Latest News

Daniel Hall   – -BBN Times – 24/08/2025

Outdated views of addiction hurt patients. Dr. Roger Starner Jones, Jr. and others are working to change that.

Despite decades of medical research, public awareness campaigns, and growing national concern, many people still see addiction through a distorted lens. “Addict” remains a pejorative label. Misconceptions persist that addiction is a choice, a character flaw, or the result of bad parenting. These outdated ideas don’t just misinform—they actively harm. They delay care, deepen stigma, and make recovery even more complicated to reach.

But addiction is not a moral failing. It is a complex brain disease, and understanding it as such is crucial to saving lives.

A Medical Diagnosis, Not a Personal Weakness

Addiction, clinically known as substance use disorder (SUD), alters brain chemistry in ways that impact decision-making, impulse control, and the experience of pleasure and reward. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), addiction is a chronic, relapsing disorder characterized by compulsive drug seeking, continued use despite harmful consequences, and long-lasting changes in the brain.

Yet societal attitudes lag behind the science. More than three-quarters of Americans surveyed believe that substance use disorder (SUD) is not a chronic medical illness, and more than half said they believe SUD is caused by bad character or lack of moral strength, according to findings from the 2024 Shatterproof Addiction Stigma Index Report. This belief system creates barriers to treatment by fueling shame, encouraging secrecy, and often leading families and employers to distance themselves rather than lean in with support.

The Real Risks of Misunderstanding

Misconceptions don’t just alienate people—they endanger them. Fear of judgment keeps many individuals from seeking help until their condition worsens. Delayed treatment can lead to job loss, relationship breakdowns, homelessness, overdose, and even death.

“Shame is one of the biggest enemies of recovery,” says Dr. Roger Starner Jones, Jr., a board-certified emergency and addiction medicine physician based in Nashville. “When patients think they’ll be judged instead of treated, they wait too long. They spiral. By the time they reach us, their situation is often much more severe than it needed to be.”

Dr. Jones has seen this pattern play out thousands of times. After a decade in emergency medicine, he pursued a fellowship in addiction medicine at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, driven by both clinical experience and personal history. Starner Jones’ father, who once faced 11 DUIs in seven years, found lasting sobriety after being committed to a state hospital and undergoing physician-led detox. That experience changed the course of both their lives—and led Dr. Jones to dedicate his career to compassionate, customized addiction care.

Rewriting the Narrative: Care That Meets Patients Where They Are

Through his practices—Nashville Addiction Recovery and Belle Meade AMP—Starner Jones delivers concierge-level, judgment-free care. His model includes in-home detox, private hotel suite treatment, and office-based services designed to remove as many barriers as possible between a patient and their recovery. His focus is on meeting patients where they are, not where the system dictates they should be.

“There’s no one-size-fits-all in addiction treatment,” Dr. Jones says. “Some people need a quiet, safe space to detox privately. Others need a highly structured plan for relapse prevention. What they don’t need is bureaucracy or blame.”

Starner Jones’s approach is part of a broader shift happening in the addiction medicine field. More physicians are advocating for low-threshold treatment models—services that reduce wait times, eliminate unnecessary paperwork, and avoid rigid abstinence requirements. According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), these models have been shown to increase engagement and retention in care, particularly among people with co-occurring mental health conditions.

While not a clinician in the traditional sense today, Dr. Gabor Maté is one of the most influential voices advocating for a trauma-informed approach to addiction. His book, In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts, explores how early childhood trauma, not moral weakness, underpins most substance use. He argues that addiction is not the problem itself, but rather a misguided attempt to solve internal pain. His philosophy underpins many treatment programs worldwide.

The Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation is one of the most established names in addiction treatment and has evolved to embrace an integrated model that combines medical detox, medication-assisted treatment (MAT), therapy, and mental health services. They openly reject the idea of addiction as a character flaw and emphasize long-term support and relapse prevention, rooted in compassion, not control.

Dispelling Common Myths

Several deeply ingrained myths continue to distort how addiction is viewed and treated. Let’s set the record straight:

  • Myth: Addiction is a choice.
    Reality: While the initial decision to use a substance may be voluntary, the progression to addiction is driven by changes in brain circuitry, not moral weakness.

  • Myth: You have to hit “rock bottom” to recover.
    Reality: Early intervention improves outcomes. Waiting for someone to “bottom out” can be fatal, especially in the era of fentanyl-laced street drugs.

  • Myth: Medication-assisted treatment is trading one addiction for another.
    Reality: FDA-approved medications like buprenorphine and methadone reduce cravings and withdrawal, allowing patients to stabilize their lives. They’re widely considered best practice in treating opioid use disorder.

  • Myth: Recovery is rare.
    Reality: Millions of Americans are living in recovery today. In the United States, 9.1%, or 22.35 million adults have reported resolving a substance use problem.

Compassion Is Evidence-Based

What ultimately works in addiction care isn’t punishment or shame—it’s connection. “When you treat addiction like the disease it is, you empower people to get better,” Dr. Starner Jones says. “You stop asking ‘What’s wrong with you?’ and start asking ‘What happened to you?’”

At Nashville Addiction Recovery, the ethos of compassion is baked into every interaction. From discreet intake to 24/7 physician supervision, the patient experience is defined by dignity and respect. Many of the patients Dr. Jones sees are high-profile professionals—athletes, musicians, executives—whose careers demand confidentiality. But the underlying need is universal: to be seen, respected, and supported through one of the most complex challenges a person can face.

A Call for Better Understanding

Changing how society views addiction won’t happen overnight, but it starts with how we talk about it. Swapping judgment for empathy, punishment for treatment, and generalizations for science can change not just conversations—but lives.

Source: https://www.bbntimes.com/science/what-most-people-get-wrong-about-addiction

Filed under: Addiction,Brain and Behaviour,Culture,Latest News,UK :

by Jan Hoffman – Published Aug. 25, 2025

Jan Hoffman is a health reporter for The New York Times covering drug addiction and health law.

San Francisco, Philadelphia and others are retreating from “harm reduction” strategies that have helped reduce deaths but which critics, including Trump, say have contributed to pervasive public drug use.

Safe drug-consumption materials distributed in the Tenderloin district of San Francisco, including naloxone, pipes and plastic straws.Credit…Mike Kai Chen for The New York Times

As fentanyl propelled overdose deaths to ever more alarming numbers several years ago, public health officials throughout the United States stepped up a blunt, pragmatic response. Desperate to save lives, they tried making drug use safer.

To prevent life-threatening infections, more states authorized needle exchanges, where drug users could get sterile syringes as well as alcohol wipes, rubber ties and cookers. Dipsticks that test drugs for fentanyl were distributed to college campuses and music festivals. Millions of overdose reversal nasal sprays went to homeless encampments, schools, libraries and businesses. And in 2021, for the first time, the federal government dedicated funds to many of the tactics, collectively known as harm reduction.

The strategy helped. By mid-2023, overdose deaths began dropping. Last year, there were an estimated 80,391 drug overdose deaths in the United States, down from 110,037 in 2023, according to provisional data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Now, across the country, states and communities are turning away from harm reduction strategies.

Last month, President Trump, vowing to end “crime and disorder on America’s streets,” issued a far-flung executive order that included a blast at harm reduction programs which, he said, “only facilitate illegal drug use and its attendant harm.”

But his words, implicitly linking harm reduction to unsafe streets, echoed a sentiment that had already been building in many places, including some of the country’s most liberal cities.

San Francisco’s new mayor, Daniel Lurie, a Democrat who campaigned on a pledge to tackle addiction and street chaos, announced this spring that the city would step away from harm reduction as its drug policy and instead embrace “recovery first,” aspiring to get more people into treatment and long-term recovery. He banned city-funded distribution of safe-use smoking supplies such as pipes and foil in public places like parks. A year earlier, San Francisco voters had signaled their restiveness with pervasive drug use by approving a measure stipulating that some recipients of public assistance who repeatedly refused drug treatment could lose cash benefits.

Philadelphia stopped funding syringe services programs, which the C.D.C. has called “proven and effective” in protecting the public and first-responders as well as drug users. The city put restrictions on mobile medical teams that distribute overdose reversal kits and provide wound care for people who inject drugs, and stepped up police sweeps in Kensington, a neighborhood long known for its open-air drug markets and a focal point of the city’s harm reduction efforts.

Santa Ana, Calif., shut down its syringe exchanges; Pueblo, Colo., tried to do the same but a judge blocked enforcement of the ordinance.

Mayor Daniel Lurie of San Francisco, center, often walks through the Tenderloin district, where people experiencing addiction, mental illness and homelessness gather.Credit…Mike Kai Chen for The New York Times

Republican-dominated states have also been retreating from the approaches. In 2021, West Virginia legislators said that needle exchange programs had to limit distribution to one sterile syringe for each used one turned in and could only serve clients with state IDs. Last year, Nebraska lawmakers voted against permitting local governments to establish exchanges.

“Harm reduction” is a decades-old concept, grounded in the reality that many people cannot or will not stop using drugs. Since the 1980s, when AIDS activists began distributing sterile syringes to drug users to slow the spread of diseases, the expression has moved to the mainstream of addiction medicine and public health.

Over time, it has become shorthand for a wide range of approaches. Some are broadly popular and will certainly continue. In April, the White House’s office of drug control policy released priorities reaffirming support for drug test strips and naloxone, the overdose reversal medication that has become an essential item in first-aid kits in homes, restaurants and school nurse offices.

But critics contend that making drug use safer, with distribution of supplies and pamphlets directing how to use them, normalizes drug use and undercuts people’s motivation to quit and seek abstinence.

“The more you’re sort of funding and feeding the addiction, you’re going to get more addiction,” Art Kleinschmidt, now the head of the federal agency that oversees grants for substance abuse, said on a podcast last year. Such programs, he said, “definitely are breeding dependency.”

Others argue for nuance.

“Harm reduction is neither the singular solution to the overdose crisis nor a primary cause of public drug use and disorder,” said Dr. Aaron Fox, president of the New York Society of Addiction Medicine. “It’s one component of a spectrum of services necessary to prevent overdose deaths and improve the health of people who use drugs. But if communities want long-term solutions to homelessness, they need to work on expanding access to housing.”

Harm reduction supporters reject the notion that protecting people from the worst consequences of drugs encourages use.

“I don’t think the availability of sterile supplies really makes a difference about whether someone is going to start or continue using drugs,” said Chelsea L. Shover, an epidemiologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, who oversees Drug Checking Los Angeles, which tests the contents of drugs for individuals and public health agencies. “But I do think it will make a difference in terms of whether that person is going to be alive in a week or a month or a year, during which time they might get into recovery, whatever that may mean for them.”

Some addiction experts fear that a retreat from harm reduction will reverse the falloff in deaths from injection-related diseases.

“Hepatitis C and H.I.V. numbers will go up, and more people are going to die,” said Dr. Kelly Ramsey, a harm reduction consultant who practices addiction medicine at a South Bronx clinic.

While overdose deaths have fallen, it is unclear whether drug use itself has also slowed. In neighborhoods across the country, from Portland, Maine, to Portland, Ore., many residents complain that the harm to them from drug use, including crime and syringe street litter, has not been reduced.

Mr. Trump particularly called out a type of harm reduction known as “safe consumption sites” — sometimes labeled “overdose prevention centers.” They are supervised locations where people can inject drugs without fatally overdosing, found in Europe, Canada and Mexico. Often drug users can test their supplies right away and staff members can quickly administer overdose reversal medication if needed.

There are only three in the United States, and they make for easy political targets. In addition to many Republicans, prominent Democratic governors, including Gavin Newsom of California, Kathy Hochul of New York and Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, oppose them. The Pennsylvania senate voted to ban them. One, in Rhode Island, is protected by state and local law. But the other two, in New York City, which provide treatment referrals and support services, operate in a legal gray zone and could face federal scrutiny.

Opponents of harm reduction offer few specifics about how to get more people to stop using drugs and into treatment. Mr. Trump’s order directs the health secretary and the attorney general to explore laws to civilly commit addicted people who cannot care for themselves into residential treatment “or other appropriate facilities.” But it is silent about how such programs would be paid for.

The administration has already made major cuts to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the federal agency that awards grants for prevention, treatment and recovery. It has slashed the agency’s staff and the grants it gives for a wide variety of prevention, intervention and treatment services.

Cuts to Medicaid included in the sweeping domestic policy bill enacted this summer are also likely to affect many people’s access to treatment and states’ ability to cover it. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the health secretary, who is in recovery from a substance use disorder, has focused on nutrition, chronic disease and vaccines during his first six months in office and has said little about plans to address the drug crisis.

The battle over whether harm reduction should remain a primary goal or be secondary to getting users into treatment and restoring order to public streets has been joined most intensively in San Francisco.

There, ample social services and ferociously expensive housing had contributed to a large population living on the streets, many struggling with mental illness and addiction. Then, by 2020, fentanyl and Covid had slammed into the city.

At public meetings this spring, angry residents brandished signs, some reading “Harm Reduction Saves Lives” and others “Drug Enablism Kills.”

Although the city has adhered to regulations for state-funded Housing First programs, which offer permanent housing for homeless people without requiring them to be drug-free, Mr. Lurie recently presided over the opening of the city’s first transitional sober living residence, with 54 units for adults committed to abstinence.

The drive to adjust the city’s drug policy to recovery first has been led by Matt Dorsey, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, who is in recovery from a substance use disorder.

In an interview, Mr. Dorsey said he supports aspects of harm reduction, including the distribution of safe supplies. But he sees the strategy as more of a floor than a ceiling. “We need to make clear that the objective of our drug policy is a healthy, self-directed life free of illicit drug use,” he said.

The difficult challenge, he said, was how to attend to the rights of pedestrians who daily confront drug use, while also trying to “help people addicted to life-threatening drugs.”

To pay for additional treatment and services, he said, city officials are working on ballot measures to redirect tax revenue.

“Part of what gives me confidence that we will ultimately find the funding,” Mr. Dorsey added, “is that the alternative is unthinkable.”

 

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/25/health/harm-reduction-san-francisco-trump.html

Filed under: Drug use-various effects,Harm Reduction,Latest News,Prevalence,Social Affairs,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

By Jennie Taer – New York Post – Published Aug. 28, 2025, 6:00 a.m. ET

The US is “behind the curve” on fighting a deadly new synthetic narcotic that’s dramatically more lethal than fentanyl and resistant to Narcan, a top DEA agent warns.

Just as authorities in the US and China increase efforts to tackle the scourge of fentanyl, the drug manufacturers, who are motivated by “greed,” shifted to start producing nitazenes — an even deadlier poison, said Drug Enforcement Administration Houston Division Special Agent in Charge Jonathan C. Pullen.

The Trump administration has hit Mexico and China with sanctions and tariffs to force the foreign governments to act against illicit drug producers responsible for the poisonings of thousands of Americans each year.

Nitazenes and other synthetic drugs are often disguised to look like prescription pills.Getty Images
Additionally, with President Trump’s effort to close the southern border, the feds have seen a significant drop in the flow of illicit fentanyl into the US.

But the Chinese pharma companies and cartels have already moved to introduce a new and stronger drug that many authorities are just now learning about, Pullen said.

“And if we get into a place where then we are able to issue controls or China issues more controls on the precursor chemicals that go to these, they’ll just change the analog and it’ll go to another precursor chemical. China’s already done that,” he added.

Nitazenes are produced in China, often with the help of Mexican cartels that finish the product and move it north across the border, according to Pullen.

The potent narcotic can be up to 43 times stronger than fentanyl depending on the formula, according to the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission.

Nitazenes are not included in routine drug tests or toxicology screenings, making them all the more challenging to detect.

While the feds are “making headway” to tackle the new threat, there’s still more work to be done, said Pullen.

“So it’s very very difficult to stay ahead of it, so we’ve got to continue to step up our enforcement along the border,” he said.

“I think that the number of overdose deaths being reduced in the United States is a testament to that. The enforcement is not the only reason its reduced. Naloxone [aka Narcan] is a huge piece too, but we’re definitely making some headway and we’re gonna keep pushing on that.”

There were 80,000 overdose deaths in the US in 2024 — a 27% drop from the 110,000 deaths estimated in 2023, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

While the wider use of Narcan has contributed to the drop in overdose deaths, nitazenes is often resistant to the drug antidote — adding a terrifying new pitfall, Pullen warned.

“It’s incredibly deadly and normal treatment methods like naloxone … don’t work as well on nitazenes because it’s so much stronger,” said Pullen.

“It’s really hard to overcome if you’ve taken one.”

In the Houston-area, there were 15 deaths related to nitazenes and 11 seizures of the drug between November and February, according to the DEA.

Two of the victims were best friends Lucci Reyes-McCallister, 22, and Hunter Clement, 21, who ingested pills marketed as Xanax and Percocet that actually contained N-pyrrolidino protonitazene, a form of nitazenes that is 25 times stronger than fentanyl.

An illustration that highlights the U.S. cities with the highest rates of nitazene-related overdoses.Jared Larson / NY Post Design

And their mothers are warning America’s youth in the hopes of saving lives.

“They could think something is clean or rather safe when it’s actually pressed for something that’s 20 to 40 times stronger, more deadly than fentanyl,” Lucci’s mother Grey recently told The Post.

“It just really lit a fire under me. There was no way Lucci was going to die in vain,” she added.

The drug was developed 60 years ago as a possible alternative to morphine, but was outlawed for medical use over its high overdose risk.

Authorities in Europe have already seen several overdoses from the synthetic narcotic. It was first detected in the US in 2019.

Last January, a Florida man confessed to distributing protonitazene that he received in mailed shipments from China, according to the IRS.

Customs officers at Kennedy are also seeing the drug coming through the airport “at least a few times a week in quantities ranging from just a few grams to upwards of a pound or more,” Andrew Renna, assistant port director for cargo operations at the airport, said in May.

Source: https://nypost.com/2025/08/28/us-news/america-not-ready-to-combat-nitazene-synthetic-opioids-dea-agent/

Filed under: Addiction,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Opioids,Synthetics,USA :

Marijuana is one of the most widely used drugs globally. Rising legalization has fueled greater social acceptance and lowered perceptions of risk even as research continues to highlight its harms. A recent study published in Pediatric Research reviewed years of evidence from both animal models and human studies, examining how marijuana impacts pregnant women and their babies.

How marijuana affects the body during pregnancy

One of the critical human body systems is the Endocannabinoid System (ECS), which helps regulate memory, appetite, emotions, and even fetal development. During pregnancy, the ECS is especially active, influencing hormonal signaling, fetus brain development, and placental development.

When marijuana is used, cannabinoids such as THC enter and interfere with the ECS, disrupting its natural processes. Because THC is lipophilic, meaning it binds strongly to fat, THC crosses into fatty tissues and can be stored there for weeks. This is especially concerning during pregnancy because the membrane of the placenta, which is the critical organ that supplies the developing baby with nutrients and oxygen, is mostly made of fatty molecules enabling THC to enter with ease. About one-third of the THC in the mother’s body reaches the fetus and once there, it can accumulate in the developing brain and other fatty tissues. Animal studies show that even after marijuana use stops, the developing fetus continues to be exposed to THC, potentially altering how organs and systems grow.

Long term effects extend beyond infancy

Research finds that marijuana use during pregnancy is associated with:

Fetal growth problems: Babies exposed to marijuana in the womb are more likely to be born small for their gestational age, be admitted to the NICU, and face a 75% increased risk of low birth weight. Even short-term exposure during early pregnancy can impact fetal growth.
Developmental delays: Long-term studies show that marijuana-exposed children may struggle with memory, attention, problem-solving, and emotional regulation.
Higher risk of metabolic and heart problems: Prenatal marijuana exposure may change how the body processes insulin and stores fat which could increase the risk of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease later in life.
Increased vulnerability to addiction: Prenatal marijuana exposure changes the brain pathways involved in reward and impulse control which may increase the risk of substance use and mental health challenges during adolescence and adulthood.
 

In some studies, girls’ exposure to marijuana in the womb showed more behavioral problems including aggression and attention issues, as early as 18 months of age.

With the marijuana industry falsely promoting products as “natural” and safe remedies for various health conditions, it is critical that women of childbearing age understand that marijuana use is not risk-free. Research consistently shows that marijuana can affect fetal development, leading to long-lasting consequences for a child’s physical and mental health.

For science-based resources on marijuana use during pregnancy, as well as tools for parents and fathers, click here to visit our dedicated webpage on this topic. If you are in Florida, our grant program allows us to provide and distribute these resources to you free of charge. Complete this request form to access materials ranging from Go-to-Guides to Fast Facts for Fathers.

Prevention starts with education, and staying informed can help protect future generations.

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

Filed under: Cannabis/Marijuana,Drug use-various effects on foetus, babies, children and youth,Education,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,USA :
by Kyoto University –
A new non-opioid pain reliever developed in Japan shows early success in clinical trials, offering hope for safer pain management. If effective, it could help curb the opioid crisis by providing a powerful alternative. Credit: Stock

The discovery of a new painkiller offers relief with fewer side effects.

