director, Health Law and Policy – July 2025

Reminder: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), an expert panel, evaluates preventive services and recommends which should be provided at no cost.

Why it’s important: Services currently required to be covered at no cost include certain mental health screenings, drug/alcohol screenings, PrEP for HIV, etc.
A group of conservative Christian employers in Texas led a lawsuit challenging the requirement. They argued that having the independent panel determine national health coverage violated the appointments clause of the Constitution and that covering PrEP violated religious freedom (though the Supreme Court only weighed in on the appointments clause argument).

The details:

The employers argued that USPSTF members were not appointed as either of two types of executive branch officers that the Constitution allows to make certain national policy decisions. They argued that the task force recommendations requiring them to cover certain preventive services in their employer-sponsored health plans were unconstitutional because task force members are not confirmed by the Senate.
The government defended the task force, arguing that it is constitutional because HHS officials appoint USPSTF members, and the HHS secretary can remove members at will and veto recommendations.
The Supreme Court agreed with the government and affirmed that the HHS secretary has these powers over USPSTF and its recommendations.

The bigger context:

The decision is a win for health advocates, who wanted to maintain the no-cost coverage requirement for preventive services. Providing preventive services at no cost is key to increasing access to and receipt of important screenings and other preventive services. Decreasing access to such services would lead to worse health outcomes.
But: The ruling could challenge USPSTF’s independence and credibility. It cements a strong role for the HHS secretary in overseeing the USPSTF, including removing members and modifying its rulings. This paves the way for HHS Secretary Kennedy to reject recommendations he disagrees with, allowing insurers to charge for those services or avoid covering them in some cases. It also opens the door for Kennedy to remove all the task force members and appoint new people, and a new task force could reject previous recommendations.

Source: https://drugfree.org/drug-and-alcohol-news/supreme-court-upholds-aca-preventive-care/

Filed under: Drug use-various effects,Health,Legal Sector,Mental Health,Prevention and Intervention,Strategy and Policy,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

In Christian Daily – Forum 2025 – News & Stories – July 9, 2025

According to a report in ChristianDaily.com, a June 2025 study published in a peer-reviewed journal of the British Medical Association, found that daily cannabis users are 34% more likely to develop heart failure than non-users.

The study by researchers from France drew on data from over 150,000 U.S. adults tracked over several years, and also linked marijuana use with an increased risk of heart attack and stroke. The objective was to evaluate the possible association between major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and the use of cannabis or cannabinoids.

Dr. Matthew Springer, a heart disease biologist at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), told the New York Times that marijuana inhalation delivers “thousands of chemicals deep into the lungs,” potentially increasing cardiovascular risk. His lab recently found that both edible and inhaled forms of marijuana were associated with comparable levels of blood vessel dysfunction.

An accompanying editorial by researchers from California USA said about the study:

Legalisation of medical and recreational cannabis commerce is spreading around the world, associated with increased use1 and falling perception of the risk. Frequent cannabis use has increased in several countries, and many users believe that it is a safe and natural way to relieve pain or stress. In contrast, a growing body of evidence links cannabis use to significant harms throughout life, including cardiovascular health of adults. The robust meta-analysis of cannabis use and cardiovascular disease by Storck et al4 in this issue of Heart raises serious questions about the assumption that cannabis imposes little cardiovascular risk.

This study is backed up by a March 2025 publication by the American College of Cardiology which revealed that cannabis users under the age of 50 are six times more likely to suffer a heart attack and three times more likely to die from cardiovascular causes compared to non-users.

According to a review article in JACC: Journal of the American College of Cardiology – “Marijuana is becoming increasingly potent, and smoking marijuana carries many of the same cardiovascular health hazards as smoking tobacco.”

As reported by Christian Daily International, in 2019, the Christian Medical & Dental Associations (CMDA) — a U.S.-based nonprofit representing thousands of Christian healthcare professionals — issued a position statement cautioning against recreational and medicinal marijuana use. “[T]here is a need for limiting access to marijuana,” the CMDA said. It warned of addiction, cognitive impairment, psychosis, and long-term health effects, especially among youth. “The adolescent brain is still developing and more vulnerable to the adverse effects of marijuana,” the statement emphasised.

