• Drug Policy - Question of the Week

    Question of the Week: Does student drug testing achieve drug free students?

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 8-23-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 8-23-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3031

    Question of the Week: Does student drug testing achieve drug free students?

    As described in the July 2010 report from the U.S. Department of Education, entitled “The Effectiveness of Mandatory-Random Student Drug Testing,”

    “One approach to address student substance use is school-based mandatory-random student drug testing (MRSDT). Under MRSDT, students and their parents sign consent forms agreeing to the students’ random drug testing as a condition of participation in athletics and other school-sponsored competitive extracurricular activities.”

    These programs have the goals of (1) identifying students with substance use problems for referral to counseling or treatment services, and (2) deterring substance use among all students.

    Unfortunately, MSRDT has produced few results. Seven years ago, the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University found,

    “Drug testing is not associated with either significantly lower risk scores or lower estimates of student body drug use.”

    That same year, researchers in a Journal of School Health article concluded,

    “drug testing (of any kind) was not a significant predictor of student marijuana use in the past 12 months. Neither was drug testing for cause or suspicion.”

    A 2007 study in the Journal of Adolescent Health questioned deterrence, finding that,

    “No Drug and Alcohol Testing deterrent effects were evident for past month use.”

    The conclusions in the aforementioned 2010 Department of Education report mostly mirrored those of the prior studies, stating that mandatory random student drug testing has,

    “had no “spillover effects” on the substance use reported by students who were not subject to testing and had no effect on any group of students’ reported intentions to use substances in the future.”

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Drug Testing chapter of Drug War Facts at www.drugwarfacts.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].

  • Cannabis & Hemp - Drug Policy - Question of the Week

    Question of the Week: Is marijuana a gateway to hard drug use?

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 8-17-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 8-17-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3022

    Question of the Week: Is marijuana a gateway to hard drug use?

    The hypothesis that marijuana is a “pipeline” to heroin and other drugs is called the “Gateway Theory.” It asserts that marijuana use leads directly to hard drug abuse.

    This concept was questioned in the 1999 Institute of Medicine Report, Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base, which stated,

    “There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs.”

    In 2002, British Home Office Research Study 253 looked at the presumed progression of drug use arrived at the same conclusion,

    “there is very little remaining evidence of any causal gateway effect.”

    The 2006 study “Predictors of Marijuana Use in Adolescents Before and After Licit Drug Use: Examination of the Gateway Hypothesis,” was published in the American Journal of Psychiatry and concluded that

    “Evidence supporting ‘causal linkages between stages,’ as specified by the gateway hypothesis, was not obtained.”

    Finally, consider numbers from the 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. In 2008, more than 102 million Americans were estimated to have tried marijuana, with 15.2 million of them said to be “past-month” users. There were an estimated 1.8 million “past-month” users of cocaine and 213,000 “past-month” users of heroin. These “past month” cocaine and heroin use numbers are respectively 11.8% and 1.4% of “past month” marijuana users and 1.8% and 0.2% of lifetime marijuana users. If cannabis were a pipeline to hard drugs, wouldn’t these percentages be significantly higher?

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Gateway Theory chapter of Drug War Facts at http://www.drugwarfacts.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].


    These facts and others like them can be found in the Gateway Theory and Marijuana chapters of Drug War Facts at www.drugwarfacts.org.

  • Drug Policy - Question of the Week

    The Vienna Declaration and HIV/AIDS

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 8-7-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 8-7-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3010

    Question of the Week:  Is there a relationship between HIV/AIDS and drug policy?

    The most recent annual statistics concerning HIV/AIDS come from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It reported that, from the beginning of the epidemic through 2007, an estimated 583,298 persons in the US have died from AIDS. A total of 1,030,832 persons reportedly had AIDS in 2007.