Morphine and other opioids are commonly used in medicine because of their strong ability to relieve pain. Yet, they also pose significant risks, including respiratory depression and drug dependence. To limit these dangers, Japan enforces strict rules that allow only specially authorized physicians to prescribe such medications.

In contrast, the United States saw widespread prescribing of the opioid OxyContin, which fueled a rise in the misuse of synthetic opioids like fentanyl. By 2023, deaths from opioid overdoses had exceeded 80,000, marking the escalation of a nationwide public health emergency now known as the “opioid crisis.”

A new analgesic approach

Opioids may soon face competition. Researchers at Kyoto University have identified a new analgesic, named ADRIANA, that provides pain relief through a completely different biological pathway. The drug is now moving through clinical development as part of an international research collaboration.

“If successfully commercialized, ADRIANA would offer a new pain management option that does not rely on opioids, contributing significantly to the reduction of opioid use in clinical settings,” says corresponding author Masatoshi Hagiwara, a specially-appointed professor at Kyoto University.

Targeting adrenoceptors for safer pain relief

The researchers drew their initial inspiration from compounds that imitate noradrenaline, a chemical released during life-threatening situations that activates α2A-adrenoceptors to reduce pain. While effective, these compounds carry a high risk of destabilizing cardiovascular function. By examining the relationship between noradrenaline levels and α2B-adrenoceptors, the team proposed that selectively blocking α2B-adrenoceptors could increase noradrenaline activity, stimulate α2A-adrenoceptors, and provide pain relief without triggering cardiovascular instability.

To test this idea, the scientists used a specialized method called the TGFα shedding assay, which allowed them to measure the function of different α2-adrenoceptor subtypes. Through compound screening, they succeeded in identifying the world’s first selective α2B-adrenoceptor antagonist.

Promising clinical results and future trials

After success in administering the compound to mice and conducting non-clinical studies to assess its safety, physician-led clinical trials were conducted at Kyoto University Hospital. Both the Phase I trial in healthy volunteers and the Phase II trial in patients with postoperative pain following lung cancer surgery yielded highly promising results.

Building on these outcomes, preparations are now underway for a large-scale Phase II clinical trial in the United States, in collaboration with BTB Therapeutics, Inc, a Kyoto University-originated venture company.

As Japan’s first non-opioid analgesic, ADRIANA has the potential not only to relieve severe pain for patients worldwide but could also play a meaningful role in addressing the opioid crisis — a pressing social issue in the United States — and thus contribute to international public health efforts.

“We aim to evaluate the analgesic effects of ADRIANA across various types of pain and ultimately make this treatment accessible to a broader population of patients suffering from chronic pain,” says Hagiwara.

Source: https://scitechdaily.com/the-end-of-opioids-new-drug-could-change-the-way-we-treat-severe-pain/

Filed under: Addiction,Latest News,Opioids,Others (International News) :

Although I’ve been deeply concerned about this problem since my days in Sacramento, over the past nearly 8 years, I’ve focused mainly on education, on prevention, and on the need to change attitudes.

NANCY REAGAN
Remarks at the White House Conference for a Drug Free America Washington, D.C. 02/29/1988

The White House

People finally are facing up to drug abuse. They’re banding together, and they’re making real progress. And I just want to say a heartfelt ‘thank you’ to all those people out there who are working so hard to get drug abuse under control.

NANCY REAGAN
Radio Address to the Nation on Federal Drug Policy 10/02/1982

As First Lady, Nancy Reagan focused on fighting drug and alcohol abuse among youth. She expanded the drug awareness campaign to the international level when she invited First Ladies from around the world to the First Lady Conference on Drug Abuse April 24-25, 1985.

“Just Say No”

Thank you for being part of the first international ‘Just Say No’ walk. Look around at how many young people are walking with you today. And just think, there are groups as big as yours, or even bigger, doing the same thing all over the world! Can you imagine just how many children are saying ‘Just Say No’ today? Children everywhere are learning about drug abuse at an early age. And that’s a good thing.

NANCY REAGAN
Remarks at the Just Say No International Walk 05/22/1986

First Lady Nancy Reagan urged the nation’s youth to “just say no.” She appeared on television talk shows, attended rallies and sporting events, taped public service announcements, and wrote guest articles.

 

Signings

This legislation allows us to do even more. Nevertheless, today marks a major victory in our crusade against drugs – a victory for safer neighborhoods, a victory for the protection of the American family.

President Ronald Reagan
Remarks on Signing the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 10/27/1986

The United Nations

In your deliberations, I urge you not to be diplomatic for the sake of diplomacy, but to speak the truth about the effects of drugs on our peoples and our governments. I urge you to be tough and firm in the recommendations you make.

Nancy Reagan
Remarks to the Third Committee of the United Nations General Assembly 10/25/1988

On October 21, 1985, during the United Nation’s 40th anniversary, Nancy Reagan hosted a second international drug conference.

On October 25, 1988, she addressed the Third Committee of the United Nations General Assembly where she spoke about the illegal use of drugs and its impact on families.

Nancy Reagan and the Fight Against Drug Abuse: United Nations: Textual Records

The picture below shows the various trips Nancy Regan made in promoting her campaign.

Source: https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/exhibits/virtual-exhibits/nancy-reagan-and-fight-against-drug-abuse

Filed under: Addiction,Culture,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Political Sector,Prevalence,Prevention and Intervention,USA,Youth :
by: Kelley King –  Miami Valley News – Posted:

DAYTON, Ohio (WDTN) — The Drug Enforcement Administration is launching a major campaign to combat drug abuse on college campuses.

Officials say it’s an effort to talk directly with students and raise awareness about the dangers of drugs.

“One pill can kill” is the message the Drug Enforcement Administration is pushing in a state that’s a victim of its own geography with the I-70/I-75 interchange.

“Ohio is kind of uniquely positioned. It’s great for commerce, but just like it’s great for commerce is great for drug traffickers as well,” says Brian McNeal.

Brian McNeal is the DEA’s Public Information Officer for the Detroit Division, covering Michigan, Ohio, and Northern Kentucky.

His visit to college campuses comes after a major bust in September where a large amount of drugs — including fentanyl — were seized after being brought into the region from China.

“It’s a demonstration that what happens in other parts of the world can have an impact here in Ohio,” states McNeal.

McNeal says a lot of times, you don’t know what’s in a synthetic opioid. Sometimes it’s filler — like aspirin or caffeine. But other times it’s methamphetamine or even a lethal dose of fentanyl.

McNeal says a big trend they’re seeing now are counterfeit pills, and they’re easier than ever to get.

“Gone are the days where you have to meet somebody in a weird part of town. You can just sit on your phone and order these pills,” states McNeal.

He says half of the counterfeit pills they’re seizing contain two milligrams of fentanyl, which is a deadly dose.

That’s why they’re bringing the campaign to campus to promote drug prevention and provide free resources, and in turn, decrease drug related deaths. 

“A lot of times, college students whether they’re on campus or off campus, there’s this misnomer that maybe if I pop a Percocet or an Adderall, it’ll help me study,” says McNeal. “The only pill that you should take is one prescribed by your doctor, obtained at a legitimate pharmacy, that has your name on it.”

The DEA says young adults ages 18 to 25 make up 11 percent of drug-related emergency room visits. 

Source: https://www.wdtn.com/news/local-news/dea-launches-campaign-on-campuses-warning-of-drug-dangers/

Filed under: Addiction,Drug use-various effects,Education,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,USA,Youth :
By Kyoto University –
 A new non-opioid pain reliever developed in Japan shows early success in clinical trials, offering hope for safer pain management.
If  effective, it could help curb the opioid crisis by providing a powerful alternative. Credit: Stock

The discovery of a new painkiller offers relief with fewer side effects.

Morphine and other opioids are commonly used in medicine because of their strong ability to relieve pain. Yet, they also pose significant risks, including respiratory depression and drug dependence. To limit these dangers, Japan enforces strict rules that allow only specially authorized physicians to prescribe such medications.

In contrast, the United States saw widespread prescribing of the opioid OxyContin, which fueled a rise in the misuse of synthetic opioids like fentanyl. By 2023, deaths from opioid overdoses had exceeded 80,000, marking the escalation of a nationwide public health emergency now known as the “opioid crisis.”

A new analgesic approach

Opioids may soon face competition. Researchers at Kyoto University have identified a new analgesic, named ADRIANA, that provides pain relief through a completely different biological pathway. The drug is now moving through clinical development as part of an international research collaboration.

“If successfully commercialized, ADRIANA would offer a new pain management option that does not rely on opioids, contributing significantly to the reduction of opioid use in clinical settings,” says corresponding author Masatoshi Hagiwara, a specially-appointed professor at Kyoto University.

Targeting adrenoceptors for safer pain relief

The researchers drew their initial inspiration from compounds that imitate noradrenaline, a chemical released during life-threatening situations that activates α2A-adrenoceptors to reduce pain. While effective, these compounds carry a high risk of destabilizing cardiovascular function. By examining the relationship between noradrenaline levels and α2B-adrenoceptors, the team proposed that selectively blocking α2B-adrenoceptors could increase noradrenaline activity, stimulate α2A-adrenoceptors, and provide pain relief without triggering cardiovascular instability.

  Mechanism of pain relief by ADRIANA. Credit: KyotoU / Hagiwara lab

To test this idea, the scientists used a specialized method called the TGFα shedding assay, which allowed them to measure the function of different α2-adrenoceptor subtypes. Through compound screening, they succeeded in identifying the world’s first selective α2B-adrenoceptor antagonist.

Promising clinical results and future trials

After success in administering the compound to mice and conducting non-clinical studies to assess its safety, physician-led clinical trials were conducted at Kyoto University Hospital. Both the Phase I trial in healthy volunteers and the Phase II trial in patients with postoperative pain following lung cancer surgery yielded highly promising results.

Building on these outcomes, preparations are now underway for a large-scale Phase II clinical trial in the United States, in collaboration with BTB Therapeutics, Inc, a Kyoto University-originated venture company.

As Japan’s first non-opioid analgesic, ADRIANA has the potential not only to relieve severe pain for patients worldwide but could also play a meaningful role in addressing the opioid crisis — a pressing social issue in the United States — and thus contribute to international public health efforts.

“We aim to evaluate the analgesic effects of ADRIANA across various types of pain and ultimately make this treatment accessible to a broader population of patients suffering from chronic pain,” says Hagiwara.

Reference: “Discovery and development of an oral analgesic targeting the α2B adrenoceptor” by Masayasu Toyomoto, Takashi Kurihara, Takayuki Nakagawa, Asuka Inoue, Ryo Kimura, Isao Kii, Teruo Sawada, Takashi Ogihara, Kazuki Nagayasu, Takayuki Kishi, Hiroshi Onogi, Dohyun Im, Hidetsugu Asada, So Iwata, Jumpei Taguchi, Yuto Sumida, Suguru Yoshida, Junken Aoki, Takamitsu Hosoya and Masatoshi Hagiwara, 7 August 2025, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2500006122

Funding: Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Japan Science and Technology Agency, Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development

Source:  https://scitechdaily.com/the-end-of-opioids-new-drug-could-change-the-way-we-treat-severe-pain/

Filed under: Brain and Behaviour,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Opioids,Others (International News),Treatment and Addiction :

by DAVID EVANS – 19 August 2025

There are established five schedules of controlled substances, to be known as schedules I, II, III, IV, and V.

(1) Schedule I–(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.(C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

(2) Schedule II–(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or a currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.(C) Abuse of the drug or other substances may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence.
(3) Schedule III–(A) The drug or other substance has a potential for abuse less than the drugs or other substances in schedules I and II.(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.(C) Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to moderate or low physical dependence or high psychological dependence.

(4) Schedule IV–(A) The drug or other substance has a low potential for abuse relative to the drugs or other substances in schedule III.(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.(C) Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to limited physical dependence or psychological dependence relative to the drugs or other substances in schedule III.
(5) Schedule V–(A) The drug or other substance has a low potential for abuse relative to the drugs or other substances in schedule IV.(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.(C) Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to limited physical dependence or psychological dependence relative to the drugs or other substances in schedule IV.

Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not legalize the drug, however, the change would greatly serve to benefit state legalized commercial marijuana companies who would no longer be subject to IRS Section 280E and thus could deduct business expenses and drastically increase their profit margins. This means more advertising and normalization. Not only would this mean that marijuana corporations would be able to deduct expenses for advertisements appealing to youth and the sale of kid-friendly marijuana gummies, but it would also dramatically increase the industry’s commercialization ability.

—
Source:  www.drugwatch.org  (drug-watch-international@googlegroups.com)

Filed under: Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Legal Sector,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

by UNODC – 20 August 2025

For over three decades, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has supported non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in low- and middle-income countries implement substance use prevention projects that benefit youth around the world. This support has been made possible through the ongoing contributions of the Drug Abuse Prevention Centre (DAPC) in Japan since 1994. The DAPC Grants Programme enables civil society organizations to initiate and scale up prevention activities for youth and with youth aligned with the UNODC/WHO International Standards on Drug Use Prevention. The grants also empower young people to take active roles in supporting the health and wellbeing of their peers.

Following the 2024 Call for Proposals, which attracted more than 500 applications (more than double the previous year’s submissions), UNODC selected four new DAPC grant recipients through a multi-phased competitive process. Grantees from Cambodia, Iraq, Sri Lanka, and Zimbabwe will soon begin implementing their projects to support youth through locally grounded prevention efforts.

The Youth Aspire Development Trust, based in Zimbabwe, will be implementing their SPARK (Substance Prevention and Awareness for Resilient Knowledgeable Communities) project.  The grantee will engage with schools and communities in the Chitungwiza region of Zimbabwe targeting students, teachers and parents. Teachers from local schools will receive training on classroom-based prevention strategies, early detection of risky behaviours, and ways to foster positive school climates. Students will also be selected as peer leaders and be equipped with life skills, refusal techniques, and resilience training to lead cascade sessions and positively influence other peers. Complementing these efforts, the grantee will also engage parents to strengthen their role in creating protective home environments for their family. And finally, to expand the reach of the programme, trained teachers and parents will conduct cascade trainings within schools and communities.

The Alcohol and Drug Information Centre (ADIC) in Sri Lanka will implement the project “Peer Power: Youth-Driven Substance Use Prevention and Resilience Building” in Colombo. Youth facilitators will be trained to mentor younger peer leaders, who will deliver interactive, skills-based workshops in local communities and schools with the support of ADIC’s resource persons. The project includes a baseline survey, capacity building for youth, creation of a tailored action plan, peer-to-peer education sessions, community and family engagement activities, and social media campaigns developed by youth. By combining in-person outreach with digital platforms, the project aims to enhance youth resilience and decision-making, empower and educate youth leaders, and strengthen community support for such initiatives.

In Cambodia, the grantee Mith Samlanh will implement its “Peer Prevention: A Youth-Driven Project Against Drugs” project by combining national and community-level initiatives. A national multimedia campaign, developed together with youth, will raise awareness about the risks of drug use through videos and prevention messages, reaching young people across social media platforms. In parallel, in-person awareness sessions will engage directly with communities in vulnerable areas of Phnom Penh, helping to bridge the digital divide and reach those who may not be active online. The grantee will also develop and integrate a Drug Prevention module into Mith Samlanh’s existing soft skills training for at-risk individuals, using evidence-informed methods to build resilience and enhance life skills. Additionally, a cascade Training of Trainers modality will strengthen local capacity by preparing teachers, social workers, youth champions, and local authorities to deliver prevention messaging and trainings to support youth and families across Phnom Penh.

In Iraq, the Bestan Child Society (Bustan Association) will implement the “Building Community Power to Prevent Youth Drug Use” project. The grantee will engage with community influencers such as teachers, sports coaches, youth leaders, and journalists to strengthen the local prevention capacity. Trained as prevention champions, they will integrate drug awareness and life skills into sports, arts, and peer-led activities that will be conducted in the target communities. Youth will also take part as informal peer educators through the 3S Initiative (Sport–Smile–Sleep), which will promote resilience and healthy lifestyles in young people.  Also, youth co-created awareness materials will further extend the project’s reach through social media and community events.

UNODC is pleased to support these four new diverse projects under the DAPC Grants Programme. Each initiative reflects a strong commitment to prevention aligned with the Standards, youth engagement, and community-level action — key elements in building healthier lifestyles and safer environments for young people to grow and thrive in. For more information about the DAPC grants projects and the programme, please visit the Youth Initiative website and stay up to date through the UNODC PTRS social media channels  (X, LinkedIn, Facebook).

Source:  https://www.unodc.org/unodc/prevention/youth-initiative/youth-action/2025/August/introducing-new-dapc-grant-funded-projects.html

Filed under: All countries,Crime/Violence/Prison,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,Youth :

Issued by U.S. Customs and Border Protection  – Thu, 08/21/2025

NEW YORK — U.S. Customs and Border Protection Deputy Commissioner John Modlin delivered remarks at a National Fentanyl Prevention and Awareness Day event today in Times Square.

The annual event, hosted by the nonprofit Facing Fentanyl, brings together impacted families and federal, state, and local law enforcement to draw national attention to the synthetic opioid epidemic.

“On behalf of the more than 65,000 fathers and mothers, and sons and daughters, who are also agents, officers and professional staff of CBP, we mourn with those who have lost a loved one to fentanyl poisoning,” said Deputy Commissioner Modlin. “Every hour of every day of the year, CBP is enforcing the law, across the land, in the air, and on the sea. Fentanyl is not just a public health threat – it’s a weapon. Any group that tries to poison Americans will face U.S. law enforcement and national security authorities.”

CBP supports the nation’s fight against fentanyl by prioritizing counter-fentanyl efforts across all operational environments. This includes stopping the ingredients, equipment, and the drug itself from entering or moving through the U.S. CBP has significantly increased its efforts to find and seize fentanyl at border crossings and checkpoints, using a variety of methods, such as officers’ instincts, drug-sniffing dogs, advanced scanning technology, artificial intelligence, and intelligence gathering to target and stop smugglers.

CBP’s approach to combatting fentanyl has grown to also include taking down the criminal groups that ship fentanyl, its ingredients, and pill-making equipment into the U.S. By working closely with law enforcement agencies both within the U.S. and in other countries, CBP helps investigate the larger criminal organizations, not just the individuals caught smuggling drugs at the border.

Fentanyl is a very dangerous drug that CBP first encountered in its final form around 2013-2014. Even a very small amount can be deadly. It’s cheap and easy to make, and there’s a high demand for it. Just one kilogram (about 2.2 pounds) of fentanyl already mixed into pills makes just over 9,000 pills. In contrast, one kilogram of fentanyl powder can make roughly 80,000 pills.

National Fentanyl Prevention and Awareness Day serves as a vital platform to highlight the devastating impact of synthetic opioids and the ongoing efforts to combat this epidemic. CBP’s participation underscores its unwavering commitment to protecting American communities and saving lives.

For more information on National Fentanyl Prevention and Awareness Day, visit DEA Fentanyl Awareness.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is America’s frontline: the nation’s largest law enforcement organization and the world’s first unified border management agency. The 65,000+ men and women of CBP protect America on the ground, in the air, and on the seas. We enforce safe, lawful travel and trade and ensure our country’s economic prosperity. We enhance the nation’s security through innovation, intelligence, collaboration, and trust.

Source:  https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-observes-national-fentanyl-prevention-and-awareness-day

Filed under: Culture,Drug use-various effects,Fentanyl,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

 

Social media often gets a bad reputation when it comes to how much time children and teens spend glued to their phones – but there are lots of ways that social media can be a tool for good in the hands of a teen.
The Ups and Downs of Teens and Social Media

Social media issues for teenagers can be rife, and most parents are aware of the dangers. Cyber-bulling is a real problem, and studies show that too much time spent on social media can lead to feelings of low self-esteem and depression amongst teens who compare themselves to unrealistic ideals they see online.

While these are serious concerns, as a foster carer, you can make social media a positive experience for your foster teen by helping them to be aware of the risks and empowering them to take advantage of the benefits. You can also help your teen to limit the negative consequences by encouraging them to enjoy social media in moderation. Teens need time to enjoy life offline – exercise and face-to-face socialisation are both important for their growing brains and bodies.

In fact, a 2019 study found a strong link between the negative effects of social media and a lack of exercise brought about by too much time spent online. That means balancing time on devices with plenty of physical activity can help mitigate some of social media’s more harmful effects.

How to Encourage Healthy Social Media Habits for Teens?

Empower your teen to use social media safely

Talk about what is safe to share online and what isn’t, and make sure your foster teen knows what to watch out for to avoid online predators, scammers, and cyberbullies. Teach them to recognise false information and to think critically about what they read and see online.

Help them understand the risks to their mental health and self-image and decide together how to deal with these feelings if they come up. Make sure they know how to change their privacy settings on different platforms.

Looking for more guidance on internet safety? The UK Safer Internet Centre has a host of resources for teens from 11-19.