Source: https://www.christiandaily.com/news/new-study-links-marijuana-to-heart-failure-echoing-christian-medical-professionals-long-standing-warnings-against-recrea

Filed under: Cannabis/Marijuana,Drug use-various effects,Health,Marijuana and Medicine,Mental Health,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

Two large-scale surveys of California high school students found that teens who saw cannabis and e-cigarette content were more likely to start using those substances or to have used them in the past month

Teens who see social media posts showing cannabis or e-cigarettes, including from friends and influencers, are more likely to later start using those substances or to report using them in the past month, according to surveys done by researchers at the Keck School of Medicine of USC. Viewing such posts was linked to cannabis use, as well as dual use of cannabis and e-cigarettes (vapes). Dual use refers to youth who have used both cannabis and e-cigarettes at some point. The results were just published in JAMA Network Open.

The findings come amid a decline in youth e-cigarette use, reported in 2024 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, teen vaping, cannabis use and the dual use of e-cigarettes and cannabis remain a problem.

“While the rate of e-cigarette use is declining, our study shows that exposure to e-cigarette content on social media still contributes to the risk of using e-cigarettes with other substances, like cannabis,” said Julia Vassey, PhD, a health behavior researcher in the Department of Population and Public Health Sciences at the Keck School of Medicine.

The study, funded by the National Institutes of Health, also helps clarify how certain types of social media posts relate to teen substance use. Researchers surveyed more than 7,600 teens across two studies: a longitudinal study to understand whether viewing cannabis or e-cigarette posts on TikTok, Instagram and YouTube relates to a teen’s later choice to start using either substance or both, and a second survey looking at whether an association exists between the source of the content— friends, influencers, celebrities or brands—and substance use.

“Answering these questions can help federal regulators and social media platforms create guidelines geared toward preventing youth substance use,” Vassey said.

Links across substances

Data for the study came from California high school students, with an average age of 17, who completed questionnaires on classroom computers between 2021 and 2023. Researchers conducted two surveys, one focused on teens who used cannabis, e-cigarettes or both for the first time, the other focused on use during the past month.

In the first survey, which included 4,232 students, 22.9% reported frequently seeing e-cigarette posts on TikTok, Instagram or YouTube, meaning they saw at least one post per week. A smaller portion—12%—frequently saw cannabis posts.

One year later, researchers followed up with the students. Teens who had frequently seen cannabis posts—but had never tried cannabis or e-cigarettes—were more likely to have started using e-cigarettes, cannabis or both. Teens who had frequently seen e-cigarette posts on TikTok were more likely to have started using cannabis or started dual use of both cannabis and e-cigarettes. No such pattern was found for Instagram or YouTube. The data collected allowed researchers to look at platform-specific results for e-cigarettes posts, but not for cannabis posts.

“This is consistent with previous research showing that, of the three platforms, TikTok is probably the strongest risk factor for substance use,” Vassey said. That may be because TikTok’s algorithm pushes popular content broadly, including posts that feature e-cigarettes, even to users who don’t follow the accounts.

In the second survey, researchers asked 3,380 students whether they saw cannabis or e-cigarette posts from brands, friends, celebrities, or influencers with 10,000 to 100,000 followers. Teens who saw e-cigarette or cannabis posts from influencers were more likely than their peers to have used cannabis in the past month. Those who saw e-cigarette posts from friends were more likely to have been dual users of cannabis and e-cigarettes in the past month. Those who saw cannabis posts from friends were more likely to have used cannabis in the past month or to have been dual users of cannabis and e-cigarettes.

The link between e-cigarette posts and cannabis use is what researchers call a “cross-substance association” and may be explained by the similar appearance of nicotine and cannabis vaping devices, Vassey said.