    AIDS is prevalent in Europe where 48,892 newly diagnosed HIV cases were reported in 49 of the 53 EU countries. The situation in the Russian Federation is particularly dire as detailed in a Human Rights Watch report that determined

    “being in prison or other state detention is an important risk factor for HIV in Russia.”

    Prison is a risk factor in the United States as well. The Bureau of Justice Statistics estimated that,

    “At yearend 2008, a reported 21,987 inmates held in state or federal prisons were HIV positive or had confirmed AIDS.”

    Another risk factor for HIV/AIDS is race. The CDC concluded that HIV was the 22nd leading cause of death in the US for whites, the 13th leading cause of death for Hispanics, and the 9th leading cause of death for blacks.

    These factors and more served as the basis for the Vienna Declaration, which was launched at the 18th International AIDS Conference held recently in Vienna, Austria from July 18th to 23rd. The declaration was drafted by a team of leading international HIV experts. It stated simply,

    “The criminalisation of illicit drug users is fuelling the HIV epidemic and has resulted in overwhelmingly negative health and social consequences. A full policy reorientation is needed.”

    These facts and others like them can be found in the HIV/AIDS, Race & HIV, and European Union chapters of Drug War Facts at www.drugwarfacts.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].


  • International - Question of the Week

    United States counternarcotics initiatives in Mexico

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 7-28-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 7-28-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/2995

    Question of the Week: Are the United States’ counternarcotics initiatives in Mexico working?

    Drug war violence along the United States/Mexico border has been widely reported. A March 2010 report from the U.S. State Department calculated that,

    “Between January and September 2009, there were 5,874 drug-related murders in Mexico, an almost 5 percent increase over 2008 (5,600).”

    That’s a total of well over 11,000 for those two years.

    That same report also estimated that,

    “DTOs’ [drug trafficking organizations] annual gross revenue ranges between $15-30 billion from illicit drug sales in the U.S.”

    A 2009 report from the Government Accountability Office reviewed the Mérida Initiative, a multiyear security assistance package for Mexico and Central America set in motion in 2007 by U.S President George W. Bush and Mexican President Felipe Calderón. Under this initiative, Mexico was set to receive $1.4 billion in counternarcotics aid over several years, $400 million for fiscal year 2008 alone.

    But another just released report from the GAO concerning the Mérida Initiative concluded that the Department of State, which oversees the program,

    “generally lacks outcome-based measures that define success in the short term and the long term, making it difficult to determine effectiveness and leaving unclear when the Initiative’s goals will be met.”

    The report went on to state,

    “There are no timelines for future deliveries of some equipment and training,”

    causing the Mexican government to express concerns about the pace of delivery.

    So the short answer to this question is we don’t know if counternarcotics initiatives are working and won’t know until effective measurements of them have been put in place.

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Causes of Death, Economics, and United States International Policy chapters of Drug War Facts at www.drugwarfacts.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].

  • Drug Policy - Question of the Week

    Is alcohol a dangerous drug?

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 7-19-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 7-19-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/2984

    Question of the Week: Is alcohol a dangerous drug?

    Let’s look at some statistics.

    A 2009 report from the National Center for Health Statistics estimated that about 22,000 people died of alcohol-induced causes in 2006.

    Numbers from 1993 quoted in a 2009 study from the Journal of Psychopharmacology stated,

    “Four per cent of the global burden of disease is attributable to alcohol (about as much as that to tobacco and hypertension) and causally related to more than 60 medical conditions.”

    An editorial in the New Zealand Journal of Medicine calculated that

    “The lethal dose of alcohol divided by a typical recreational dose [in other words, its safety ratio] is 10, which places it closer to heroin [safety ratio – 6), and GHB [safety ratio – 8] in terms of danger from overdose”

    The editorial further asserted that alcohol is considerably more dangerous than LSD [with a safety ratio of 1000] or cannabis, whose safety ratio is greater than 1,000.