Encourage self-expression

Not only can social media be a great way for teens to explore new things like art, culture, and history, it’s also a versatile tool for self-expression. Many creative teens use social media to showcase their own art and performances, while others use it as a platform for building a unique personal brand through what they share and how they engage with online communities.

Using social media in this way can teach a teen digital skills and build an online presence that will put them in a good position for future education and job prospects. You can help your teen build their digital skills through online and in-person courses, such as photo/video editing and content creation. Check out BT’s Skills for Tomorrow portal for a host of free family resources.

Keep connected

For foster children, social media can be a useful way to keep in touch with old friends and family members and build important connections for the future. It also helps many teens strengthen friendships and build communities around shared experiences and interests – particularly when it’s not possible to see one another in person (like when schools are closed, or across long distances).

Being a teen can be lonely if you feel like you don’t fit in, but you can always find someone who’s interested in the same things you are online – whether that’s someone who loves the same band you do or someone from a similar cultural background.

Inspire your foster teen to do good

With the world more connected through social media, teens today have access to a lot more information on global issues – and many more ways to have an impact. Consider 17-year-old Greta Thunberg; in two years, she’s been able to reach a global audience with her message of fighting climate change and now has an Instagram following of over 10 million.

Help your teen find an issue that they care about and encourage them to get involved and have a positive impact, such as promoting community initiatives and organisations.

Be involved

Model healthy social media use by not looking at your phone during meals or family activities, and limit screen time close to bedtime.

Follow your foster teen on social media and make time to chat with them – in person and in a non-judgemental way – about what they and their friends are posting and seeing online. Share interesting and educational feeds with them and keep communication open so your teen knows they can talk to you if they see or experience anything upsetting online.

Teenagers can be truly inspiring with the passion and energy they bring, but many teens suffer without a safe space to grow up. If you have the room to give a young person a stable and supportive home, get in touch today. You can also read our article about fostering teenagers here.

Source:  https://www.compassfostering.com/advice/teenagers-and-social-media

 

Filed under: Culture,Latest News,Social Media,USA,Youth :

by Kevin Sabet  August 22, 2025 

In 2018, 27-year-old Bryn Spejcher, an inexperienced marijuana smoker in California, killed her boyfriend Chad O’Melia by stabbing him 108 times, a crime the local district attorney described as “horrific” and “one of the worst our medical examiner has ever seen.” A jury found Spejcher guilty of involuntary manslaughter, but she received only probation at sentencing because of a compelling presentation of her defense of cannabis-induced psychosis. Prior to the violent incident, Spejcher had taken two hits of legal marijuana from a bong, and claimed that she began “seeing things that weren’t there” and lost touch with reality. She also stabbed herself repeatedly in the neck, and stabbed her own dog. Law enforcement agents called to the scene had to break her arm with a metal baton to get her to let go of the knife; multiple Taserings had no effect. 

Cases like Spejcher’s illustrate the stakes involved in the federal reclassification of marijuana. If President Trump follows through with such a move, the drug would remain illegal on the federal level, but would receive an imprimatur of being safer and face fewer restrictions, with significant commercial and social implications.  

Yet voices across public discourse persist in asking: why should anyone care if President Trump does just that? 

Celebrities like Mike Tyson and Joe Rogan and hedge-fund bosses like Andrew Lahde tell us that marijuana is no big deal. Numerous states have already legalized it for medical and recreational usage, and they claim to be regulating it well. If we are to believe the advocates, marijuana is a miracle cure for PTSD, anxiety, depression, and bipolar disorder — not to mention an unbeatable salve for the pain suffered by cancer patients.

So what sense does it make for this drug to sit in the same federal category as PCP and heroin? Isn’t marijuana’s placement in Schedule I, the most serious category, merely a relic of discredited thinking from the bad old days of the War on Drugs? It isn’t. To understand why it isn’t, and why a Trump move to reclassify weed would risk unmitigated harm to American health and safety, it’s first important to clear up some common misunderstandings around how and why drugs end up classified as they do.  

Under the Controlled Substances Act of 1971, a five-part schedule was established for classification of potentially dangerous drugs. This schedule is emphatically not an index either of a drug’s “hardness” or a kind of unofficial charging and sentencing guide for prosecutors and judges. Placement is earned specifically through consideration of a drug’s accepted medical use and its abuse risk. Drugs with no accepted medical use and a high risk of abuse get placed in Schedule I.  

That’s the commonality between marijuana and heroin; under federal law, the relevant agencies necessarily view them that way.  

Neither has an accepted medical use, though both drugs have approved medicines derived from them that remain in lower schedules (the medicine dronabinol, for example, is synthesized THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, and is in Schedule III). Both have high risks of abuse. The argument that one is a “hard” drug and the other is not  — which is debatable, especially given today’s ultra-high-potency weed — simply doesn’t come into play.  

Nor does the criminal-justice question. Keeping marijuana in Schedule I isn’t, as critics have it, a carceral strategy; conversely, moving it into Schedule III isn’t a de-carceral one. Under a move to Schedule III, the drug would remain federally illegal, still subject to the enforcement power of the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Department of Justice. No low-level offender would see his sentence commuted. This is sort of beside the point anyway, since most low-level marijuana users never receive a sentence for anything. 

But how can it be, another objection runs, that the drug has no medical use? Most US states currently allow doctors to recommend it. 

That, again, is technically correct. But the decisions those states made to allow doctors (and in some cases, “designated caregivers”) to recommend marijuana to treat pain and other issues were political decisions, not medical or scientific ones. Voters stated a preference; that has no effect on how federal agencies are required by current law to view the question. The facts of just how those recommendations get handed out drive home that political aspect. In 2022, Pennsylvania saw some 132,000 medical-marijuana certifications, a third of the state’s total for that year, issued by only 17 doctors.

Those decisions, taken in the aggregate, don’t constitute an accepted medical use. Or at least, they didn’t until October 2022. That was the month the Biden administration directed its Department of Health and Human Services to look into a possible reclassification of the drug.  

“This schedule is emphatically not an index either of a drug’s ‘hardness’ or a kind of unofficial charging and sentencing guide.”

Again, history is important here. Before the Biden process, the federal government had used an eight-factor test to determine how to schedule various drugs. Those factors focus on what the current and historical patterns of its abuse look like, as well as what that means for individual users, what risk it presents to public health, how likely it is to cause dependence (either physical or psychological), the state of the science around the drug and its pharmacology, and whether it’s a chemical precursor or “analogue” of another controlled substance.  

By these metrics, marijuana is precisely where it belongs in Schedule I. The best science shows that it isn’t an effective medical treatment. One of the most frequent conditions it’s used to treat is chronic pain. But the 2017 study cited to prove its efficacy there has seen dozens of subsequent meta-analyses and reviews fail to support its conclusions; a 2022 study of a decade’s worth of surgical records from a Cleveland hospital even found that using marijuana actually increases pain after surgery. 

The data also demonstrate that marijuana poses a significant risk of dependency: addiction rates are around 30% of all users and rising. Addiction in this case means exactly what it does for other substances: inability to quit, a need for ever more of the drug to achieve the same effect, and even withdrawal symptoms. Given the recent avalanche of data cataloguing marijuana’s harms specifically to cardiac and mental health — like a June British Medical Journal review  connecting it to a two-fold risk of cardiovascular death or the massive Danish study from 2023 suggesting that as much as 30% of schizophrenia cases among men between 21 and 30 were linked to cannabis-use disorder — its wider public-health risks are glaringly clear.  

The Biden administration supplanted the eight factors with a new system seemingly designed to push the drug into a less restrictive schedule. The Biden recommendation — likely a political compromise between the status quo and full legalization, timed just before Joe Biden’s re-election bid — also incorporated the shaky argument that because so many states have made political decisions to allow medical marijuana, that constitutes an accepted medical use.

An incisive article in JAMA Neurology, by the Harvard addiction scientist Bertha Madras, took a hard look at the process and found disturbing evidence of politicization. This included the fact that a high-ranking Biden DOJ official, Acting Assistant Attorney General Peter Hyun, argued that “cannabis has not been proven in scientific studies to be a safe and effective treatment for any disease or condition” — six months before the rescheduling directive appeared. Yet the science Hyun cites certainly had not changed in the interim.  

The federal government has long held the position Hyun laid out. Under the Obama administration, Jay Inslee and Gina Raimondo — then the governors of Washington and Rhode Island, respectively — petitioned the federal government to reclassify marijuana. The administration’s response made clear that federal drug schedules reflect what the science says, not “danger” or “severity.” Obama’s then-DEA chief, Chuck Rosenberg, announcing the denial of the petition, used language Hyun would later echo: “This decision isn’t based on danger. This decision is based on whether marijuana, as determined by the FDA, is a safe and effective medicine . . . and it’s not.”

Suggested reading

I have seen the damage cannabis does

By Peter Hurst

But let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that Trump reverses years of federal precedent to follow the logic of the rescheduling argument. What happens then? 

The truth: no one knows.  

It’s clear that the marijuana industry believes that rescheduling will be an enormous benefit to its shareholders. In one sense, that’s likely correct. Businesses selling substances in Schedule I face severe commercial restrictions under the tax code. A provision of the tax code prevents any such business from taking normal deductions at tax time on expenses like advertising. Lifting those restrictions seems sure to provide an enormous boost to revenues and reach for businesses selling marijuana products.

The impact on society is a different matter. The available evidence suggests that this will be a significant negative for society, especially given the research around how the young start using the drug: data published in June by researchers from the University of Southern California and Rutgers University show that exposure to marijuana social-media content plays a huge role in teens initiating use.  

But there are other externalities in play.  

If marijuana moves into Schedule III, it will be the only substance there without Food and Drug Administration approval. Will that play out in a similar way to the case of opium-poppy straw (i.e., the entirety of the plant, as it exists prior to the processes that turn it into heroin or opium)? Poppy straw is listed in Schedule II, but it also lacks an FDA approval — and it’s regularly seized by drug and border authorities, with a massive shipment grabbed up just in May. Though weed entrepreneurs clearly expect smooth sailing after a reclassification, they may well be in for a rough ride.

Then there’s the fact that substances listed in Schedule III face additional regulatory and enforcement power: Not only from the DEA and DOJ, but also from the FDA. There are strict rules around what sellers of Schedule III substances can and can’t say in advertisements. They’re forbidden from advertising off-label uses — and since marijuana lacks an FDA approval, all therapeutic uses are off-label. It’s easy to imagine another operator in the Schedule III space filing a lawsuit demanding precisely that kind of enforcement. 

In other words, rescheduling opens the door to regulatory chaos, even as it seems certain to add commercial firepower to an industry whose products, on the evidence, are extraordinarily harmful. How this combination will produce the benefits promised by proponents of rescheduling also remains unclear. 

The federal government shouldn’t signal to the American people that a drug that lacks medical or scientific imprimatur somehow possesses such approval. Others disagree — and vocally. They have a lot of money riding on it. But we should be crystal clear about what their preferred policy would  actually mean for American society — nothing good. 

Kevin Sabet, a former three-time White House senior drug-policy adviser, is president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana.

Source:  https://unherd.com/2025/08/the-illusion-of-safe-marijuana/?edition=us?

Filed under: Brain and Behaviour,Cannabis/Marijuana,Culture,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

by

  • Thomas Kennedy GreenfieldSenior Scientist, Alcohol Research Group, Public Health Institute
  • Libo LiPublic Health Institute, Alcohol Research Grouphttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7147-9838
  • Katherine J. Karriker-JaffeResearch Triangle Institutehttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2019-0222
  • Cat MunroePublic Health Institute, Alcohol Research Grouphttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6950-7200
  • Deidre PattersonPublic Health Institute, Alcohol Research Grouphttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6775-9682
  • Erica RosenCalifornia State University, Long Beachhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1343-7554
  • Yachen ZhuPublic Health Institute, Alcohol Research Grouphttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-8192-6168
  • William C. Kerr Centre Director, Scientific Director, Public Health Institute, Alcohol Research Grouphttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-6612-9200

August 22, 2025

This study from PHI’s Alcohol Research Group and RTI International evaluated the associations between a seven-item summative burden scale and different types of harms attributed to someone else’s use of alcohol, cannabis or other drugs.

There is a growing body of research on the second-hand harms from alcohol and drug use that points to the negative health impacts of substance use extend beyond the individual engaged in the behavior. The literature on alcohol-related harms has explored the connections between secondhand alcohol and drug harms (ADH) and their impact on quality of life, well-being and mental health issues among those affected, often including family members, but there hasn’t been any specific research done on the family burden related to alcohol and other drug harms until now.

This study from PHI’s Alcohol Research Group and independent scientific research institute RTI International evaluates the familial burden of the secondhand ADHs, investigating associations between a seven-item summative burden scale and different types of harms attributed to someone else’s use of alcohol, cannabis or other drugs. The findings reveal the need for family support interventions and policy remedies to mitigate these burdens.

You can view the study here:

Background: Family burden has not been studied in relation to alcohol and other drug harms from others. We adapted a family burden scale from studies of caring for those with mental health conditions for use in the US Alcohol and Drug Harm to Others Survey (ADHTOS). We investigated associations between a seven-item summative burden scale and different types of harms attributed to someone else’s use of alcohol, cannabis, or another drug: (a) being assaulted/physically harmed; (b) having family/partner problems; (c) feeling threatened or afraid; and (d) being emotionally hurt/neglected due to others’ substance use.

Methods: A survey of adults aged 18 years and over conducted between October 2023 and July 2024 (n = 8,311), involved address-based sampling (n = 3,931 including 193 mail-backs) and web panels (n = 4,380), oversampling Black (n = 951), Latinx (n = 790) and sexual or gender minority (SGM) respondents (n = 309). Data from seven items on types of burdens experienced from other people’s alcohol or drug use were provided by those harmed by someone else’s alcohol or drug use and were used to create a burden scale. Analyses used negative binomial regression on burden sum adjusting for covariates, such as age, gender, race and ethnicity, marital status and years of education.

Results: The single factor burden scale showed good internal consistency (α = .91). Components assessing being emotionally drained/exhausted and family friction/arguments were endorsed by 38–39% of participants; finding stigma of the other’s substance use upsetting was affirmed by 33%. Fewer endorsed feeling trapped in caregiving roles (22%), problems outside the family (26%), neglect of other family members’ needs (16%), and having to change plans (14%). In adjusted regression models, seven of eight harm exposures were significantly associated with burden scores.

Discussion: People reported substantial burden from others’ use of alcohol, cannabis, and other drugs. Family support interventions and policy remedies to mitigate these burdens are needed.

About RTI International

RTI International is an independent scientific research institute dedicated to improving the human condition. Our vision is to address the world’s most critical problems with technical and science-based solutions in pursuit of a better future. Clients rely on us to answer questions that demand an objective and multidisciplinary approach—one that integrates expertise across social, statistical, data, and laboratory sciences, engineering, and other technical disciplines to solve the world’s most challenging problems.

Originally published by International Journal of Alcohol and Drug Research

Source:  https://www.phi.org/thought-leadership/study-evaluating-family-burden-among-us-adults-experiencing-secondhand-harms-from-alcohol-cannabis-or-other-drug-use/

 

Filed under: Alcohol,Cannabis/Marijuana,Drug use-various effects,Harm Reduction,Latest News,Marijuana and Medicine,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

by: Clare Gehlich ABC8 News – Aug 10, 2025 

Drug prevention education expands in Charles City County

CHARLES CITY COUNTY, Va. (WRIC) — The Charles City County Elementary School will soon re-introduce a program focused on drug prevention and awareness for the 2025-26 academic year.

According to a release from the sheriff’s office, the program, DARE — Drug Abuse Resistance Education program — will come to the elementary school for the upcoming school year.

SRO Corporal Tramayne Mayo, who developed a curriculum to teach the program, reportedly attended a two-week training course as required by DARE to instruct.

“We are excited to get this program back into our school system,” said Jayson Crawley, Sheriff of Charles City County. “We feel that early education of the dangers of drugs should be taught to our youths and can have a significant positive impact on the decisions they make when faced with drugs. This is just part of our continued efforts to deter illegal drug activity in our county.”

Opioid settlement money awarded to all jurisdictions in the Commonwealth from a reported lawsuit filed against prescription drug companies will help fund the program, per the sheriff’s office.

8News previously reported that, in June, Virginia joined all other states and some U.S. territories in agreeing to sign a $7.4 billion settlement with Purdue Pharma and members of the Sackler family who own the company for their part in perpetuating the opioid crisis.

As a result, the state will receive as much as $103.8 million from this settlement over the next 15 years — funding which will go toward local prevention, treatment and recovery efforts, as previously reported by 8News.

Source:  https://www.wric.com/news/local-news/charles-city-county/dare-program-charles-city-elementary-2025-2026/

Filed under: Brain and Behaviour,Culture,Drug use-various effects,Education,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA,Youth :
by Emily Murray – August 11, 2025

Fake pills remain a threat, with 5 out of 10 pills tested containing potentially lethal doses of fentanyl.

OMAHA, Nebraska – As students across the state prepare to return to school, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Omaha Division is encouraging families to have open conversations about the potentially lethal consequences of drug experimentation and the threat posed by drug dealers on social media.

In Nebraska, DEA has seized more than 145,000 fentanyl pills in the first seven months of 2025. This number is more than triple the amount seized by DEA in Nebraska in all of 2024 and represents close to 85,000 deadly doses of fentanyl removed from communities.

Social media plays a significant role in the life of students and cartels are taking advantage of this audience. Parents and caregivers are encouraged to emphasize the dangers associated with buying pills online. In Nebraska, DEA has seized fentanyl pills made to resemble common prescription medications such as Xanax ®, Adderall ® and Oxycodone ®. Never trust your eyes to determine if a pill is legitimate or counterfeit. The only safe medications are prescribed by a trusted medical professional and dispensed by a licensed pharmacist.

“We know that a lot of families sit down at the start of a new school year to go over things like dealing with bullies, taking precautions when walking home and staying organized with classes,” DEA Omaha Division Acting Special Agent in Charge Rafael Mattei said. “We want families to engage on the tough topics including the use of social media for buying and selling drugs. One pill can kill. Let’s raise awareness in our communities and prevent families from suffering a tragic loss of life.”

For families unsure how to begin a conversation on the dangers of drug use, the DEA has resources and fact sheets available online: https://www.dea.gov/onepill/partner-toolbox. Conversation starters, information on drugs including street names and side effects, and helpful tips on ways to stay engaged in these important conversations year-round, are available based on age and grade.

Source:  https://www.dea.gov/press-releases/2025/08/11/drug-enforcement-administration-encourages-open-conversations-dangers

Filed under: Culture,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,USA,Youth :

by Nathan Mol­loy – 14 Aug 2025

PREVENTION is Bet­ter is a sub­stance abuse pre­ven­tion train­ing pro­gramme. Their mis­sion is to break the cycle of sub­stance use dis­order by provid­ing evid­ence based pre­ven­tion edu­ca­tion in schools, work­places, and com­munit­ies world­wide.

Its CEO and founder, Ryan Ulrich, has over 20 years of exper­i­ence work­ing in addic­tion and treat­ment and drug pre­ven­tion space. Speak­ing to the Sligo Week­ender, Ryan says that he uses his own lived exper­i­ence of over­com­ing addic­tion to treat people and that he has worked in this field across many dif­fer­ent coun­tries.

Its CEO and founder, Ryan Ulrich, has over 20 years of exper­i­ence work­ing in addic­tion and treat­ment and drug pre­ven­tion space. Speak­ing to the Sligo Week­ender, Ryan says that he uses his own lived exper­i­ence of over­com­ing addic­tion to treat people and that he has worked in this field across many dif­fer­ent coun­tries.

“I have my own lived exper­i­ence of over­com­ing my own sub­stance use addic­tion and I’ve been in healthy recov­ery for over 24 years. I’ve been work­ing in this field in the US and I spent quite a long time, 16 years in China, work­ing there and about four years here in Ire­land. So I’ve worked with many schools and in dif­fer­ent coun­tries across the world deliv­er­ing these kind of pro­grams.”

The ideal Pre­ven­tion is Bet­ter pro­gramme in a school accord­ing to its CEO is one which is run over the course of a week. After that, Ryan says that he hopes either schools or cor­por­a­tions keep them on for a period of three years as that is when they can note the changes in atti­tude in people towards sub­stance abuse.

The ideal Pre­ven­tion is Bet­ter pro­gramme in a school accord­ing to its CEO is one which is run over the course of a week. After that, Ryan says that he hopes either schools or cor­por­a­tions keep them on for a period of three years as that is when they can note the changes in atti­tude in people towards sub­stance abuse.

“Ideally, we would love to work with the school or cor­por­a­tion over a two to three year period. That’s where we can really see the changes in atti­tudes and beha­vior just to really pre­vent and make an impact. That’s really our mis­sion. So it’s quite flex­ible depend­ing on the needs of the school or the cor­por­a­tion.”