The risks of influencer content

Influencer posts deserve special attention because they often slip through loopholes in federal rules and platform guidelines. For example, the FDA can only regulate content when brand partnerships are disclosed, but influencers—consciously or not—may skip disclosures in some posts.

Studies show that these seemingly unsponsored posts are seen as more authentic, Vassey said, making them particularly influential.

Most social media platforms already ban paid promotion of cannabis and tobacco products, including e-cigarettes. Some researchers say those bans should be extended to cover additional influencer content. Others want platforms to partner with regulators to find a comprehensive solution.

“So far, it’s a grey area, and nobody has provided a clear answer on how we should act and when,” Vassey said.

In future studies, Vassey plans to further explore cannabis influencer marketing, including whether changes to social media guidelines impact what teens see and how they respond.

About this research

In addition to Vassey, the study’s other authors are Junhan Cho, Trisha Iyer and Jennifer B. Unger from the Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine of USC, University of Southern California; Erin A. Vogel from the TSET Health Promotion Research Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City; and Julia Chen-Sankey from the Institute for Nicotine and Tobacco Studies and the School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.

This work was supported by National Institutes of Health [R01CA260459]and the National Institute on Drug Abuse [K01DA055073].

Source: https://keck.usc.edu/news/e-cigarette-and-cannabis-social-media-posts-pose-risks-for-teens-study-finds/

Filed under: Cannabis/Marijuana,Culture,Drug use-various effects,Marijuana and Medicine,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA,Vaping,Youth :

itvx news – Tuesday 24 June 2025

Cannabis activists and entrepreneurs, hold cannabis plant as they march to Government House in Bangkok, Thailand in 2024.Credit: AP

Thailand is moving to pass new legislation banning cannabis for recreational use in a major reversal, three years after the country became the first in Asia to decriminalise the drug, local media reports.

On Tuesday, Public Health Minister Somsak Thepsuthin said he had signed an announcement limiting cannabis to medical use only, Bangkok news site Khaosod confirmed.

Under the changes, people wishing to purchase cannabis must have a doctor’s prescription and a medical certificate indicating their illness.

Operators selling the drug will need to have a doctor present at the shop to renew or apply for a license to sell.

Somsak also said that in the future, cannabis will return to being considered a narcotic.

It is not clear when the regulation will take effect or when it will be re-listed.

Banged up abroad: How many Brits are being arrested over alleged drug smuggling?

Thailand to crack down on cannabis after smuggling cases involving UK tourists

Is cannabis legal in Thailand?

Medical marijuana has been legal in Thailand since 2018, but decriminalisation in 2022 took things a step further, making it no longer a crime to grow and trade marijuana and hemp products, or to use any parts of the plant to treat illnesses.

It was a rarity in the region where many countries give long jail terms and even death sentences for people convicted of marijuana possession, consumption or trafficking.

Smoking marijuana in public remained illegal even under the relaxed laws.

Subscribe free to our weekly newsletter for exclusive and original coverage from ITV News. Direct to your inbox every Friday morning.

What happened when cannabis was decriminalised?

The relaxed laws saw a lucrative cannabis industry catering to locals and foreigners alike boom across the Southeast Asian nation, with thousands of cannabis dispensaries sprouting up across Thailand, as well as other cannabis-themed businesses like weed cafes and hemp spas, and beauty treatment.

Cities like Chiang Mai and the capital Bangkok have even held weed festivals, and decriminalisation has been a major draw for tourists.

Pro-legislation advocates have argued that the cannabis boom across Thailand has helped many Thais, from farmers to small business owners and workers behind the counter.

Critics say the decriminalisation was rushed through, causing confusion about the regulations.

Last year, a new conservative government vowed to tighten the rules around the drug after a string of alleged smuggling cases involving tourists.

Hundreds of British citizens are currently detained across the world, accused of narcotics smuggling offences.

Prisoners Abroad – a charity assisting Britons who are arrested and detained overseas – told ITV News it is currently supporting 431 people around the globe who are facing drugs charges.

This includes 22 people in Thailand.