    A 1998 Bureau of Justice Statistics analysis found that,

    “Federal statistics show that a large percentage of criminal offenders were under the influence of alcohol alone when they committed their crimes (36.3%, or a total of [1.9 million] offenders). Federal research also shows for more than 40% of convicted murderers being held in either jail or State prison, alcohol use was a factor in the crime.”

    That Journal of Psychopharmacology study compared alcohol to GHB and concluded,

    “the degree of danger to public health caused by ethanol is similar to that caused by GHB.”

    In the United States, GHB is a Schedule 1 drug, the same classification as heroin.

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Alcohol chapter of Drug War Facts.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].

  • Cannabis & Hemp - Drug Policy - Question of the Week

    Hemp History

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 7-17-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 7-17-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/2982

    Question of the Week: What is hemp’s history in United States?

    A 2000 report from the United States Department of Agriculture recounted,

    “The first records of hemp cultivation and use are from China, where the species most likely originated. Migrating peoples likely brought hemp to Europe where, by the 16th century, it was widely distributed, cultivated for fiber, and the seed cooked with barley or other grains and eaten.”

    “The Puritans brought hemp to New England in 1645 as a fiber source for household spinning and weaving … Cultivation spread to Virginia and, in 1775, to Kentucky, where the crop grew so well a commercial cordage industry developed. The hemp industry flourished in Kentucky, Missouri, and Illinois between 1840 and 1860 because of strong demand for sailcloth and cordage by the U.S. Navy.”

    For her article in the 2009 UCLA Law Review, Christine Kolosov, reported,

    “So important was hemp to the earliest settlers that in 1619, the Jamestown colony passed a law making it illegal not to grow the crop. Colonies in Massachusetts and Connecticut passed similar laws in 1631 and 1632. The first drafts of the United States Constitution and the Declaration of Independence were both penned on hemp paper, and hemp cultivation continued well into the twentieth century as patriotic farmers responded to the government’s call by drastically increasing production during World War I and World War II.”

    But according to the USDA,

    “Production peaked in 1943 and 1944. After the war, production rapidly declined as imports resumed and legal restrictions were reimposed. A small hemp fiber industry continued in Wisconsin until 1958.”

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Hemp chapter of Drug War Facts.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].

  • Drug Policy - Question of the Week

    Opium, heroin, and Afghanistan

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 6-29-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 6-29-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/2956

    Question of the Week: What’s the relationship among opium, heroin, and Afghanistan?

    Afghanistan is a landlocked country in South–Central Asia, bordered by Pakistan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and China. Although the modern state of Afghanistan was established in 1747, the country has been fought over, conquered, and incorporated within large empires for millennia.

    A report entitled, “Addiction, Crime and Insurgency: The transnational threat of Afghan opium,” was published by the United Nation’s Office of Drugs and Crime (UNDOC) in October 2009. It stated,

    “Opium poppy cultivation is not a new phenomenon in Afghanistan, but the country’s global pre-eminence as an exporter is relatively recent. Opium poppy was traditionally cultivated in some parts of Afghanistan as far back as the eighteenth century.82 The first significant increases in cultivation levels were reported in the 1980s as Turkish, Pakistani and Iranian anti-narcotics policies were being successfully enforced.”

    It went on to state,

    “Between 1995 and 2000, the Taliban regime tolerated the drug trade and earned some US$ 75-100 million annually from taxing it. In the post-Taliban period, it was a source of revenue for warlords.”

    The Taliban regrouped in the south of the country, and their cumulated revenue over the four-year period (2005-2008) ranged from US$ 350-650 million.

    The report concluded that, currently

    “more than 90 per cent of the world’s heroin is manufactured from opium produced in Afghanistan,”

    that

    “global illicit consumption [of opium] is estimated at close to 1,100 tons per year, used by some 4 million users,”

    and that

    “Close to half of all global heroin consumption is estimated to take place in Europe (including the Russian Federation).”

    The UNDOC’s World Drug Report 2009 calculated that,

    “The 2007 wholesale price for a kilogram of heroin in Afghanistan ranged around $2,405.”