“Ideally, we would love to work with the school or cor­por­a­tion over a two to three year period. That’s where we can really see the changes in atti­tudes and beha­vior just to really pre­vent and make an impact. That’s really our mis­sion. So it’s quite flex­ible depend­ing on the needs of the school or the cor­por­a­tion.”

Pre­ven­tion is bet­ter than the cure is a com­monly used pro­verb defined by that it is bet­ter to stop something bad hap­pen­ing than to deal with it after it has happened. Ryan believes that in his field, it is massively import­ant to pre­vent someone get­ting addicted to alco­hol or drugs as it can have a dev­ast­at­ing impact not only them but their fam­ily and friends.

“I think it’s very import­ant and it’s abso­lutely pos­sible [to pre­vent sub­stance abuse].

“I think it’s very import­ant and it’s abso­lutely pos­sible [to pre­vent sub­stance abuse].

“There’s a very evid­ence based way to go about that as well because as we all know when some­body’s addicted to even vap­ing or cigar­ettes or alco­hol, it’s dev­ast­at­ing, not only for the indi­vidual, but for the fam­ily and the com­munity.

“From a health per­spect­ive, each euro inves­ted in pre­ven­tion saves about nine times that in terms of costs over­all, jails or health care. That doesn’t even include the impact on the com­munity. So it’s kind of an over­looked but extremely import­ant part of the broader part of health care and treat­ment over­all.”

Efforts to stop people using drugs has changed over the years. In the 1970s, the phrase “War on Drugs” was pop­ular­ised by then US Pres­id­ent

Efforts to stop people using drugs has changed over the years. In the 1970s, the phrase “War on Drugs” was pop­ular­ised by then US Pres­id­ent

Richard Nixon when he declared drug abuse “pub­lic enemy num­ber one” in June 1971. Accord­ing to Ryan, sub­stance abuse pre­ven­tion has changed a lot since then and that now they’re using a trauma based approach which is more evid­ence based.

“I think even longer, maybe about 40 years ago from the US there was kind of just say no or these scare tac­tics in terms of pre­ven­tion, which was shown sci­en­tific­ally to not work at all. And then there more of an edu­ca­tion approach, which is good.”

“But now we’re mov­ing more towards a trauma-informed approach, where we under­stand the impact both on the fam­ily and the com­munity, the impact on the body in car­ry­ing the trauma. So we take all those evid­ence-based approaches into the classroom. And that’s shown to be more and more effect­ive and have greater impact.”

“But now we’re mov­ing more towards a trauma-informed approach, where we under­stand the impact both on the fam­ily and the com­munity, the impact on the body in car­ry­ing the trauma. So we take all those evid­ence-based approaches into the classroom. And that’s shown to be more and more effect­ive and have greater impact.”

The rise of AI has also help Pre­ven­tion is Bet­ter to get more data to help with their pro­grammes.

“I think the rise of AI and data has had a sig­ni­fic­ant impact as well. So now we can col­lect more GDPRcom­pli­ant data. We can make more impact assess­ments. And that’s part of everything that we do, very datadriven as an organ­iz­a­tion.”

Earlier this year, the HSE’s clin­ical lead on addic­tion, Pro­fessor Eamon Keenan said that approx­im­ately 20% of young people show­ing up to addic­tion ser­vices are using HHC, syn­thetic marijuana. Accord­ing to Ryan, his organ­isa­tion are see­ing this becom­ing more of a prob­lem along with dual addic­tion issues which affects people’s men­tal health.

“So we’re see­ing, espe­cially with the leg­al­iz­a­tion of marijuana in the US, in other coun­tries, that’s become more of a prob­lem. There’s new sub­stances, new psy­cho­act­ive sub­stances that are com­ing into the mar­ket. Dual addic­tion and issues around addic­tion and men­tal health, which has always been there.

“These are becom­ing more pre­val­ent. And so these are just some of the trends that we’re see­ing and the changes over the years.”

Vap­ing and cocaine use has caught the national media’s atten­tion over the past few years. Accord­ing to the rehab­il­it­a­tion facil­ity, Rut­land Centre, women rep­res­ent one of the fast­est grow­ing groups seek­ing treat­ment for cocaine. Treat­ment for the drug as a primary addic­tion rose from 17% in 2023 to 23% in 2024, sig­nalling one of the sharpest single year increases recor­ded for any sub­stance at the centre.

Accord­ing to Ryan, both vap­ing and cocaine have a lot of mis­in­form­a­tion online which makes people think they’re not harm­ful.

“Young women look­ing at cocaine, cocaine has no cal­or­ies, is the typ­ical thing they’ll say. And sure, but that’s not, it’s not a healthy option, to say the least. So there’s these mis­per­cep­tions about these sub­stances being safe or not very harm­ful. There’s a tre­mend­ous amount of mis­in­form­a­tion, espe­cially with things like Tik­Tok or social media. The same with vap­ing as well.”

“For the young kids, they see celebrit­ies vap­ing or blow­ing smoke rings. It looks very attract­ive and all the dif­fer­ent fla­vors. That’s abso­lutely not the case.

“Nicot­ine is one of the most addict­ive sub­stances. Even using a vape one or two times with a high con­cen­tra­tion of nicot­ine is enough to get some­body addicted for life. It’s dif­fi­cult to quit after that.”

“Nicot­ine is one of the most addict­ive sub­stances. Even using a vape one or two times with a high con­cen­tra­tion of nicot­ine is enough to get some­body addicted for life. It’s dif­fi­cult to quit after that.”

Source:  https://www.pressreader.com/ireland/sligo-weekender/20250814/281977498705333

Filed under: Culture,Education,Latest News,Others (International News),Prevention and Intervention,Youth :
OPINION: Eric Adams is right 
by Charles Fain Lehman – Aug. 14, 2025
Charles Fain Lehman is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and senior editor of City Journal.
Rampant drug use in and around the Hub by 149th street and 3rd avenue in the south Bronx.                           photo:Stephen Yang

Can New York clean up its public drug-use problem?

Mayor Eric Adams aims to try: On Thursday, he called on the state Legislature to allow clinicians and judges to compel people into treatment when their drug use is hurting them and the city.

“We must help those struggling finally get treatment, whether they recognize the need for it or not,” Adams said at an event hosted by the Manhattan Institute (where I work).  

“Addiction doesn’t just harm individual users; it tears apart lives, families and entire communities, and we must change the system to keep all New Yorkers safer.”

Adams’ proposed state law, the Compassionate Interventions Act, may face an uphill battle in Albany, as “harm reduction” advocates assail it as coercive and dangerous.

But involuntary treatment should be a tool in New York’s arsenal for dealing with the public drug use that has plagued it for years.

Last year it reported nearly 4,000 homeless residents with a history of chronic substance use — probably an undercount, as such people are less likely to be identified by the city’s annual late-night census.

Regardless, it’s not hard to find people shooting up on New York’s streets — just visit the Hub in The Bronx or Washington Square Park in Manhattan.

Such behavior makes whole swaths of the city unlivable.

Public drug use hurts both users — there were more than 2,100 overdose deaths in the five boroughs last year — and the places where they use.

It deters commerce, and creates environments conducive to more serious crime.

Too often the city has responded to these situations with benign neglect, exemplified by its two “supervised consumption sites,” which give people a place to use with Narcan-wielding staff standing by.

These sites continue to operate, in spite of the fact that they don’t work and violate federal law.

Leaving people free to abuse drugs, it turns out, doesn’t save lives.

 

 

 

 

Involuntary treatment, by contrast, tries to correct the behavior that drives drug users to hurt both themselves and others.

That’s why 37 other states already permit it — and why New York under Adams’ plan would join them.

Critics will insist that involuntary drug treatment doesn’t work, and that people have to want to change.

But the balance of the evidence suggests that involuntary treatment performs as well as voluntary treatment.

That’s backed up both by older research on California’s involuntary-treatment scheme, and by strong indications that drug courts, which route drug offenders into treatment instead of prison, can reduce recidivism.

Opponents will also say that it’s immoral to compel people to get treatment they don’t want, and that it violates their “bodily autonomy.”

But there’s no right to shoot up in public spaces, or to ruin your body with fentanyl. And New Yorkers should have the right to expect their public spaces to be free from disorder, including public drug use.

The biggest challenge for Adams, though, may be the state’s limited treatment capacity.

New York state as a whole has only 134 long-term residential treatment facilities.

As of 2023, the most recent available data, they were serving 2,935 clients — fewer than the city’s tallied homeless drug-addict population.

Implementing the Compassionate Interventions Act will almost certainly require more funding for treatment beds, much as Adams’ previous efforts to institutionalize the seriously mentally ill did. That will have to be part of any ask in Albany.

But the mayor’s proposal will also allow diversion to outpatient treatment programs, including a new $27 million investment in contingency management therapy — an evidence-based intervention that has been shown to help treat drug addiction.

What happens if Albany says no to Adams’ proposal? Or if Adams is out of the mayoralty come the next legislative session?

The NYPD can still work to clear encampments. And the city can still try to divert drug users into its drug-courts system, which, while useful, faces administrative problems and lacks transparency.

But actually getting drug users the help they need, rather than just cycling them through the city’s jails, will be hard — much as the administration struggled to handle the seriously mentally ill before it had the power to compel them into treatment.

SOURCE: https://nypost.com/2025/08/14/opinion/involuntary-treatment-can-solve-the-public-drug-scourge/

Filed under: Addiction,Brain and Behaviour,Culture,Drug use-various effects,Harm Reduction,HIV/Injecting-Drug-Users,Latest News,Legal Sector,Needle Exchange,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA :
  •  Sunday, August 3, 2025 8:30 PM

 

ABU DHABI, 3rd August 2025 (WAM) — The International Society of Addiction Medicine (ISAM) has praised the federal decree-law issued by President His Highness Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan establishing the National Anti-Narcotics Authority, describing it as a vital and effective tool that enhances the UAE’s quality of efforts in combating narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and eliminating their sources.

In a statement, ISAM affirmed that the decree issued by the UAE President reinforces the country’s comprehensive and precise approach in tackling the global threat of drug abuse.

It stated that the UAE has continually updated its legislation to combat narcotics, while simultaneously advancing its security, prevention, treatment and awareness efforts, which have significantly contributed to curbing this menace.

Dr. Hamad Al Ghafri, President of ISAM and Board member of the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASMA), stated that the establishment of the National Anti-Narcotics Authority provides a holistic framework for developing policies and strategies to combat drug abuse, including mechanisms for prevention, treatment and rehabilitation.

He added that the legal powers granted to the authority would play a key role in enhancing the UAE’s national efforts and institutions, which work relentlessly to eliminate drug sources and confront those who target the country’s youth.

Dr. Al Ghafri explained that the authority’s mandate is built around several core pillars, including reducing both the supply and demand for drugs by tracking and dismantling trafficking networks, bolstering treatment and rehabilitation systems to reintegrate recovered individuals into their families and communities, and advancing legislative frameworks alongside dedicated research.

“These efforts will support community-based prevention initiatives, establish a unified national monitoring system, and promote international collaboration in training and capacity-building. These pillars are central to achieving an integrated approach that combines preventive, security and therapeutic dimensions to effectively tackle all facets of the drug issue,” he added.

Dr. Al Ghafri reaffirmed ISAM’s commitment to supporting all initiatives and programmes related to combating narcotics and psychotropic substances, while enhancing cooperation and coordination and adopting efforts that contribute to building safe and drug-free societies.

Source: https://www.wam.ae/en/article/bl0dfij-isam-praises-uae-presidents-decree-law

Filed under: Drug Specifics,Latest News,Others (International News),Strategy and Policy :

 

From CDC Media Relations – August 5, 2025
Illustration: Free Mind Campaign

The back-to-school season is a great time to engage with youth about mental health and substance use to promote their well-being throughout the academic year. To support these conversations, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has launched Free Mind, a new national campaign that provides youth ages 12-17 and their parents and caregivers with resources and information about substance use, mental health, and the connection between the two.

The drug overdose crisis is constantly evolving and remains an important public health issue. In 2024, more than 80,000 Americans died from a drug overdose. From 2020 to 2024, 75% of overdose deaths among youth ages 10–19 involved illegally made fentanyl. In addition, the number of teens reporting poor mental health has increased in the past decade. In 2023, 40% of high school students stopped regular activities because of persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness and one in five students seriously considered attempting suicide.

“Teens may use alcohol and other substances to help them cope with stress, anxiety, and depression,” said Dr. Allison Arwady, Director of the CDC National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. “Talking openly about mental health and substance use, and knowing when to get professional help, is critical to helping teens stay healthy. That’s why this campaign supports youth, parents, and caregivers in having those conversations early, before an issue arises.”

CDC spoke directly with youth about their knowledge and perceptions regarding substance use to develop messages, branding, and tactical strategies for Free Mind. The campaign seeks to resonate with this age group by addressing the connections between substance use and mental health, risk factors that contribute to drug use, and strategies to keep them safe. CDC also has created resources for parents and caregivers about the latest substance use and mental health challenges youth may face.

Source:  https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2025/2025-cdc-launches-new-campaign-to-address-youth-substance-use-and-mental-health.html

Filed under: Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Mental Health,Prevention and Intervention,USA,Youth :

From Emory University – Aug 6 2025

While overdose deaths in the U.S. sharply declined in 2024, they remain high. Almost 90,000 Americans died from drug overdoses between October 2023 and September 2024. Overdose death rates are particularly high in American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) people.

The earlier someone starts substance use, the more likely they are to have substance use problems later in life. So, it is important to work with young people to prevent substance use early in life. Researchers at Emory’s Rollins School of Public Health recently partnered with Cherokee Nation Behavioral Health to design and implement programs to help prevent youth substance use in their community. 

They created two programs. Connect Kits for Family Action delivers activity kits to families of teens in 10th to 12th grade to help strengthen family relationships. Connect Brief Intervention uses technology to deliver individualized coaching to high school students.

Testing the programs

A randomized trial of the interventions, with results published in the American Journal of Public Health, found that they worked to reduce alcohol and other substance use in high school students in rural Oklahoma.

In the trial, Cherokee Nation Behavioral Health implemented the programs at 10 high schools. Ten other schools did not receive programming to serve as a comparison. The 10 high schools that did not receive the programs during the trial received them after the study ended. Most students at participating schools were either white or AI/AN.

The trial lasted for three years, and students completed surveys every six months to report on their alcohol and substance use.

What they found

Students at the schools that received the intervention had lower alcohol and other substance use than students at the comparison schools.

Every six months, these students reported:

  • 18% less alcohol use
  • 26% less binge drinking
  • 11% less cannabis use
  • 40% less prescription opioid misuse

Why this matters

Adolescent substance use poses serious risks to health, academic achievement, and long-term well-being. Therefore, protecting teens from substance use is key to helping them thrive. Our prevention programs have demonstrated measurable success in reducing alcohol and drug use among high school students. We’re proud of the results and excited to share these adaptable, effective solutions with other communities.”

Kelli Komro, PhD, professor of behavioral, social, and health education sciences at Rollins and project co-lead

“We believe our children are our most valuable resource,” she says. “This project allowed us to work within our own reservation to find ways that affect change in our youth. Our partnership with Emory University and area high schools was vital in making this happen. We learned so much from the challenges we encountered during this trial, making it more effective and sustainable. The improved outcomes from this trial will last into the future generations of our Cherokee families and communities.”

Source: Emory University
Filed under: Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,USA,Youth :

From Shane Varcoe –

Physical activity emerges as a powerful ally in exercise addiction recovery, offering hope and healing for those struggling with substance dependency. Recent groundbreaking research reveals how structured exercise programmes can reshape both body and mind, providing a natural pathway to wellness that supports long-term recovery goals.

The Science Behind Exercise Addiction Recovery

Two comprehensive studies from leading institutions demonstrate the remarkable impact of physical activity on individuals recovering from substance dependency. Research involving 90 participants in opioid substitution treatment and 43 individuals in drug rehabilitation centres reveals compelling evidence for physical activity recovery benefits.

Neurohormonal Changes Through Exercise

Exercise creates profound changes in the brain’s chemistry that directly counteract the damage caused by substance abuse. When individuals engage in regular moderate-intensity aerobic exercise, their bodies experience:

Increased β-endorphin production: These natural “feel-good” chemicals help restore the brain’s reward system, reducing cravings and improving mood without relying on substances.

Reduced cortisol levels: Exercise helps normalise stress hormone production, which is typically elevated during early recovery phases. This reduction helps manage anxiety, insomnia, and psychological distress.

Enhanced immune function: Regular exercise addiction recovery programmes boost white blood cell and neutrophil counts, strengthening the body’s natural defence systems weakened by substance abuse.

Physical Transformations Supporting Recovery

Body Composition Improvements

Research participants following structured exercise programmes showed remarkable physical changes after 24 weeks:

  • Significant reduction in body fat percentage
  • Increased skeletal muscle mass
  • Improved overall body composition
  • Enhanced physical strength and endurance

These improvements aren’t merely cosmetic—they represent fundamental changes that support sustained recovery by improving self-esteem and physical capability.

Fitness and Functional Capacity

Physical activity recovery programmes deliver measurable improvements across multiple fitness domains:

Cardiovascular health: Participants experienced substantial increases in vital capacity and overall cardiovascular function, supporting better oxygen delivery throughout the body.

Strength and endurance: Upper body and core muscle strength showed significant improvements, enabling individuals to engage more fully in daily activities and work responsibilities.

Flexibility and balance: Enhanced balance control and flexibility reduce injury risk whilst improving quality of life and confidence in physical activities.

Mental Health Benefits of Exercise Addiction Recovery

Anxiety and Depression Relief

The research demonstrates that structured exercise provides substantial mental health benefits:

  • 20% reduction in anxiety scores within 12 weeks
  • Significant decrease in depression symptoms sustained throughout the programme
  • Improved emotional regulation and stress management
  • Enhanced self-confidence and body awareness

The Mind-Body Connection

Exercise programmes that emphasise mind-body integration, such as Pilates, show particular promise. These activities combine physical movement with breath control and mental focus, helping individuals:

  • Develop greater body awareness
  • Learn effective stress management techniques
  • Build emotional resilience
  • Establish healthy coping mechanisms

Types of Exercise for Addiction Recovery

Aerobic Exercise

Moderate-intensity aerobic exercise performed at approximately 70% of maximum heart rate proves most effective for exercise addiction recovery. Activities include:

  • Treadmill walking or running
  • Cycling
  • Swimming
  • Group fitness classes

The key lies in consistency—training three times per week for 20-minute sessions produces measurable neurohormonal improvements.

Mind-Body Practices

Research specifically highlights the benefits of Pilates training for individuals in recovery:

  • Progressive intensity programmes that adapt to improving fitness levels
  • Emphasis on core strength and stability
  • Integration of breathing techniques with movement
  • Low injury risk suitable for deconditioned individuals

Creating Sustainable Exercise Addiction Recovery Programmes

Professional Supervision

Successful physical activity recovery requires proper oversight:

  • Medical clearance before beginning exercise
  • Trained supervision during sessions
  • Heart rate monitoring to ensure appropriate intensity
  • Progressive programme design that prevents overexertion

Long-Term Commitment

The research emphasises that benefits accumulate over time. Participants showed:

  • Initial improvements within 4-6 weeks
  • Significant changes by 12 weeks
  • Maximum benefits achieved after 24 weeks of consistent training

Integration with Comprehensive Care

Exercise works best as part of a holistic recovery approach that includes:

  • Professional counselling and therapy
  • Medical support as needed
  • Peer support networks
  • Structured daily routines

Practical Implementation Strategies

Starting an Exercise Programme

For individuals beginning their recovery journey, successful exercise addiction recovery programmes typically include:

Foundation Phase: Week 1-4:

  • Low-intensity activities focusing on movement quality
  • 40-50% maximum heart rate
  • Emphasis on learning proper techniques

Development Phase: Week 5-12

  • Moderate intensity training
  • 60-70% maximum heart rate
  • Increased session duration and frequency

Maintenance Phase: Week 13-24

  • Sustained moderate-intensity exercise
  • Focus on long-term habit formation
  • Integration of preferred activities

Monitoring Progress

Successful programmes track multiple indicators:

  • Physical fitness improvements (strength, endurance, flexibility)
  • Mental health assessments (anxiety and depression scales)
  • Body composition changes
  • Adherence to exercise schedule

The Role of Exercise in Long-Term Recovery

Preventing Relapse

Physical activity recovery programmes address key relapse triggers:

  • Providing healthy stress relief mechanisms
  • Improving mood naturally through endorphin release
  • Building structured daily routines
  • Enhancing self-efficacy and confidence

Social Benefits

Group exercise activities offer additional advantages:

  • Peer support and accountability
  • Shared goals and achievements
  • Reduced isolation and loneliness
  • Development of healthy social connections

Building Support Networks

Family and Friends

Loved ones play crucial roles in supporting exercise addiction recovery:

  • Encouraging consistent participation
  • Participating in activities together when possible
  • Celebrating milestones and achievements
  • Understanding the importance of exercise in recovery

Professional Support Teams

Effective programmes involve multidisciplinary teams:

  • Exercise physiologists or qualified fitness professionals
  • Mental health counsellors familiar with addiction recovery
  • Medical professionals monitoring overall health
  • Peer support specialists with recovery experience

Evidence-Based Outcomes

The research provides compelling evidence for physical activity recovery effectiveness:

  • 96% programme adherence rates in supervised settings
  • Significant improvements in all measured physical parameters
  • Sustained mental health benefits throughout intervention periods
  • Strong correlations between physical improvements and psychological wellbeing

These outcomes demonstrate that exercise isn’t merely an adjunct therapy—it’s a fundamental component of comprehensive recovery strategies.