Source: https://www.itv.com/news/2025-06-24/thailand-to-ban-recreational-cannabis-three-years-after-decriminalisation

Filed under: Cannabis/Marijuana,Crime/Violence/Prison,Culture,Drug use-various effects,Legal Sector,Marijuana and Medicine,Others (International News),Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction :

from KFF Health News – Jul 8 2025

Inside a bright new building in the heart of Skid Row, homeless people hung out in a canopy-covered courtyard — some waiting to take a shower, do laundry, or get medication for addiction treatment. Others relaxed on shaded grass and charged their phones as an intake line for housing grew more crowded.

The Skid Row Care Campus officially opened this spring with ample offerings for people living on the streets of this historically downtrodden neighborhood. Pop-up fruit stands and tent encampments lined the sidewalks, as well as dealers peddling meth and fentanyl in open-air drug markets. Some people, sick or strung out, were passed out on sidewalks as pedestrians strolled by on a recent afternoon.

For those working toward sobriety, clinicians are on site to offer mental health and addiction treatment. Skid Row’s first methadone clinic is set to open here this year. For those not ready to quit drugs or alcohol, the campus provides clean syringes to more safely shoot up, glass pipes for smoking drugs, naloxone to prevent overdoses, and drug test strips to detect fentanyl contamination, among other supplies.

As many Americans have grown increasingly intolerant of street homelessness, cities and states have returned to tough-on-crime approaches that penalize people for living outside and for substance use disorders. But the Skid Row facility shows Los Angeles County leaders’ embrace of the principle of harm reduction, a range of more lenient strategies that can include helping people more safely use drugs, as they contend with a homeless population estimated around 75,000 — among the largest of any county in the nation. Evidence shows the approach can help individuals enter treatment, gain sobriety, and end their homelessness, while addiction experts and county health officials note it has the added benefit of improving public health.

“We get a really bad rap for this, but this is the safest way to use drugs,” said Darren Willett, director of the Center for Harm Reduction on the new Skid Row Care Campus. “It’s an overdose prevention strategy, and it prevents the spread of infectious disease.”

Despite a decline in overdose deaths, drug and alcohol use continues to be the leading cause of death among homeless people in the county. Living on the streets or in sordid encampments, homeless people saddle the health care system with high costs from uncompensated care, emergency room trips, inpatient hospitalizations, and, for many of them, their deaths. Harm reduction, its advocates say, allows homeless people the opportunity to obtain jobs, taxpayer-subsidized housing, health care, and other social services without being forced to give up drugs. Yet it’s hotly debated.

Politicians around the country, including Gov. Gavin Newsom in California, are reluctant to adopt harm reduction techniques, such as needle exchanges or supervised places to use drugs, in part because they can be seen by the public as condoning illicit behavior. Although Democrats are more supportive than Republicans, a national poll this year found lukewarm support across the political spectrum for such interventions.

Los Angeles is defying President Donald Trump’s agenda as he advocates for forced mental health and addiction treatment for homeless people — and locking up those who refuse. The city has also been the scene of large protests against Trump’s immigration crackdown, which the president has fought by deploying National Guard troops and Marines.

Trump’s most detailed remarks on homelessness and substance use disorder came during his campaign, when he attacked people who use drugs as criminals and said that homeless people “have no right to turn every park and sidewalk into a place for them to squat and do drugs.” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reinforced Trump’s focus on treatment.

“Secretary Kennedy stands with President Trump in prioritizing recovery-focused solutions to address addiction and homelessness,” said agency spokesperson Vianca Rodriguez Feliciano. “HHS remains focused on helping individuals recover, communities heal, and help make our cities clean, safe, and healthy once again.”

A comprehensive report led by Margot Kushel, a professor of medicine at the University of California-San Francisco, this year found that nearly half of California’s homeless population had a complex behavioral health need, defined as regular drug use, heavy drinking, hallucinations, or a recent psychiatric hospitalization.

The chaos of living outside, she said — marked by violence, sexual assault, sleeplessness, and lack of housing and health care — can make it nearly impossible to get sober.

Skid row care campus