    In the United States, the wholesale price for a kilogram is estimated at $71,200.

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Interdiction chapter of Drug War Facts.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].

  • Cannabis & Hemp - Drug Policy - Question of the Week

    Science News on Medicinal Cannabis

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 6-21-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 6-21-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/2946

    Question of the Week: Is there any science news on medical marijuana?

    Those of you who follow medicinal cannabis likely know that this question represents a play on words, for the subject is the cover story of the current issue of the prestigious Science News magazine, published biweekly since 1922 by the non-profit Society for Science and the Public.

    This article, entitled “Not just a high: Scientists test medicinal marijuana against MS, inflammation and cancer” and available in full text on their website, provides a comprehensive overview of cannabis’ underlying biology, where it stands politically, and the studies that are defining new indications for it in the treatment of Multiple Sclerosis, Crohn’s Disease, PTSD, cancer, and diabetes.

    What is particularly important about this Science News article are the 38 published studies that comprise its “Suggested Reading” and “Citations & References” sections. Several studies can be found in Drug War Facts.

    As a sample, two studies concerning diabetic neuropathy discuss positive uses for cannabidiol, a component of cannabis termed a cannabinoid and abbreviated as CBD. One study in Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science states,

    “CBD has been shown to block NMDA-, LPS-, or diabetes induced retinal damage.”

    The other study in the World Journal of Diabetes concluded,

    “Recent evidence suggests that local inflammation plays a major role in the pathogenesis of diabetic retinopathy. The function of CBD as an antioxidant to block oxidative stress and as an inhibitor of adenosine reuptake to enhance a self-defense mechanism against retinal inflammation represents a novel therapeutic approach to the treatment of ophthalmic complications associated with diabetes.”

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Medical Marijuana chapter of Drug War Facts. Be sure to look for the research section toward the bottom of the page. The website for Science News is www.sciencenews.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].

  • Drug Policy - Question of the Week

    Can heroin be used to treat heroin addiction?

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 6-9-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 6-6-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/2930

    Question of the Week: Can heroin be used to treat heroin addiction?

    First, a look at the numbers finds that there were approximately 213,000 current users of heroin in the United States in 2008, with current users defined as those who had used the drug in the last month. This kind of use is medically defined as chronic.

    The two physicians looked into heroin addiction in the 2004 Archives of Internal Medicine article entitled, “Treating Opioid Dependence.” They pointed to a scientific basis for heroin addiction by postulating,

    “Chronic heroin abusers end up with an endogenous opioid deficiency because of down-regulation of opioid production. This creates an overwhelming craving.”

    Three synthetic opiates — Methadone, Levomethadyl, and Buprenorphine – have been developed as chronic maintenance therapies to overcome this down regulation and the consequent cravings.

    Very recently – in fact just last week – the prestigious British medical journal, The Lancet, contained an article and commentary concerning the

    “scientific evidence base [that] is emerging to support the effectiveness of maintenance treatment with directly supervised medicinal heroin as a secondline treatment for chronic heroin addiction.”

    Heroin maintenance is targeted toward the

    “5-10% of heroin addicts who fail to benefit from established conventional treatments.”

    Moreover, studies have shown that,

    “treatment with supervised injectable heroin leads to significantly lower use of street heroin than does supervised injectable methadone or optimised oral methadone.”

    Commenting on heroin maintenance, The Lancet concluded,

    “The existing interference and non-evidence-based opposition from politicians and care providers, who refuse to acknowledge the limitations of methadone maintenance and the superiority of prescribed heroin in selected populations, is arguably unethical. Denying effective second-line therapy to those in need ultimately serves to condemn many users of illicit heroin to the all too common outcomes of untreated heroin addiction, including HIV infection or death from overdose.”

    These facts and others like them come from the Heroin and Heroin Maintenance chapters of Drug War Facts.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].