Moving Forward with Exercise Addiction Recovery

The evidence overwhelmingly supports integrating structured exercise addiction recovery programmes into comprehensive treatment approaches. By addressing both physical and mental health simultaneously, exercise provides a natural, sustainable foundation for long-term recovery success.

For individuals and families affected by substance dependency, understanding the transformative power of physical activity offers hope and practical steps towards healing. The journey may be challenging, but with proper support, professional guidance, and commitment to consistent exercise, lasting recovery becomes not just possible but probable.

The path to recovery through exercise requires dedication, but the rewards—improved physical health, enhanced mental wellbeing, and sustained freedom from substance dependency—make every step worthwhile.

Filed under: Addiction,Australia,Brain and Behaviour,Crime/Violence/Prison,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction :

by Herschel Baker – Director Queensland Director, Drug Free Australia – 03 August 2025 

Story by Kat Lay, Global health correspondent

Avatars smoke in an image shared on social media of a gathering in the metaverse. A packet of Djarum LA cigarettes, an Indonesian brand, sit on the table. Photograph: iceperience.id Instagram via Canary© Photograph: iceperience.id Instagram via Canary

In the image, a group of friends is standing in a bar, smoke winding upwards from the cigarettes in their hands. More lie in an open packet on the table between them. This is not a photograph taken before smoking bans, but a picture shared on social media of a gathering in the metaverse.

Virtual online spaces are becoming a new marketing battleground as tobacco and alcohol promoters target young people without any legislative consequences.

A report shared at the World Conference on Tobacco Control last month in Dublin set out multiple examples of new technologies being adopted to promote smoking and vaping, including tobacco companies launching digital tokens and vape companies sponsoring online games.

It comes from a monitoring project known as Canary – because it seeks to act as the canary in a coalmine – run by the global public health organisation Vital Strategies.

“Tobacco companies are no longer waiting for regulations to catch them up. They are way ahead of us. We are still trying to understand what we’re seeing in social media, but they’re already operating in unregulated spaces like the metaverse,” says Dr Melina Magsumbol, of Vital Strategies India. “They’re using NFTs [non-fungible tokens]. They’re using immersive events to get our kids to come and see what they’re offering.”

In India, one tobacco company made and promoted an NFT, which represents ownership of digital assets, to celebrate its 93rd anniversary.

Canary scans for and analyses tobacco marketing on social media platforms and news sites in India, Indonesia and Mexico. It is expanding to more countries, including Brazil and China, and to cover alcohol and ultra-processed food marketing.

Digital platforms are being used to bypass traditional advertising restrictions and target young audiences

Melina Magsumbol, Vital Strategies India

It is not set up to scan the metaverse – a three-dimensional, immersive version of the internet that uses technology such as virtual reality headsets to enable people to interact in a digital space. But it has picked up references to what is going on there via links and information shared on older social media sites.

Researchers say that children are likely to be exposed to any tobacco marketing in the new digital spaces given the age profile of users – more than half of the metaverse’s active users are aged 13 and below.

Social media companies have deep knowledge of how to drive engagement and keep people coming back for more views, says Dr Mary-Ann Etiebet, chief executive of Vital Strategies.

“When you combine that with the experience and the knowledge of the tobacco industry on how to hook and keep people hooked … those two things together in a space that is unknown and opaque – that scares me.”

Mark Zuckerberg, metaverse’s prominent backer, says in future “you’ll be able to do almost anything you can imagine” there. Already, that includes shopping and attending virtual concerts.

But Magsumbol describes it as “a new battleground for all of us” that is “being taken over by corporate entities that actually push health-harming products”.

“My daughter is very quiet, she’s an introvert. But online, on [gaming platform] Roblox, when she is killing zombies and ghosts, she morphs into a different avatar – she’s like Alexander the Great mixed with Bruce Lee and John Wick. She is so bloodthirsty,” she says.

“Online we behave differently. Social norms change … the tobacco industry knows that very well. And it’s so easy to subtly sell the idea that you can be anything, anyone you want.”

The metaverse art the team saw in Indonesia was shared on an Instagram account for electronic music lovers linked to Djarum, one of Indonesia’s largest cigarette companies. Another example showed a group having coffee, and looking for a lighter.

It all amounts to efforts to “normalise” smoking and vaping, says Magsumbol. “This kind of behaviour is happening and being done by your avatars, but is it seeping into your real life?

“Digital platforms are being used to bypass traditional advertising restrictions and target young audiences,” she says. “What we’re seeing here is not just a shift in marketing, it’s a shift in how influence works.”

Other researchers have set out examples of alcohol being promoted and even sold in virtual stores.

Online marketing is a global issue. At the same conference, Irish researchers shared findings that 53% of teenagers saw e-cigarette posts daily on social media.

A World Health Organization official (WHO) says a rise in youth smoking in Ukraine is due, in part, to Covid and the war pushing children “too much online” and exposing them to marketing.

Related: Vapes threaten to undo gains in tackling dangers of tobacco, health leaders warn

In India, Agamroop Kaur, a youth ambassador at the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, includes social media marketing when speaking to schoolchildren about the dangers of tobacco and vaping. She has seen vapes suggested as a “wellness” item.

“I think educating youth on what an advertisement looks like, why it’s false, how you might not even see that it’s from the tobacco industry and it’s [content posted by an] influencer is really powerful because then that builds a skill – so that when they’re on social media, because they are digital natives, they’re able to see all of that and know that it’s fake and it’s not something they should be attracted by. I think building those skills early from high school to middle school, and even younger, is really important.”

The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control requires countries to implement bans on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship. Last year, signatories agreed that action was needed to tackle the increasing focus on “digital marketing channels such as social media, which increases adolescent and young people’s exposure to tobacco marketing”.

But there is no easy answer, says Andrew Black at the framework’s secretariat.

“The challenge of regulating the internet is not a problem that’s unique to tobacco. It’s a real challenge for governments to think about how they can provide the protections that society is used to in a world where borders are broken down because of these technologies.”

Nandita Murukutla, who oversees Canary, says regulators should take note: “What starts out small and you ignore, rises up to a certain point when you’ve got critical mass, and after that, it just explodes, and dialing something back is virtually impossible.”

Herschel Baker

International Liaison, Director Queensland Director, Drug Free Australia – Web https://drugfree.org.au/

Source:  https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/smoking-avatars-and-online-games-how-big-tobacco-targets-young-people-in-the-metaverse/ar-AA1J2WHU?

Filed under: Australia,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Nicotine,Tobacco, smoking,Vaping,Youth :

by  Shalini Ramachandran  and Betsy McKay – Wall Street Journal – July 31, 2025

Hundreds of thousands of veterans with PTSD have been prescribed simultaneous doses of powerful psychiatric drugs. The practice, known as “polypharmacy,” can tranquilize patients to the point of numbness, cause weight gain and increase suicidal thoughts when it involves pharmaceuticals that target the central nervous system, according to scientific studies and veterans’ accounts. 

The VA’s own guidelines say no data support drug combinations to treat PTSD. The Food and Drug Administration warns that combining certain medications such as opioids and benzodiazepines can cause serious side effects, including death.

Nonetheless, prescribing cocktails of such drugs is one of the VA’s most common treatments for veterans with PTSD, and the number of veterans on multiple psychiatric drugs is a growing concern at the agency, according to interviews with more than 50 veterans, VA health practitioners, researchers and former officials, and a review of VA medical records and studies.

Polypharmacy has multiple definitions when it comes to central nervous system drugs. The VA defines it as taking five or more medications at the same time, while some medical researchers say it’s two or more and the American Geriatrics Society defines it as three or more. 

There is an emerging medical consensus among VA doctors and researchers that taking multiple central nervous system drugs can wreak havoc on patients. Interactions between such drugs aren’t well understood, and their effects in combination can be unpredictable and extreme.

SOME CASE HISTORIES …

Mark Miller

U.S. Navy, Security Forces (1992-2007)

In 2007, Mark Miller was diagnosed with PTSD. The military put him on fluoxetine, otherwise known as Prozac. He became suicidal. Miller eventually weaned himself off medications and used “neuroplasticity” therapy which forms new connections in the brain. This April, returning suicidal thoughts prompted Miller to visit a VA hospital in San Antonio. A nurse practitioner prescribed a powerful antipsychotic in a five-minute appointment. Six days later, Miller returned, stepped off a shuttle bus and fatally shot himself in the head. “He did it clearly to speak for all the veterans who have no voice,” his father said.

  • Aripiprazole
  • Bupropion
  • Cyclobenzaprine
  • Fluoxetine
  • Lithium
  • Quetiapine
  • Tramadol

‘They did not even listen to anything I said — just prescribed stuff. Unreal’— Text from Mark Miller to his father days before his suicide

The VA maintains that the best treatment for PTSD is talk therapy. But therapists are scarce and wait times are long, so overwhelmed doctors default to pills. Because there is no single drug designed specifically to treat PTSD, veterans often end up on drug cocktails as multiple specialists try to ease a variety of symptoms and prevent harm or suicide, according to VA clinical staff, studies and veterans. 

“When it comes to the challenge of polypharmacy in these populations, it’s constantly chasing your tail,” said Dr. Ryan Vega, a chief healthcare innovation official at the VA until 2023, who still treats veterans. “It is where medicine is more art than science. We have medications that treat those symptoms but are we addressing the root cause?”

Nearly 60% of VA patients with PTSD were taking two or more central nervous system drugs at the same time in 2019, the latest year for which data are publicly available, according to a VA study. That works out to more than 520,000 patients, up 62% from a decade earlier, driven by a near doubling of the number of VA patients with PTSD due to more combat tours and better screening. 

One silver lining highlighted by the study was that the percentage of PTSD veterans on five or more CNS medications declined to 7% from 12%, largely due to internal efforts to deprescribe opioids and benzodiazepines. (Central nervous system drugs affect the brain and spinal cord; psychiatric medications are a subset of CNS drugs). The VA declined requests from The Wall Street Journal to provide more recent polypharmacy numbers for veterans in its care. 

The VA has long been aware of the risks of overprescribing, and has internal research since at least 2016 showing the potential harms, including increased risk of suicide. The internal polypharmacy data “was pretty concerning,” said Dr. Shereef Elnahal, who headed the VA health system until early this year. He recalled a veteran advocate who told him about three veterans on more than five psychiatric drugs each who died by suicide, one after the other. They had been “walking around like zombies” before they took their own lives, the advocate told him. 

The VA’s use of psychiatric drugs has come under scrutiny from members of Congress and advocacy groups as the veteran suicide rate is roughly double that of U.S. adults who didn’t serve. Studies by VA researchers link the simultaneous use of multiple psychiatric drugs to suicide risk among veterans, including a 2016 paper that found Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans taking five or more central nervous system drugs faced higher risks of overdose and suicidal behaviors.

Lucas Hamrick

U.S. Army, Special Forces (1996-2019)

Lucas Hamrick was diagnosed with PTSD in the Army. There, and then at the VA, he was prescribed multiple central nervous system drugs. Some put him in a daze, others made him feel like he might want to kill himself. After losing 12 friends on similar drug combinations to suicide, Hamrick quit all the medications by 2023 and turned to meditation, mindfulness and breathing exercises. “It’s about structuring life around how not to let things spill over,” he said.

  • Chlordiazepoxide
  • Diazepam
  • Gabapentin
  • Hydrocodone-acetaminophen
  • Lorazepam
  • Naltrexone
  • Paroxetine
  • Phenobarbital
  • Prazosin
  • Propranolol
  • Rizatriptan
  • Sertraline
  • Trazodone

‘The quality of mental health care made me feel like I was there to check a box and complete the process instead of working toward any type of changes in perspective or disposition.’

Yet the agency has been slow to mandate changes. It has failed to implement nationwide electronic systems to alert doctors when they prescribe multiple psychiatric drugs, despite evidence from its own studies that these alerts improve care. The VA doesn’t uniformly require written informed consent for all psychiatric drugs with suicide risk, something that veterans groups and some members of Congress are urging. Some veterans who have resisted taking cocktails of drugs say they were warned by VA and military doctors that refusing them could jeopardize their eligibility for disability benefits, which can reach $4,500 a month.

“I’ve been mortified by practically every veteran I’ve seen having been prescribed multiple psychiatric medications, often without a timely referral to therapy or without any referral at all,” said Janie Gendron, a therapist who worked for the Defense Department and has seen hundreds of active-duty service members and veterans in the past 25 years.

A VA spokesman said the agency is looking into the issues raised by the Journal, and that the Trump administration is seeking to address serious problems it has identified in veterans’ healthcare that weren’t solved by the Biden administration. 

VA Secretary Doug Collins said at a congressional hearing in May that the agency is pursuing the potential use of alternative therapies, such as psychedelics, to offer more options and reduce the risk of suicide among veterans. 

The rise of the combat cocktail for PTSD has its roots in the overreliance on a single class of drugs: benzodiazepines. By the 1970s, the military and VA relied heavily on Valium and, later, Xanax as a primary treatment for traumatized service members and veterans returning from deployment. But in the 1990s, Defense Department researchers observed that high doses often yielded poor clinical outcomes, and, along with the VA, ultimately advised against their long-term use on veterans in 2004.

Still, against the guideline, the VA has doled out benzodiazepines to more than 1.7 million patients with PTSD diagnoses since 2005, its own data show. It took nearly a decade for the use of those drugs to start to decline.

At the same time, prescriptions to veterans with PTSD rose for other powerful psychiatric drugs.

VA doctors and patients say that existing tools to limit the number of psychiatric drugs a patient takes, and guidance to avoid the use of benzodiazepines and certain antipsychotics for veterans with PTSD, are frequently ignored.

A friend’s suicide

After his best friend’s suicide in 2013, Iraq war veteran Doug Gresenz was diagnosed with PTSD and borderline personality disorder and eventually put on six psychotropic drugs. After one medication’s dosage was increased, he attempted suicide and was hospitalized. When he protested the volume of medications there, he said VA doctors questioned his commitment to recovery and told him he needed the pills to lead a normal life. “I was guilt-tripped,” he said. 

Doug Gresenz

U.S. Marine Corps, Assaultman (2006-2010)

  • Baclofen
  • Bupropion
  • Citalopram
  • Clonazepam
  • Clonidine
  • Cyclobenzaprine
  • Divalproex
  • Doxepin
  • Erenumab-aooe
  • Eszopiclone
  • Gabapentin
  • Hydroxyzine
  • Melatonin
  • Methocarbamol
  • Mirtazapine
  • Olanzapine
  • Oxycodone
  • Prazosin
  • Propranolol
  • Sumatriptan
  • Quetiapine
  • Tizanidine
  • Tramadol
  • Trazodone
  • Venlafaxine
  • Zolpidem

‘I remember thinking: I’m literally poisoning myself.’

In 2016 alone, VA doctors prescribed him more than a dozen drugs, including antidepressants, antipsychotics, muscle relaxants and medications for nightmares, anxiety, pain and sleep, medical records show. Over little more than a decade, he received more than two dozen central nervous system medications. He recalled complaining to VA doctors that he was “so doped up” he would have accidents before getting to the bathroom.

“I remember thinking: I’m literally poisoning myself,” he said. In 2018, he quit benzodiazepines cold turkey and began to taper off the other drugs.

Within a couple of weeks, he collapsed, unable to use his legs. He developed a stutter and extreme light sensitivity. Violent spasms led to another fall, which caused complications that resulted in a severe foot injury and, eventually, an amputation last year.

The VA recommends any one of three antidepressants for PTSD—sertraline (Zoloft), paroxetine (Paxil) and venlafaxine (Effexor). But doctors are free to prescribe other additional drugs off-label—and many do.

“It’s super normal to see someone on five or six medications,” said Mary Neal Vieten, a retired Navy psychologist who has worked with thousands of members of the military and veterans. “That’s like an everyday thing.” Trauma has been medicalized, she said. “They’re acting as if the problem is in the person,” she said. Instead, it’s a normal response to an overwhelming experience, she said.

‘Stop-and-go’ pills

The culture of combat cocktails begins for some who are diagnosed with PTSD while still on active duty. In the military, too, drugs have long been given priority over psychotherapy, according to many veterans, former VA officials and therapists. 

One Navy chaplain said his repeated calls to the Navy for more mental health resources went unanswered despite his documentation of more than 70 critical events, including suicide attempts, at a high-stress installation with nuclear submarines. When the chaplain himself grew suicidal, Navy doctors suggested that refusing the three-medication cocktail they prescribed could lead to discharge without benefits, instead of medical retirement with care. 

Some veterans enter VA care dependent on psychiatric drugs that they were prescribed to improve combat readiness. They include Air Force veterans given “stop-and-go” pills—stimulants followed by sleeping pills. 

Michael Valentino, who was chief pharmacist at the VA until 2021, said he grew alarmed by the rising numbers of service members entering VA care on stimulants without a diagnosis justifying it. “Then the VA has the burden of trying to undo it.”

Heather King

U.S. Air Force, Aircraft Maintenance Craftsman (2001-2010)

Heather King struggled with sleep after the Air Force prescribed Ambien following long flights. After her discharge, she was diagnosed with PTSD, and the VA added eight central nervous system drugs by 2020. King begged for help weaning off. Her VA doctor’s response: “Heather, under no circumstances are you ever going to be a person who is going to operate without meds.” She’s lately been sleeping soundly without pills for the first time, thanks to cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia—something the VA only told her about recently.

  • Amitriptyline
  • Buspirone
  • Cyclobenzaprine
  • Doxazosin
  • Doxepin
  • Duloxetine
  • Fluoxetine
  • Gabapentin
  • Hydroxyzine
  • Lamotrigine
  • Lorazepam
  • Mirtazapine
  • Prazosin
  • Propranolol
  • Ramelteon
  • Trazodone
  • Zaleplon
  • Zolpidem

‘It was like a death sentence. All these medications, they just made me numb. I wanted to feel my feelings, I wanted to actually heal.’

A Pentagon official said several medications at once are sometimes necessary for patients with multiple medical problems or who are treatment-resistant, adding that “records are reviewed to determine if the treating provider has provided clinical justification for the use of polypharmacy.” Service members and their families are offered “a robust and comprehensive array” of mental health programs, the official said.

Chemical messengers

Psychiatric drugs work by affecting levels of chemical messengers in the brain called neurotransmitters, which send signals between nerve cells and other cells in the body. For instance, many antidepressants increase levels of serotonin, a neurotransmitter associated with mood. Benzodiazepines enhance the activity of a neurotransmitter called GABA, while some antipsychotics block dopamine receptors. Layering on several of these central nervous system agents at once can magnify their effects. 

Combining an antipsychotic drug that activates dopamine receptors with one that blocks dopamine can exacerbate psychosis, said Dr. Sanket Raut, a research fellow specializing in polypharmacy at Gallipoli Medical Research in Brisbane, Australia. By the same token, benzodiazepines and opioids taken together can increase the risk of overdose. “Polypharmacy is a big problem,” said Raut. “There are many side effects: cognitive impairment, dizziness and the risk of falls.”

Erika Downey

U.S. Army, Military Police (2007-2013)

Amphetamine-Dextroamphetamine

  • Clonazepam
  • Erenumab-aooe
  • Fluoxetine
  • Lorazepam
  • Trazodone

‘They give out these giant paper bags filled with medicine after your first psychiatrist appointment.’

“They give out these giant paper bags filled with medicine after your first psychiatrist appointment,” said Erika Downey, a 35-year-old retired Army sergeant with PTSD. Women are more likely to be prescribed multiple drugs concurrently against guidelines, VA researchers have found. 

Downey’s bouts of suicidal ideation while taking antidepressants, benzodiazepines and stimulants were so bad she once called a friend to come take away her gun. After that, she decided talk therapy would be the best medicine. She weaned herself off the drugs on her own over two years. She had to wait three years for a VA psychotherapy appointment. “At the VA, you are more quick to get into a psychiatrist”—someone who can prescribe meds—“than a psychologist,” she said. Gray for WSJ

Only 15% of veterans diagnosed with depression, PTSD or anxiety are offered psychotherapy in lieu of medication, according to a 2019 report by the Government Accountability Office. “They’re really leveraging the prescribing to keep up with patient demand,” said Derek Blumke of the Grunt Style Foundation, a nonprofit veterans’ care group. Many VA providers’ impulse is to “get them in and get them out,” said Chris Figura, a patient advocate at a VA in St. Louis.

Navy veteran Dick Johnson, in the VA system for three decades and diagnosed with PTSD and bipolar disorder, was prescribed more than 25 different central nervous system drugs, including antipsychotics, antidepressants and epilepsy medications, sometimes on six concurrently, his medical records show. He blames them for the collapse of his two marriages. “They pretty much destroyed my life,” Johnson said. When he worsened on one antipsychotic and experienced intense withdrawal tapering off, VA doctors tried to patch him up with a cocktail of other medicines including benzodiazepines. In 2006, he started a prolonged dose of Seroquel, a powerful antipsychotic, to get off benzodiazepines, because doctors said it was supposed to be easier to stop. His weight soared and he developed diabetes. Quitting Seroquel “nearly killed” him, as he suffered intense vomiting, diarrhea and a near-inability to digest. He’s still tapering off Paxil and Tegretol today, using a jewelry scale and sandpaper.

Drugged for Decades

Dick Johnson, who joined the Navy in 1989, was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. After he was medically discharged in 1994, the VA put him on a heavy regimen of psychiatric drugs that made matters worse.

  • Medications prescribed, by class and date
  • Mood Stabilizers Anti- Psychotics Anti- Anxiety Anti-Depressant Medicated with lithium, which makes him severely ill 1995
  • Lithium Divorce with first wife  2000
  • Second marriage ’05 PTSD diagnosis
  • Divorce with second wife Seroquel ’10
  • Retires with disability from power plant ’15
  • Side effects of medications lead to ICU visit. Seeks help outside VA to taper off meds ’20
  • After cutting backmeds, joinssupport groupsand shares hisexperience
  • Note: Does not include all medications, including those prescribed for short durations.

Dr. Saraswathy Battar, a VA geriatrician, launched a passion project in 2016 to decrease the use of potentially inappropriate medications. After noticing veterans suffering from debilitating symptoms that she attributed to overprescription, she developed an electronic tool that has helped providers discontinue more than three million prescriptions. About half of VA providers are using the optional tool, she said, but they’re mostly caring for older veterans or those in palliative care, while it’s been hard to get mental health providers to adopt the tool. Some said they were unaware of its existence. “Suicide and homicide get attention,” but “there’s no penalty for not prioritizing polypharmacy reduction,” she said.

A path forward

After years on psychiatric drug regimens prescribed by military and VA doctors, a growing number of veterans are taking healing into their own hands, often exploring unconventional treatments. Many veterans said they are frustrated and angry that the country spends heavily training them to be lethal, but there’s little support for their fragile mental health as they reintegrate back into society.

Scott Griffin, the former special operations soldier who contemplated suicide last year, reached out to a group called Veterans Exploring Treatment Solutions, or VETS, after the episode. Their suggestion: ibogaine, a powerful psychedelic derived from an African plant and illegal in the U.S., but only after tapering off his current medications. When Griffin asked his VA prescriber for help tapering, “he point-blank refused,” Griffin said.

He embarked on a gruelling self-taper. “I was white knuckling. I broke my teeth from clenching,” he recalled, battling intense vertigo and suicidality.

After 12 hours of altered consciousness on ibogaine in Mexico, Griffin took 5-MeO-DMT, a psychoactive compound most famously found in Colorado River toads’ poison, which he says was a profound spiritual experience. Since returning home in March, he has discarded his pills, prays daily and spends time with family, reconnecting after years of being “consumed by panic and anxiety.”

A Stanford study of 30 special operations forces veterans published last year found that ibogaine sharply reduced PTSD and related symptoms. A bipartisan bill in the House aims to fund VA research into psychedelics, which doctors caution remain largely unproven in clinical trials. 

Says Griffin, “How does bark from a tree and venom off the back of a toad beat all this crap, all these pharmaceuticals they push down your throat?”

Source:  Maggie Petito – www.drugwatch.org

Filed under: Culture,Drug use-various effects,Health,Latest News,Mental Health,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction,USA :

by Rebecca H. Johnson, Ashley Speckhart, Franklin Chien, Archie Bleyer – Academia Oncology – June 06, 2025

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to test the a priori hypothesis that the increasing incidence of testis and breast cancer in adolescent and young adult (AYA) Americans correlates with their increasing cannabis use. 

Methods: The overall study design involved comparing breast and testis cancer incidence trends in jurisdictions that had or had not legalized cannabis use. Cancer incidence was assessed for the U.S. using the U.S. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data, and for Canada, using Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation data. 

Results: In the U.S., both breast carcinoma in 20- to 34-year-old females and testis cancer in 15- to 39-year-old males had annual incidence rate increases that were highly correlated (Pearson’s r = 0.95) with the increase in the number of cannabis-legalizing jurisdictions during the period 2000–2019. Both were significantly greater during the period 2000–2019 in the SEER registries of cannabis-legalizing than non-legalizing states (Joinpoint-derived average annual percent change, AAPC1.3, p << 0.001 vs. 0.7, p << 0.001, respectively, for breast cancer, and AAPC1.2, p << 0.001 vs. no increase during the period 2000–2011 for testis cancer). During the period 2000–2019, registries in cannabis-legalizing versus non-legalizing states had a 26% versus 17% increase in breast carcinoma and 24% versus 14% increase in testis cancer. In the same age groups, Canada had a greater increase in both breast and testis cancer incidence than the U.S., and in both countries, breast and cancer trends were both correlated with the country’s cannabis use disorder prevalence by age. 

Conclusions: North America shows evidence that cannabis is a potential etiologic factor contributing to the rising incidence of breast carcinoma and testis cancer in young adults. Canada’s greater increases than in the U.S. are consistent with its earlier and broader cannabis legalization. Given the increasing use and potency of cannabis facilitated by jurisdiction legalization and expanded availability, cannabis’ potential as a cause of breast and testis cancer merits national consideration.

Source:  https://www.academia.edu/2998-7741/2/2/10.20935/AcadOnco7758

Filed under: Cannabis/Marijuana,Drug use-various effects,Health,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,USA,Youth :

Opening statement by Herschel Baker

Sent: 31 July 2025 23:41 – 1 August 2025

It does appear that America is taking important action regarding Fentanyl but it’s also very important for America to make nitazene.

https://www.utmb.edu/mdnews/podcast/episode/even-worse-than-fentanyl

<https://www.utmb.edu/mdnews/podcast/episode/even-worse-than-fentanyl>   a Schedule I drug.

<https://www.cadca.org/advocacy/president-trump-signs-halt-fentanyl-act-into-law/>

This important legislation attached permanently designates all fentanyl-related substances as Schedule I drugs.

<https://www.cadca.org/advocacy/president-trump-signs-halt-fentanyl-act-into-law/>

<https://www.cadca.org/advocacy/terrance-cole-sworn-in-as-new-administrator-of-the-drug-enforcement-administration/>

It does appear that Terrance Cole is the right choice Sworn in as New Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration

<https://www.cadca.org/advocacy/terrance-cole-sworn-in-as-new-administrator-of-the-drug-enforcement-administration/> 

Terrance Cole Sworn in as New Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration | CADCA

<https://www.cadca.org/advocacy/terrance-cole-sworn-in-as-new-administrator-of-the-drug-enforcement-administration/>

This Fentanyl Act is a good example that The Australian Federal Government needs to review and implement as a new Act to help keep The Australian community safe:

  1. Alcohol And Drug Foundation https://adf.org.au/drug-facts/fentanyl/

https://adf.org.au/insights/fentanyl-and-nitazenes/

  1. What are nitazenes?

https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/what-are-nitazenes

  1. AFP warn over alarming potent synthetic opioids in 2024

https://www.afp.gov.au/news-centre/media-release/afp-warn-over-alarming-pote

nt-synthetic-opioids-2024

  1. Weak response from TGA

https://www.tga.gov.au/products/medicines/prescription-medicines/prescriptio

n-opioids-hub/prescription-opioids-what-changes-are-being-made-and-why

  1. Weak response from NIDA

https://nida.nih.gov/research-topics/fentanyl#addictive

  1. Lethal synthetic opioids found in Australian wastewater

https://news.uq.edu.au/2025-03-19-lethal-synthetic-opioids-found-australian-wastewater

  1. Warning of potentially deadly synthetic opioid

https://www.sahealth.sa.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/public+content/sa+health+internet/about+us/news+and+media/all+media+releases/warning+of+potentially+deadly+synthetic+opioid

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

PUBLIC LAW 119–26—JULY 16, 2025
HALT ALL LETHAL TRAFFICKING OF FENTANYL ACT

To access the full document:

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

Source:  HALT ALL LETHAL TRAFFICKING OF Fentanyl Act

Filed under: Fentanyl,Latest News,Political Sector,Prevention and Intervention,USA :
by Lindsey Culli – Department of Health Policy and Management – July 30, 2025

A new study from researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health sheds light on how people who inject drugs (PWID) are responding to the growing instability and danger in the U.S. illicit drug supply. Despite facing structural vulnerabilities, participants in the study demonstrated a keen awareness of changes in drug quality and content, and many are taking proactive steps to reduce their risk of overdose, injury, and other harms.

Published July 24, 2025, in the journal Health Promotion International, the qualitative study explores the experiences of 23 PWID in Baltimore City, where a growing number of opioid-related deaths and the emergence of new, harmful adulterants like xylazine have made drug use increasingly perilous. Participants reported encountering potent and unpredictable drug combinations and described cognitive, behavioral, and social strategies they use to navigate this new reality. Notably, the paper’s publication comes just two weeks after a mass overdose in Baltimore’s Penn North neighborhood sent dozens of people to the hospital in the span of a few hours and tests revealed unfamiliar ingredients.

“We found that people who inject drugs are not indifferent to the risks they face,” said lead author Abigail Winiker, PhD, MSPH, an assistant scientist in Health Policy and Management and program director for the Bloomberg Overdose Prevention Initiative. “They are making conscious decisions every day to protect their health, whether that’s testing a small dose, avoiding injecting alone, switching to less risky methods of use, or sharing safety information with peers. These are intentional harm reduction strategies grounded in knowledge and a desire to stay safe.”

The U.S. continues to grapple with a historic overdose crisis, with over 107,000 deaths reported in 2022 alone. Fentanyl and its analogs now dominate the opioid supply, but new substances, often unknown to users, are increasingly present. Participants in the study described a “wildcard” market where real heroin has been replaced by unpredictable blends, sometimes laced with benzodiazepines, dissociative agents, or tranquilizers like xylazine, which are not meant for human consumption.

The uncertainty has led to intense fear and physical harm among PWID, with many recounting a range of adverse reactions from illicit substance use, including blackouts, seizures, severe wounds, and overdose. Despite the increasing risk associated with these drug market changes, most participants reported having no access to a reliable source of information about the composition of the drug supply, making it challenging to adapt in the face of new additives. Most knowledge about specific risks or harmful batches was passed on through word of mouth, which could perpetuate rumors and the spread of misinformation.

Individual and Collective Adaptations 

The study highlights the wide array of harm reduction strategies participants use to mitigate risk. Cognitively, many indicated thinking about their drug use in terms of personal health and family responsibilities, with some expressing a motivation to seek treatment or abstain from use entirely in the face of an increasingly risky drug supply.

Behaviorally, PWID described strategies such as taking smaller test doses, sniffing instead of injecting, and having someone present who could administer naloxone if needed. Socially, trust played a critical role; participants emphasized returning to known sellers who warned them about potent batches and relying on peer networks to spread information about adverse events or dangerous batches in circulation. 

“These strategies reflect a deep sense of agency and adaptability,” said Winiker. “Our findings debunk the dangerous myth that individuals who use drugs are reckless or disconnected from their health. This false narrative perpetuates stigma and limits our ability as a society to recognize the incredible resilience and strength of people who use drugs.” 

Policy and Programmatic Implications 

The authors argue that these findings should inform more responsive public health policies and harm reduction programming. While fentanyl test strips can be an effective intervention, many participants noted that fentanyl’s presence is now expected, but what they fear are the unknown additives they cannot identify or test for, such as those that were found in the case of the mass overdose two weeks ago. Universal drug checking services, real-time supply surveillance, and mobile harm reduction outreach are critical next steps, the study concludes.

The research also points to the urgent need to remove structural barriers to harm reduction. In many states, drug checking equipment is still considered illegal paraphernalia. Criminalization and stigma continue to limit access to lifesaving services, especially among those who are unhoused or medically underserved. 

“People who inject drugs are doing their part to reduce harm,” said Winiker. “It’s time to reform our systems so they stop making it harder for them to do so, by legalizing drug checking, ensuring individuals with lived experience have leadership roles in overdose prevention and response efforts, investing in safer supply programs, and ensuring that stigma and punitive laws don’t block access to care.”

The study was conducted as part of the SCOPE Study, a project led by Susan Sherman, PhD, MPH, to design an integrated drug checking and HIV prevention intervention. It was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and reflects growing interest in how PWID are adapting to the post-fentanyl era.

Source:  https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2025/in-the-face-of-a-volatile-drug-supply-people-take-harm-reduction-into-their-own-hands

Filed under: Addiction,Culture,Drug use-various effects,Harm Reduction,Latest News,Mental Health,Strategy and Policy,USA :

by Rachel Girarda, PATHS Lab, Department of Psychology, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, USA

Background: American Indian communities consistently identify adolescent substance use as a major concern. However, limited empirical work has examined how culturally specific protective factors – such as family disapproval and cultural affiliation – interact to influence substance use behavior. Given the importance of kinship networks and cultural continuity, understanding these dynamics is critical for informing culturally grounded prevention strategies.

Objectives: This study examines the moderating role of cultural affiliation in the association between family disapproval of substance use and actual use among American Indian adolescents, a population often excluded from national health datasets.

Methods: Secondary analysis was conducted using self-report data from the Our Youth, Our Future study, a nationally representative sample of American Indian adolescents attending schools on or near reservations (N = 8,950; 51% female; Mage = 14.64 years, SD = 1.77).

Results: Multilevel analyses revealed that family disapproval was negatively associated with lifetime alcohol (b = −0.15, p < .001) and cannabis use (b = −0.34, p < .001), controlling for age. Among adolescents who endorsed use, cultural affiliation moderated the relationship between family disapproval and past-year alcohol and cannabis use. Specifically, family disapproval was significantly associated with lower alcohol use at high (b = −0.01, p = .002) but not low (b = −0.07, p = .48) levels of cultural affiliation. For cannabis use, the association was stronger at high (b = −0.51, p < .001) versus low (b = −0.32, p = .005) levels.

Conclusions: Cultural affiliation strengthens the protective effects of family disapproval on substance use among American Indian youth. Findings support culturally responsive, family-based prevention efforts that promote cultural identity and intergenerational communication.

Source: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00952990.2025.2535557?src=

Filed under: Culture,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,USA :

by Shane Varcoe – 24 July 2025

Big Alcohol – Big Interference: Unnecessary Harm Podcast – SPECIAL DRY in JULY Episode – #alcoholawareness #soberinspiration

In this eye-opening episode of The Unnecessary Harm Podcast, we sit down with Kristina Spikova, President of Movendi International, a global network of over 170 organizations fighting alcohol harm across 63 countries. As we celebrate Dry July, Kristina reveals the shocking truth about Big Alcohol’s predatory tactics and their devastating impact on global development.

With her extensive experience in public health advocacy, Kristina exposes how alcohol directly affects 15 out of 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals, from poverty and hunger to gender equality and climate change. She discusses the alarming rise in alcohol-related violence, the industry’s deceptive marketing targeting women and children, and the environmental destruction caused by alcohol production – including the staggering 270 liters of water needed to produce just one liter of beer.

Kristina also highlights recent scientific research which underscores the health risks associated with alcohol consumption, noting its classification as a Group 1 carcinogen, alongside substances like tobacco and asbestos. From the WHO’s “best buys” policies to Big Alcohol’s corporate interference at the UN level, this conversation provides crucial insights into the global fight against one of the world’s most harmful legal substances.
Source:  Shane Varcoe – CEO Dalgarno Institute
Filed under: Latest News,Uncategorized :

by Emily Caldwell – Ohio State News – Jul 08, 2025

Almost 1 in 10 workers in their 30s uses alcohol, marijuana or hard drugs like cocaine while on the job in the United States, a new study has found. 

The risk for substance use among young employees was highest in the food preparation/service industry and in safety-sensitive occupations including construction – a sector linked in previous research with a high risk for drug overdose deaths. 

Based on their prior studies of workplace strategies related to employee substance use, the researchers say these new findings suggest comprehensive substance use policies and supportive interventions could improve safety and help reduce workers’ misuse of alcohol and drugs. 

“Especially for those working in blue-collar or heavy manual jobs, they often have limited access to support to address substance use,” said lead author Sehun Oh, associate professor of social work at The Ohio State University. “It’s easy to blame someone for using substances, but we want to pay attention to understanding their working conditions and barriers at the workplace.” 

Oh completed the study with Daejun “Aaron” Park, assistant professor of social work at Ohio University, and Sarah Al-Hashemi, a recent Ohio State College of Public Health graduate. 

The research was published recently in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 

Previous research has suggested that substance use is common among people who work long hours or evening shifts and earn low wages, or who experience life stressors such as low annual household income and limited education. But few studies have been able to report on substance use during work hours, and the occupations at highest risk for on-the-job alcohol and drug use, because the data is hard to come by. 

“There are many studies looking at specific occupations and their risks, and the prevalence of substance use outside work,” Oh said. “There is very limited evidence on workplace substance use, which is more concerning in terms of occupational safety, not just for the workers but also colleagues or others exposed to the workplaces. This is the only data we know of to inform this issue.” 

The study sample included 5,465 young employees who participated in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997, a nationally representative sample of men and women who were aged 12-17 in 1997 and were interviewed regularly until 2022. The NLSY surveys were conducted by Ohio State’s Center for Human Resource Research. Data for this study came from the 2015-16 survey, the most recent wave to collect information on substance use behaviors. 

Results were based on participants’ reports of substance use immediately before or during a work shift in the past month. Among respondents, 8.9% of workers reported any substance use in the workplace, including 5.6% drinking alcohol, 3.1% using marijuana and 0.8% taking cocaine or other hard drugs, a category that also included opioids. 

Statistical modeling showed a higher risk for all types of on-the-job substance use among food-industry workers, higher alcohol use among white-collar workers (linked in prior research to drinking while cultivating business relationships or celebrating accomplishments), and elevated alcohol and marijuana use in safety-sensitive occupations.

“We’re really concerned to see the findings for safety-sensitive occupations – not just in construction, but also installation, maintenance, repair, transportation and material movement,” Oh said. “In many federal-level transportation occupations, there are policies prohibiting operating under the influence. So we’re surprised to see that still 6% of material moving workers are working under the influence, and 2% of them are using marijuana – this was striking, because other than drug testing policies, it’s hard to implement interventions for workers moving from place to place.” 

Both Oh and Park said these new findings shed light on the impact that comprehensive employer substance use policies and supportive programs for workers could have.  

Variations in workplace substance-use policies may be one explanation for industry differences in risk for employee alcohol and drug use on the job, Park said. In a 2023 study he led, 20% of survey participants reported their workplaces had no substance use policy. The research showed that comprehensive workplace substance use policies – which included recovery-friendly initiatives – were linked to a significant decrease in employee drug and alcohol use across many employment sectors. 

“The work categories least likely to have substance use policies tend to be those managed individually by owners or workers,” he said. “Also the arts, food service, entertainment, recreation – those kinds of workplaces don’t tend to have polices in place.” 

And Oh found in a 2023 study that only half of workers in a national sample had access to support services for substance use problems, such as counseling, at their places of employment. Availability of workplace support services led to lower rates of marijuana and other illicit drug use among workers. 

“What I found was policy alone can’t be effective in reducing substance use problems – policies need to be accompanied by support services,” he said. “That’s one thing we propose in this paper – that combining alcohol and other drug policies with supportive services produces the greatest benefits, rather than relying on either alone.” 

The analysis also showed substance use in the workplace had strong associations with off-work substance misuse: Users of marijuana on the job were more likely to report daily cannabis use and were more than twice as likely to be heavy drinkers compared to those not using marijuana at work, and employees on cocaine or other hard drugs while working were more likely to drink heavily, use marijuana more frequently, and report frequent illicit drug use. 

“Our research shows that those under adverse working conditions with many barriers to economic and well-being resources tend to use substances as a coping mechanism, whether that relates to an emotional toll or physical demands of not just working conditions, but their life circumstances,” Oh said. “There is a need for more structural support to address these huge implications for the health of workers and others, and to reduce the stigma associated with substance use.” 

Source: https://news.osu.edu/9-of-young-us-employees-use-alcohol-drugs-at-work-study-finds/

Filed under: Alcohol,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,USA,Workplace,Youth :
by Pat Aussem, L.P.C., M.A.C. – Vice President, Consumer Clinical Content Development – July 2025
Inhalants

Inhalants are ordinary household products that are inhaled or sniffed to get high. Hundreds of products can be misused as inhalants.

“There’s no ID required. It’s odorless. It’s everything kids look for. They can afford it, they can get it, and it doesn’t show in mom and dad’s drug test.” 

Dana O’Rourke lost her 19-year-old daughter to “dusting,” a trend popularized on social media.1 Dusting is one of the many slang terms used to describe the use of inhalants. As O’Rourke says, inhalants are easy to get and generally undetectable, making it appealing to young people. Below, learn more about dusting and huffing, the signs of inhalant misuse, and how to keep your child safe.

Key Takeaways:

  1. Inhalant misuse: Huffing and dusting involve inhaling substances like aerosol sprays or household chemicals, posing serious health risks.
  2. Warning Signs: Look for unusual chemical odors, headaches, dizziness, slurred speech, and behavioral changes.
  3. Prevention: Educate loved ones, keep chemicals out of reach, monitor activities, and seek professional help if needed.

What Are Inhalants?

 Inhalants are everyday household products that some people misuse to get high. This dangerous practice has many slang names including “huffing,” “dusting,” “sniffing,” “whippets,” and “huff.” (see other terms at the end of this article) These products were never meant to be breathed in on purpose and using them this way can cause serious harm or even death.2

Common household items that get misused include:3

  • Computer keyboard cleaners (canned air)
  • Spray paint
  • Nail polish remover
  • Certain types of glue
  • Markers and correction fluid
  • Hair spray and deodorant
  • Cooking spray
  • Cleaning fluids
  • Gasoline
  • Whipped cream dispensers (the propellant)
  • Air conditioner fluid (Freon)

Why This Is Happening More Often

 Inhalant misuse has become more visible, especially among younger teens. There are several reasons why this is concerning:

Easy to Find: Unlike other substances, these products are legal and found in almost every home, school, and store. Kids don’t need to buy anything special or find a dealer.

Social Media Influence: Some social media challenges and videos show people using inhalants, making it seem normal or fun. These videos don’t show the real dangers or the people who get seriously hurt.

False Safety: Because these products are sold in stores, some people think they must be safe to use in any way. This is far from the truth. (There are stores dedicated to the sale of alcohol, for example, and alcohol comes with many health risks.)

Quick Effect: Inhalants work very fast – within seconds of breathing them in, a person feels intoxicated with effects similar to being drunk on alcohol. This quick effect can make them appealing to curious teens, but it’s also what makes them so dangerous. 

The Real Dangers

 Using inhalants is extremely risky, even the first time. Here’s what can happen:

  • Immediate Effects: Within seconds, users may experience slurred speech, inability to coordinate movements, dizziness, confusion, delirium, nausea, and vomiting. They may also have lightheadedness, hallucinations, and delusions.
  • Sudden Death: This can happen to anyone, even healthy people using inhalants for the first time. It’s called “sudden sniffing death syndrome.”
  • Brain Damage: Inhalants can permanently damage parts of the brain that control thinking, moving, seeing, and hearing. Effects can range from mild problems to severe dementia.
  • Heart Problems: These chemicals can cause irregular heartbeat and heart failure.
  • Suffocation: People can pass out and stop breathing.
  • Dangerous Behavior: Because the high only lasts a few minutes, people often keep using inhalants over several hours to maintain the feeling. This greatly increases the risk of losing consciousness and death.
  • Long-term Problems: Regular use can cause weight loss, muscle weakness, disorientation, trouble paying attention and other problems related to thinking, lack of coordination, irritability, and depression. After heavy use, people may feel drowsy for hours and have lasting headaches.  Their use can also lead to addiction.

Warning Signs Parents Should Watch For

 Parents and other caregivers should look out for these signs of inhalant misuse:

Physical Signs:

  • Chemical smell on breath or clothes
  • Paint stains on face, hands, or clothing
  • Red or runny nose and eyes
  • Spots or sores around the mouth
  • Drunk-like behavior without alcohol smell
  • Loss of appetite

Behavioral Changes:

  • Sudden mood swings
  • Becoming secretive or isolated
  • Declining grades
  • Loss of interest in hobbies or friends
  • Finding hidden cans, bottles, or rags

Items Around the House:

  • Empty spray cans or bottles
  • Missing household products
  • Rags or clothing that smell like chemicals
  • Hidden bags or balloons

What Parents Can Do

 Talk Early and Often: Have honest conversations about drugs and inhalants before problems start. Explain that legal doesn’t mean safe. Other important messages are:

    • No temporary feeling is worth risking your life or permanent brain damage.
    • Real friends won’t pressure you to try dangerous things. It’s okay to say no.
    • Remember that social media doesn’t show the whole story. Videos don’t show the people who got seriously hurt or died.
  • Secure Products: Keep inhalants locked up or in hard-to-reach places, especially if you suspect a problem.
  • Stay Involved: Know your child’s friends, activities, and where they spend time.
  • Monitor Online Activity: Be aware of what your kids see on social media and talk about dangerous trends.
  • Get Help: If you suspect inhalant misuse, contact your doctor, school counselor, or an addiction professional immediately.

If you discover that your child is under the influence of inhalants:

  • Don’t leave them alone if they seem confused or sick
  • Call 911 if they pass out or have trouble breathing
  • Encourage them to talk about why they are using inhalants
  • Connect with Partnership to End Addiction for guidance and resources 

Additional Terms and Information

 The following provides more information on inhalants from “The Clinical Assessment and Treatment of Inhalant Abuse”:4

  • Bagging: inhaling fumes from a soaked cloth sprayed with euphoria-inducing substances and deposited inside a paper or plastic bag.
  • Ballooning: inhaling a gas (usually nitrous oxide) from a balloon.
  • Chroming: spraying paint from an aerosol can into a plastic bag and then breathing the vapors from the bag.
  • Dusting: spraying an aerosol directly into the nose or mouth.
  • Gladding: inhaling air-freshener aerosols sprayed near the face.
  • Glue sniffer’s rash/huffer’s rash: refers to a skin condition that occurs around the mouth and midface. Glue or other chemicals dry out the skin and dissolve its natural oils, leading to inflammation, redness, and sometimes infections.
  • Huffing: inhaling a substance from a cloth or rags that have been soaked and are held close to the face.
  • Poppers/snappers: amyl nitrite packaged in small bottles that are opened to release the vapors; sold under trade names Super Rush, Locker Room, Bolt, Jungle Juice, Quick Silver, and Extreme Formula.5
  • Popper’s maculopathy: is damage to vision in the central part of the retina caused by using alkyl nitrites, which are chemicals often found in certain inhalants.
  • Sniffing/snorting: inhaling a substance from an open container directly through the mouth or nose.
  • Snotballs: inhaling smoke from the burning of rubber cement, where the adhesive is rolled into balls then burned to release the fumes.
  • Whippets: vials of nitrous oxide gas, most commonly from whipped cream aerosol canisters. The nitrous oxide can be extracted following whipped cream discharge, after which the released gas can be inhaled at close range or transferred to a balloon and then inhaled.

The Bottom Line

 Inhalant use might seem harmless because these products are common household items, but it’s one of the most dangerous forms of substance use. The risk of serious injury or death is real from the very first use. By understanding the dangers, staying informed, and learning how to spot the signs of inhalant misuse, parents can better protect their families.

Remember: There is no safe way to use inhalants. The only safe choice is not to use them at all. If you’re concerned about your loved one, don’t hesitate to reach out to us for support.

Source: https://drugfree.org/article/huffing-dusting-signs-of-inhalant-misuse-parents-should-know/

Filed under: Culture,Drug use-various effects,Drugs and Accidents,Environment,Latest News,Parents,Prevention and Intervention,Solvent abuse,USA :
by Jac Charlier, Executive Director, Center for Health and Justice, TASC, and Jason Kew, Centre for Justice Innovation, UK

July 23, 2025.

Lessons from a Decade of Police, Drug Treatment, and Community Partnerships

Ten years ago, an article appeared in the September 2015 issue of IACP’s Police Chief magazine that would introduce a new word into the U.S.  police and justice lexicon: deflection. Eventually, the word also would make its way into the public health world of drug treatment and recovery, as well as move into global usage. In the article, “Want to Reduce Drugs in Your Community? You Might Want to Deflect Instead of Arrest,” author Jac Charlier described a model of crime reduction and crime prevention in which police would “deflect” people who use drugs to substance use treatment rather than arresting and charging them, thereby addressing the root of the problem—that person’s drug use—and, in turn, reducing drug-related offenses in the community. Further, in the case of opioids, police also were seeking to prevent overdoses.

“This scenario is ripe for innovation,” wrote Charlier, adding that deflection lays the groundwork for “comprehensive solutions that work in a variety of jurisdictions.”1

A decade later, the benefits suggested in the 2015 article have borne out, and the practice of deflection indeed has exploded into the emergence of a global field and movement. Reflecting on the impact of deflection over the past decade, many additional lessons and benefits have become evident as well.

What’s In a Name?

At first appearance, the need for a word to describe what was a small and disparate set of police departments working with local drug treatment agencies to address overdoses might have seemed unnecessary. With only a handful of departments across the United States known to be doing what would become called deflection, and with departments each developing their own processes ad hoc, the need for a new word was anything but obvious. Now, 10 years on, the word itself, while still new to some, has stuck. That is in part because of the simplicity and logic of the term: while diversion moves people away from the justice system after they have already entered it, deflection happens earlier, before they even enter it, moving them into community-based services instead. In other words, diversion is post-filing, and deflection is always pre-filing, whether or not an arrest occurs.

At the time the deflection term was coined, it was becoming clear that (1) something new and different was happening between police and drug treatment that had not been seen formally before; (2) when looked at closely, even in those early days, it appeared that what other parts of the justice system (prosecutors, jails, courts, prisons, probation, and parole) had been doing for many years (working closely with drug treatment) had now arrived for police; and (3) this was more than a move upstream to the police now doing diversion; rather, this was something very different because it relied not on the justice system solving the problem, but first and foremost on community, treatment, and recovery as co-problem-solving partners with the police.

“When one thinks about when and where they can have the greatest impact with the fewest resources, including costs, it is always best and better to act first at prevention and then early intervention”

Another aspect of deflection that easily could be overlooked yet deserves to be acknowledged for the tremendous innovation that it represents is this: deflection emerged not from the treatment or recovery movement, but from—almost exclusively at first—police, sheriffs, and other law enforcement agencies. The birth of deflection was in large part, but not exclusively, a response to the overdose crisis, and the maxim that “we can’t arrest our way out of this” is due to the courage, willingness, and creativity of police, sheriffs, law enforcement, and prosecutors to seek alternative solutions.

 While one-off versions of deflection have existed here and there since the 1990s, deflection now is practiced across departments, in multicounty approaches, and even at the level of state police. Deflection exists in training, practice, policy, legislation, research, and funding and continues to expand into new areas. It is here to stay and (together with its older sibling diversion, which also works at the intersection of public safety and public health) forms an entirely new way of understanding a practice-based, community-first-approach to reducing drug use and drug use–related crime, while promoting recovery and well-being.

Another way to think about the emergence of deflection is that whereas before, prevention and diversion of drug-related offenses happened through models such as treatment courts, there now exist new opportunities to reduce drug use and drug-related behaviors earlier than previously practicable by thinking of prevention–deflection–diversion, each offering opportunities to act.

Today, 9 U.S. federal agencies; 41 states; and innumerable counties, cities, foundations, researchers, universities, police training units, and—most importantly—police practitioners, recognize deflection. From those original few sites (and with federal, state, and local funding streams for deflection) it is now estimated that more than1,600 deflection initiatives exist, not including any of the  sites outside the United States.

Deflection on an International Scale

Deflection has evolved in concert with parallel international advances in related drug- and crime-reduction policies grounded in public safety and public health working together. For instance, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), in the past several years, has hosted Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) side events focused specifically on deflection. Outside of the United States, deflection initiatives have emerged in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Kenya, Mexico, South Africa, Italy, Tanzania, and other countries as communities seek efficient and cost-effective means to reduce substance use and its consequences.2 Just as has occurred in the United States, these initiatives are growing organically and according to local needs and resources. As one example, deflection practice in the UK incorporates a vast menu of options, from children’s referrals from schools, to veterans, mental health co-response, and women-only pathways. Each program is coordinated through the local authority’s community safety partnership, and each local authority is very different from another.

10 Lessons Learned from 10 Years of Deflection

With these roots, 10 major lessons have emerged as deflection has become formalized and has grown across the United States and globally:

  1. Police–treatment partnerships are effective. The first and most important lesson is that police and drug treatment can work together, side by side, with a shared mission and vision, to make a positive difference for the community. This idea, prior to deflection, was not routinely seen nor practiced. Policing and drug treatment historically have had misgivings about working together, starting with not considering how it might benefit them both to work together. Thanks to deflection, this has now changed. Through locally driven efforts unique to each community, where police departments have flexibility and control over processes, along with treatment partners who offer clinical and outreach expertise, deflection offers mutually rewarding solutions whereby both the justice system and public health system benefit from shared goals through a collaborative working relationship. In practical terms, police officers on the street now have a new “partner” working alongside them to figure out how to handle situations for which police were neither trained nor equipped, and the treatment and recovery communities now have earlier-than-before access to people with problem drug use who were not yet, in all but overdose cases, at the point of crisis. Of course, for the deflection participant, they benefit from a supportive “warm handoff” to treatment and services as a way to stop continued drug use.
  2. Police–recovery partnerships are growing. The second lesson, which stems from the first, is that police and people in recovery from addiction could work well together. If the first lesson was a hill to overcome, then this lesson was the mountain. Indeed, the credit of deflection actually working on the ground, day in and day out, goes to the line officers and people in recovery who have learned to work together by understanding and respecting why the other does what they do. Deflection creates a situation where they need each other. This is because while the police previously may have had the contact with the person using drugs, deflection offered a way to build trust that mattered. Through what is known in the field as “relentless engagement,” the partnerships seek to ensure the person knows that both the officer and treatment/services/recovery supports are there to assist them.
  3. The community is on board. The third lesson is that communities can accept deflection, especially and importantly when key community partners are consulted and included from the outset. Binary notions such as “tough on drugs” versus “let people use drugs” are politicized statements that do not reflect the reality on the ground of what the public wants—a response that leads to a solution that actually works for their family members, neighbors, businesses, and the community alike, and then allows their local police to focus more on serious and violent crimes, including, not coincidently, drug trafficking. Limited resources require efficient use of those resources.
  4. Deflection is effective. The fourth lesson underscores all the others: deflection works. From early evaluations to research to now second and even third site evaluations, it is clear that this entirely new field and movement, which sits between drug prevention and justice diversion (post-filing and entry into the justice system), was indeed called for and needed. As anticipated when it came into being a decade ago, deflection evaluations have shown it can reduce drug use and reduce drug use–related behaviors and crime, while also promoting recovery, well-being, and community safety.3
  5. Deflection’s community focus is rooted in the history of policing. Deflection fits naturally within the history and role of policing. Sir Robert Peel, who established the first organized police force in London, England, in 1829, and August Vollmer, who became known as the “father of modern policing” in the United States a century later, each contended that a foundational principle of policing is to prevent crime before it occurs and that this happens in partnership with the community. They both proposed that, by addressing underlying reasons for criminal behavior, policing practices can mitigate the harm caused by crime and reduce its occurrence. Indeed, Vollmer practically described deflection exactly when he suggested at a 1919 IACP meeting that police collaborate with social service agencies as a crime prevention strategy.4
  6. Police want to help people recover from drug use. The sixth lesson is that the police want to learn more about drug use, misuse, and addiction; about drug treatment and how it works; and most importantly, how they can be part of helping people to recover from addiction. Every day, police see people who use drugs. They see them getting worse, not better, and they see the harmful impact of drug use on families and the community at large. Through deflection, police get to see people reduce and then stop and recover from drug use. This is critical to a profession that otherwise often sees only bad and negative things. Police can see in deflection the role they play in reducing the scourge of addiction and how helpful they and their profession can be. They are not asked to provide treatment nor do the case management, but they kick off the entire process. It is said within the field that while police may be only the first step of many to recovery from drugs, without law enforcement, deflection would never get started. (Deflection is now practiced by EMS and fire departments, as well as by others, including second responders, but police deflection still makes up the majority of sites.)
  7. Local, community-based designs, decisions, and control are vital. Deflection is a framework, not a program. This is often heard in the field with the idea being that while some critical elements that make deflection work, and work better, are known, it is and always will exist only within the context of the local community in which it operates. Deflection is a multisystems approach to addressing a complex, often chronic problem: addiction. That means the local community has a say in how it is designed and looks; police have a say in how it operates; and treatment and recovery providers have a say into how it will focus their limited resources. The complexity of deflection, understood within the design of a specific community, is what gives meaning to the statement, “If you’ve seen one deflection initiative, you’ve truly seen only one deflection initiative.”
  8. Deflection is good public policy. The combined voice of police, drug treatment, and community together makes for good, community-grounded public policy, and as a result, is much more powerful when speaking to drug policy, funding, and practice than any of them would be alone. This lesson comes from the work of each of the deflection sites themselves, which figures out how to make it work on the ground and from that, find their shared voice to do more and do better to share deflection insights with neighboring communities.
  9. Barriers to treatment persist. The ninth lesson is that deflection has required greater adjustments for treatment than it has for the police. For police, any initial hesitancy about deflection usually relates to the practical side of how this will work. For treatment, recovery, and health partners, working alongside the police is often a new endeavor altogether. Interestingly, treatment partners will state they know this can be done but do not know how. Deflection creates a bridge between public safety and public health and the resulting connection provides guidance; instruction; training; and most important, one-on-one relationships between officers, people who treat those who use drugs, and people in recovery.
  10. The efficiency of deflection: Why wait for an arrest? The tenth lesson comes directly from the motto of the deflection field: “Why wait for an arrest?” Deflection offers an opportunity to get people to treatment before they reach the point of entering the justice system, and often before addiction has set in at full force. Deflection creates pathways, six to be exact, to connect people to treatment, housing, recovery, and services.5)

This matters because when one thinks about when and where they can have the greatest impact with the fewest resources, including costs, it is always best and better to act first at prevention and then early intervention. This is, of course, where deflection operates. In cases of overdose, its focus is preventing the next potential overdose. Deflection is an early, upstream strategy. This means that deflection is efficient in addressing issues before they become crises or happen again.

First national deflection and pre-arrest diversion summit, held at IACP in Alexandria, VA, 2017.
Photo courtesy TASC’s Center for Health and Justice.

As the decade since the introduction of the term deflection closes out and stakeholders reflect on these 10 lessons learned, the future of this field and movement is nothing but positive. It is growing nationally and globally; it is now common; it has funding and legislative support; researchers and policymakers are doing more of it; the demands to show more and better outcomes by the public are underway; and there is much more to come. Most important, the idea attached to the word deflection—this foundational change in how police and drug treatment work together, in and with the community—is no longer unusual, something not understood. Rather, the communities  practicing it show that deflection can be done, and the field indeed is doing it!

Finally, as deflection celebrates its 10th anniversary with a celebration at the Police, Treatment, and Community Collaborative (PTACC) 2025 International Deflection and Pre-Arrest Diversion Summit in New Orleans, Louisiana, from December 2–4, deflection sites will share their own lessons learned. Police professionals are invited to join PTACC in New Orleans. After that, it’s time to get ready for the next 10 years. Many possibilities exist of where this work will go, but this field and movement, once unheard of, will be more, do more, and achieve more. Indeed, police, treatment, and communities alike are counting on deflection to do just that! d

 

 

Source: https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/deflection-turns-10/

Filed under: Crime/Violence/Prison,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,UK,USA :

by Shane Varcoe – Executive Director for the Dalgarno Institute, Australia – Jul 23, 2025

Alcohol affects 15 of the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, yet remains one of the most overlooked barriers to global progress. Behind the marketing messages and cultural acceptance lies a stark reality: alcohol is a Group 1 carcinogen causing seven types of cancer, with no safe level of consumption.

This week on the Unnecessary Harm Podcast,  we welcomed Kristina Sperkova , President of Movendi International , a global network of over 170 organizations across 63 countries working to reduce alcohol-related harm. Kristina shared powerful insights from her decade of leadership at the forefront of international alcohol policy advocacy, including her recent work at the World Health Assembly.

Kristina reveals how alcohol undermines everything from poverty reduction to gender equality, the predatory tactics of Big Alcohol at UN meetings, and the groundbreaking policy wins that are reshaping how the world views alcohol taxation and regulation.

 Key Takeaways From This Episode 

  • Massive Global Impact: Alcohol directly affects 15 of 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals, from perpetuating poverty cycles to fueling intimate partner violence (50-80% of violent acts are alcohol-related).
  • Environmental Devastation: Producing one liter of beer requires 270 liters of water, highlighting alcohol’s massive environmental footprint through water depletion and agricultural monocultures.
  • Cancer Connection: Since 1988, alcohol has been classified as a Group 1 carcinogen alongside tobacco and asbestos, yet public awareness remains dangerously low.
  • Industry Deception: Big Alcohol uses front groups, creates dependency through corporate partnerships, and spreads lies about employment impacts and illegal production to derail effective policies.
  • Policy Solutions Work: WHO’s “best buys” – availability restrictions, marketing bans, and public health taxation – are proven, fast-acting interventions that reduce consumption and generate revenue.

Recent Victory: After 10 years of advocacy, alcohol taxation was officially recognised as a source of domestic resource mobilisation at the Financing for Development conference – a major breakthrough for global policy.

Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/alcohols-global-impact-fight-evidence-based-policy-shane-varcoe-fmc8c

Filed under: Alcohol,Australia,Environment,Health,Latest News,Strategy and Policy :

 

OPENING REMARK BY NDPA:

Dianova presents itself as a “Swiss NGO recognized as a Public Utility organization, committed to social progress”. Examination of their publications places them as an organisation which is less committed to primary prevention than to reactive approaches, such as harm reduction. A telling quote in this context comes in their publication entitled “Between Music and Substances: a Look at Drug Use at Festivals” … they introduce this by saying “Drug use is a common occurrence at most music festivals: how can we promote self-care and harm reduction among participants?” – there is no mention of prevention as a policy option.

In their ‘history’ Dianova take a position found not infrequently in some other other critics of prevention i.e. any prevention program which does not achieve 100% success is deemed a failure … but no such assessment is made of reactive or accepting policies.

In this publication they dismiss the ‘Just Say No’ program as “…focusing mainly on white, middle-class children, it simply pointed the finger at others, particularly black communities, who were held responsible for the problem.” And yet immediately below this statement they include a photo of a White House ‘Just Say No’ rally, with Nancy Regan surrounded by black youngsters.

Dianova make judgemental remarks – without supporting evidence – in several places, and NDPA take would issue with several of these, but we have elected to retain this paper complete with their judgemental remarks, to illustrate their position on the ‘history’ as they see it.

by the Dianova.org team – 

From the early 20th century to the present day, an overview of the origins of drug use prevention, past mistakes and the current situation in this field

By the Dianova team – Over the past 40 years, prevention has become a key focus of public intervention in many areas, including responses to social issues such as alcohol and other drug use. Prevention strategies are now most often part of a comprehensive approach combining prevention, treatment and harm reduction, and taking into account the needs of people who use drugs and those of society as a whole.

These initiatives are developed on the basis of applied research in the humanities and social sciences, and their implementation and evaluation are based on scientifically validated strategies designed to answer one key question: do they work?

Understanding risk factors is crucial in modern drug prevention interventions, as it enables us to address the root causes of substance use and promote protective factors such as strong family bonds, engagement with school, and community support – Image by stokpic from pixabay, via Canva

Rather than raising awareness of the ‘dangers of drugs’, most initiatives today prefer to target risk factors and protective factors at the individual, family, community and environmental levels. These interventions are designed to be person-centred, while taking into account the many complex interactions between personal and environmental factors that may make certain populations more vulnerable to substance use or addiction. However, this has not always been the case. So what was prevention like before? Is prevention today so different from what it was in the past?

The origins of prevention: combating the ravages of alcohol

All forms of prevention stem from the 19th-century school of thought influenced by Pasteur’s work on the spread of disease: hygienism. This developed in a society plagued by diseases such as tuberculosis and cholera, which were widespread in most European countries, as well as in India, the United States and Canada.

With regard to substance use, it was alcohol that initially became the focus of efforts in Western countries. . In the countries concerned, the Industrial Revolution caused a profound change in drinking habits and exacerbated related problems. The advent of industrialization precipitated a period of exponential growth in the production, transportation and commercialization of alcohol. In urban areas, which experienced a significant increase in population following the rural exodus, millions of workers, reliant on their employers and lacking in social rights, found solace in alcohol, which had become readily available and inexpensive. Alcohol consumption increased significantly, as did the associated problems.

At the time, excessive drinkers were seen as a threat to their jobs, their families and society as a whole. In response, the temperance movement gained strength in America and Europe in an effort to combat alcoholism.

The temperance movement, a group of religious associations and leagues committed to combating the social ills of alcoholism, fought against the consumption of alcohol in the name of morality, good manners and the protection of the family unit. The influence of this movement grew until it reached its zenith in the early 20th century with the advent of alcohol prohibition laws, not only in the United States, but also in Canada, Finland and Russia – with the results we all know.

“The voluntary slave” – press illustration published in “La Fraternité” (France) for the Popular Anti-alcoholic league, author Adolphe Willette – circa 1875 – Adapted from screenshot from L’histoire par l’image

What about illegal drugs?

At the dawn of the 20th century, the concept of ‘illegal’ drugs had yet to be established. Europe and America had recently discovered a ‘remarkable substance’ – cocaine – lauded for its medicinal properties, touted as a panacea for all maladies. Initially imported in small quantities for medical research, its use grew rapidly, particularly within the medical community, and it was prescribed to treat a wide range of ailments, from toothache to morphine addiction. Sigmund Freud himself considered at the time cocaine to be a highly effective medicine for depression and stomach problems without causing addiction or side effects. With regard to cannabis and hashish, these were still available for purchase in all reputable pharmacies, while heroin, a registered trademark of the Bayer pharmaceutical company, was regarded as a sovereign remedy for… coughs.

It should be noted that the issue of substance addiction had not yet manifested itself in the context of affluent, colonizing nations. Elsewhere, the perspective was somewhat different: in a distant country – China – opium had already been wreaking havoc for several decades.

Introduced and marketed by Europeans, it had become a pervasive national scourge affecting millions of Chinese people. Opium  addiction is a prime example of the impact of colonialism on local societies: not only did it trigger two wars against Western powers concerned solely with their economic interests (profits from the opium trade), but it also had profound social and political consequences that are still felt today.

The Western countries’ ‘honeymoon’ with drugs was not to last. The problems they posed became apparent rapidly and, under the influence of American temperance leagues, they swiftly transitioned from being regarded as a universal remedy to being perceived as a threat to society and moral values. This marked the beginning of American policies predicated on drug control (or the war on drugs, depending on one’s perspective), which would shape global policies in this domain for over a century.

The demonization of ‘drugs’

The demonisation of drugs, the effects of which were felt from the beginning of the 20th century, is closely associated with a set of social, racial, political and economic dynamics that resulted in the stigmatization of both the substances themselves and the people who consumed them. As early as 1906, the United States initiated the legislative process, and the phenomenon grew until it culminated in a particularly restrictive and repressive international drug control policy – but that is another matter.

In the 1930s, the American government initiated a media offensive involving the use of racist stereotypes, sensationalist media, and political propaganda to portray cannabis as a dangerous substance that led to violence, insanity, and moral decay.

The process of demonizing drugs was gradual yet unstoppable. The discourse surrounding narcotics such as morphine, opium and heroin was initially shaped by their association with specific demographic groups, namely minorities, the economically disadvantaged, and migrants. This demonization continued over the following decades, fuelled by media sensationalism and public panic, particularly around the use of cocaine and cannabis – substances that were claimed to be the root cause of criminal behaviour and moral corruption.

The criminalization and stigmatization of substances and those who use them have had a profound impact. Not only have they perpetuated and reinforced racist prejudices against Afro-descendant, Latin American and other historically marginalized communities, but they have also completely distorted the approaches and prevention efforts implemented subsequently.

Early drug prevention initiatives

Before the 1960s, the ‘drug phenomenon’ was virtually non-existent in industrialised countries. Apart from a few opium enthusiasts, alcohol and tobacco reigned supreme in the field of substance addiction.

From the 1960s onwards, there was a rapid increase in the use of illegal drugs in the United States, particularly among the counterculture movement. The use of LSD and cannabis – and, to a lesser extent, amphetamines and heroin – spread and became a symbol of rebellion against authority, as part of a broader movement focused on social change.

Within the collective imagination, the 1960s are often regarded as the golden age of illegal drug use. This period was characterised by widespread use of cannabis, as well as the significant distribution of heroin among children in impoverished neighbourhoods. Notable figures such as Timothy Leary, a prominent Harvard professor, popularised the effects of LSD. However, an analysis of historical data reveals that the phenomenon was not as widespread as is commonly believed. Conversely, however, there was a marked increase in the perception of risk associated with drugs. For instance, in 1969, a mere 4% of American adults reported having used cannabis at least once. However, 48% of respondents indicated that drug use was a serious problem.

While many current prevention efforts have a solid theoretical basis and evidence of effectiveness, historic prevention strategies were often based on intuition and guesswork, with an emphasis on such scare tactics as the one depicted above (“Your brain on drugs” campaign, initially launched in 1987)

The notion of prevention as a concept was first developed in the early 1960s within the domain of mental health and behavioural disorders. In the context of drug policy, the first initiatives were echoing the pervasive fear of drugs that was prevalent in both America and Europe during that period. Logically, the primary initiatives were consistent with the propaganda campaigns initiated in previous decades with the objective of demonizing cannabis. The objective of these initial prevention initiatives was not to promote education, but rather to instil a sense of fear and intimidation.

‘People of my generation were taught that cannabis caused acne, blindness and sterility. It was a tactic based on fear, not on educating people.’

Children and young people in the 1960s and 1970s were no more stupid than anyone else and just as observant. They quickly realised that the messages promoted by schools and families did not correspond to reality.

So simple, ‘Just Say No’.

In 1971, Richard Nixon declared drug abuse ‘public enemy number one’ and launched a widespread campaign against drug use, distribution and trafficking. This marked the beginning of a government policy that led to the incarceration of both traffickers and users. The policy would have far-reaching consequences for many countries, whilst in the United States it would have a disproportionately negative impact on the Black community.

The notion that one should ‘Just Say No’ to drugs is predicated on a rudimentary interpretation of the rational choice model, according to which people choose their behaviour in order to maximize rewards and minimize costs (negative consequences).

Nancy Reagan at a “Just Say No” rally at the White House in May 1986 – White House Photographic Collection, public domain

The D.A.R.E. programme: information is not enough

From 1983 onwards, this concept became central to the D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) programme. Initially implemented in Los Angeles, this school-based programme aimed to help young people understand that the harmful consequences of drug use far outweigh any perceived benefits. Young people can therefore avoid these consequences by refusing to take drugs.

The D.A.R.E programme’s model was based on three key elements: 1) drugs are bad; 2) when children understand how bad drugs are, they will avoid using them; and 3) the message is more effective when delivered by police officers, who are considered credible.

The programme was subsequently developed in the United Kingdom, and a similar model was adopted elsewhere in Europe during the same period — notably by associations of rehabilitated individuals — which replaced the credibility of police officers with that of former drug users ‘who could speak from experience’.

In response to findings on the ineffectiveness of the DARE programme, a new curriculum was developed (2009) with a stronger focus on interactive activities and decision-making skills, moving away from the traditional lecture-based approach by a police officer – AI-generated image, via Canva

Over the years, the programme has been the subject of extensive study. One study found that people who completed the programme had higher levels of drug use than those who did not. Another study found that teenagers enrolled in the D.A.R.E programme “were just as likely to use drugs as those who received no intervention”.

The impact of popular culture

The aim here is not to portray the D.A.R.E. programme or similar interventions solely in an unfavourable or ridiculous light. Even though it has lost its central position, the programme is still implemented in most US states, and according to its website, it has been developed in 29 countries since its creation. It is true that the programme has since been adapted to incorporate various aspects, such as resistance to peer pressure and the development of social skills.

However, these initiatives face a major difficulty from the outset. As we know, experimentation and risk-taking are part of normal adolescent development, which is why providing young people with detailed information about different substances is likely to arouse their interest in these drugs, especially if the information is not presented in an appropriate manner. Secondly, this type of strategy only has an impact on young people who are susceptible to alarmist messages because of their cognitive patterns, and is not effective for everyone else, as we now know.

Officers in the DARE programme would sometimes arrive in sports cars seized from drug traffickers to exemplify their message on drugs and crime (Crime does not pay) – A Pontiac Firebird in D.A.R.E. livery in Evesham Township, New Jersey – image: Jay Reed – Flickr, licence: CC BY-SA 2.0

Furthermore, when talking about drugs, one must also consider the influence of popular culture, which, without openly glorifying substance use, often portrays alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs in a favourable light, particularly at an age when young people are most receptive.

We now know that providing information about drugs is not enough to make for a good prevention policy. While education and awareness can always play an important role, they are not sufficient, nor even necessary, to prevent addiction.

Should we talk about drugs to prevent drug use?

According to Dr Rebecca Haines-Saah, who spoke at a webinar organised by Dianova last May, the most effective drug prevention strategies do not focus on drugs, but on much broader social issues, such as reducing poverty, combating discrimination and implementing targeted community programmes.

Some prevention strategies even choose not to mention drugs at all, yet they have proven effective in reducing substance use by focusing on broader social, environmental and behavioural factors.

These approaches aim to create conditions that indirectly discourage drug use, particularly by strengthening social skills and improving people’s living conditions. For example, programmes focused on improving the school environment, teaching social skills or promoting healthy lifestyles can have a positive impact on reducing substance use without explicitly targeting drugs.

Similarly, family interventions that strengthen parent-child relationships and improve communication can also help prevent substance misuse by targeting underlying risk factors. These strategies highlight the importance of a holistic approach to prevention that goes far beyond direct drug education.

Prevention is a science

Preventing substance use – i.e. the use of all psychoactive substances regardless of their legal status –  involves helping people, particularly young people, to avoid using substances. If they have already used substances, the objective is to prevent them from developing substance use disorders (problematic use or dependence).

However, the overall objective is much broader, as highlighted by the UNODC in the second edition of the International Standards on Drug Use Prevention. It also involves ensuring that children and adolescents grow up healthy and safe, so they can fulfil their potential and become active and productive members of society.

Drug prevention is now grounded in research and evidence-based practices. This multi-disciplinary field has developed over the last forty years, aiming to improve public health by identifying risk and protective factors, assessing the efficacy of preventive interventions, and identifying optimal means for dissemination and diffusion –  AndreyPopov from Getty Images, via Canva

There is now a vast body of literature on substance use prevention. Its aim is to highlight effective and less effective strategies based on scientific evidence in order to guide decision-makers and practitioners in the field in their choices. Despite this, prevention activities are still sometimes poorly prepared and based primarily on beliefs or ideologies rather than scientific knowledge.

At Dianova, we believe that addiction prevention, particularly among young people, must take into account societal changes (new drugs, new patterns of use, changes in legislation, etc.) using scientifically validated strategies based on standards and methodological guidelines.

These strategies are based in particular on:

  • The acquisition of psychosocial skills (problem solving, decision-making, interpersonal skills, stress management, etc.),
  • Interventions aimed at developing parenting skills (e.g. communication skills, conflict management, setting boundaries, etc.),
  • Prevention strategies tailored to young people with vulnerability factors (e.g. those whose parents suffer from substance use disorders) and taking into account gender perspectives, abandoning androcentric strategies that obscure the situation of girls and LGBTQI+ communities.

In conclusion, we must bear in mind the mistakes of the past so as not to repeat them and, above all, understand that no prevention system is sufficient on its own. Whatever approach is chosen, effective prevention systems must be evidence-based and integrated into broader, balanced systems that focus on health promotion, the treatment of substance use disorders, risk and harm reduction, and countering drug trafficking.

Effective, science-based programmes that can make a real difference to people’s lives can only be developed by integrating all these elements.

Source: https://www.dianova.org/publications/a-brief-history-of-drug-prevention/

Filed under: Addiction,Culture,Drug use-various effects,Harm Reduction,Health,Latest News,Others (International News),Parents,Prevalence,Prevention and Intervention,Strategy and Policy,Treatment and Addiction,Youth :

 

Report to Congressional Committees – July 2025  / GAO-25-107845 – United States GAO – (Government Accountability Office)

Highlights

A report to congressional committees.

For more information, contact: Triana McNeil – United States Government Accountability Office

What GAO Found

The 12 experts in a forum which GAO convened said that to develop effective media campaigns and evaluate media campaigns, whether on drug misuse prevention or other topics, campaigns need to consider the following: 

Graphical user interface, text, application AI-generated content may be incorrect.

·         Identify and understand intended audience. Once a campaign has identified who it wants to reach, it needs to understand the intended audience—including by identifying the underlying causes of the behavior the campaign wants to change. For example, experts noted that campaigns may decide to target the underlying reasons why people misuse drugs rather than developing campaigns to target specific drugs.

·         Create content, select messengers, and decide on delivery methods. Campaigns need to create content to deliver their messages, which need to be credible and relevant for the intended audience. Campaigns also need to select messengers to deliver their messages, such as community leaders. Additionally, campaigns need to decide how to deliver their messages. For example, campaigns may use print and social media, among other options.

·         Test messages. Campaigns need to test their messages with the intended audience to ensure that the messages are relevant and resonate with the intended audience. This testing can include using focus groups, interviews, or surveys, among other methods.

·         Define the intended outcome. Campaigns need to have a clear understanding of what they are trying to achieve. Then, evaluators can decide what data are needed to determine whether a campaign is meeting its goals.

·         Select qualified evaluators. Campaigns need independent evaluators who can speak to campaign managers about a campaign’s effectiveness using evidence from evaluations. Evaluators need expertise in research methods, evaluation, and other disciplines and need to understand the campaign substance.

·         Decide when and how to measure effectiveness. Campaigns need to decide if they will evaluate the campaign while it is ongoing or after the campaign has concluded. They also need to decide what they want to measure and what data collection methods they will use.

To access the full document:

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

Source: https://files.gao.gov/reports/GAO-25-107845/index.html?

Filed under: Drug Specifics,Drug use-various effects,Internet,Latest News,Prevention and Intervention,Social Affairs,Strategy and Policy,USA :

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 Gold M.D.

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,Latest News,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.

 

  1. 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.

  1. 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.

  1. 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:

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

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

 

 

 

Filed under: Australia,Latest News,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,Latest News,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 20th 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:

  1. The pharmaceutical industry, led by Purdue Pharma, spent huge sums of money generating the notion that pain in America was not treated or undertreated;
  2. Medical schools in the 1990s were still teaching in the 1940s mode that narcotics should be used only in terminal cancer patients;
  3. Modern opioids, like Purdue’s new extended-release OxyContin, were promoted as less addictive;
  4. 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 5th 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):

  1. 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;
  2. 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);
  3. 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;
  4. 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;
  5. Purdue and Mallinckrodt entered and exited bankruptcy as a result of settlements and judgments related to the MDL;
  6. The companies have largely abandoned the freewheeling and unlawful sales of opioids that they promoted in the heyday of the previous decade;
  7. 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;
  8. 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,Latest News,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:

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

 

Source: Rescheduling Cannabis – Medicine or Politics

Filed under: Cannabis/Marijuana,Drug use-various effects,Latest News,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,Latest News,Treatment and Addiction,UK :
 

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:

  1. Treatment admissions in Europe increased by 30% between 2010 and 2019
  2. Young adults aged 20-24 show the highest rates of problematic use
  3. 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:

  1. Identify triggers and high-risk situations
  2. Develop practical coping strategies
  3. Build internal motivation for change
  4. 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:

  1. Mindfulness skills for managing cravings
  2. Emotional regulation techniques
  3. Distress tolerance without substance use
  4. 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:

  1. Leveraging community resources
  2. Building substance-free social networks
  3. Creating natural reinforcements for positive change
  4. 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:

  1. 6-52 sessions (average of 14)
  2. Weekly meetings over 2-6 months
  3. Individual or group formats
  4. 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:

  1. Severity of dependence
  2. Co-occurring mental health conditions
  3. Social support availability
  4. 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:

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

Implications for Treatment Seekers

For individuals considering treatment, research suggests:

  1. Evidence-based psychological interventions offer genuine hope for recovery
  2. Different approaches suit different individuals
  3. Professional assessment helps match treatment to personal needs
  4. 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,Latest News,Mental Health,Prevention and Intervention,Treatment and Addiction :
 

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,Latest News,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,Latest News,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,Latest News,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,Latest News,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,Latest News,Prevalence,Prevention and Intervention,Vaping,Youth :

by The Daily Telegraph, London, UK –

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.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

“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.

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).

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.”

“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.”

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,Latest News,Mental Health,UK,Youth :

Sponsored by Summit County Health

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,Latest News,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,Latest News,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,Latest News,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: Latest News,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:

  1. In socially conservative states cannabis use is falling or flat whilst it is rising in more liberal states;
  2. 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;
  3. The rate of almost all congenital anomalies in the USA has risen when reasonable estimates for ETOPFA rates are employed;
  4. Cannabis exposure is significant for all 62 anomalies combined considered as a group;
  5. 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;  
  6. 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

  1. 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,Latest News,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,Latest News :
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,Latest News,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 26th. 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,Latest News,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,Latest News,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,Latest News :

Back to top of page

Powered by WordPress