According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health conducted in 2008, teenagers who live in the country are 26 percent more apt to abuse prescription drugs than city-dwelling teens after other considerations were factored out. The statistic is particularly interesting since the rates for illicit drug use are the same regardless of whether a teen lives in a rural or urban area. The problem of prescription drug abuse is a national one with one out of every eight teenagers reporting having abused prescription drugs at one time or another in their life. So why might it be that the problem is greater for rural teens?

A number of possible reasons why the problem is worse among teens in rural areas have been posited. It could be that rural teens have more free time on their hands or that they receive less anti-drug education. Some have suggested that rural teenagers may feel that they are less apt to be caught by law enforcement. Of course, it could be as simple as the fact that there are less illicit drugs available in rural areas. Availability of prescription drugs has certainly increased.

Physicians are writing more prescriptions than ever before. At the same time, prescription drug abuse among teens rose 212 percent between 1992-2003. More prescriptions being filled means that there are more drugs at home in the family medicine cabinet. If not there, it is still an easy matter to purchase them from friends. Since prescription drug use is considered by many to be a gateway into illicit drug use, it is imperative that steps be taken to remedy the situation. Fortunately there are things parents can do:

• Make sure that your kids attend school
• Make sure that your kids are treated for all health and mental health concerns
• Hold the family together – Two parent households reduce the risk of teen substance abuse by 32 percent
• Eat dinner as a family
• Make sure you are involved with your teen – when families spend meaningful time together the risk for smoking, drinking and drugs all go down

Prescription drug abuse poses many of the same dangers as does the abuse of illicit drugs. For this reason, these findings ought to spur rural communities into greater action whether through enhanced anti-drug education campaigns or greater focus from police and pharmacies. Regardless of whether the community at large takes action, parental involvement in their teen’s life holds the greatest impact. Life in the country can be the quiet and simple, positive existence that many seek. Just don’t be fooled into assuming that by escaping the city, you can escape problems or the need for positive parental interaction with your teen.

A report written by Australian researchers Professor Louisa Degenhardt of the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre at the University of New South Wales in Sydney and the Burnette Institute in Melbourne; and Professor Wayne Hall of the University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research in Brisbane provides estimates of drug usage.

The report, published in the journal The Lancet, indicates that about 200 million people in the world participate in the use of illegal drugs, with the highest rates of drug use found among higher-income countries. The report also discovered that the related health problems are similar in scope to those related to alcohol consumption.

The authors estimate that global usage of illicit drugs affects between 142 and 271 million individuals, which equates to about one drug user for every 20 people between the ages of 15 and 64 years.

One result of the global drug problem hits especially hard in more affluent nations. Disease connected with drug use is difficult to measure because the drugs are illegal, and health authorities have a major challenge in trying to identify and treat those affected by the negative consequences of drug use.

In their analysis, the authors estimate that cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug, at about 125 to 203 million users, followed by amphetamines at about 14 to 21 million users. In addition, the authors report that cannabis rates are highest in countries such as Australia and New Zealand, with about 15 percent of adults between the ages of 15 and 64 years. Opioid use is highest in the Middle East and amphetamine usage is highest in Oceania.

The researchers explained that there are four significant adverse health consequences related to illicit drugs. They are acute toxic effects, acute effects of intoxication (such as injury), dependence, and long-term health effects that result in physical ailments.

In addition, there are other negative effects of using drugs, such as stigma and discrimination, risks associated with injection drugs and violence related to obtaining and paying for drugs.

The researchers offer important information for understanding the global effects of illicit drug use. Because of the nature of illegal activity, one consequence of drug laws is the difficulty in obtaining accurate information about the impact of drug use on regions of the globe.

This U.S. Health News report highlighted the research that focused on women. The female gender was selected for this study on ecstasy and its impact on serotonin levels due to its role in the regulation of sleep, appetite, mood and memory.

Dr. Ronald Cowan, an associate professor with the Vanderbilt University Medical Center School of Medicine, shared that ecstasy has long been known to produce transient effects, but it was assumed that recovery would result over time. This study suggests the effects could be instead sustained over time.

Dr. Cowan also stressed that this study was merely observational, producing only suggested causation. Despite that fact, he still suggests the study provides strong evidence that there is a chronic change in the levels of serotonin for those who use the drug.

This study is important to gain a better understanding the effects ecstasy can have on the body, given that nearly 16 million Americans, aged 12 and older, have been recorded as using the drug at some point in time. The National Institute on Drug Abuse describes this drug as a psychoactive stimulant that structurally resembles mescaline and methamphetamine.

Ecstasy has the ability to increase serotonin levels in the brain and users experience a feeling of euphoria and emotional warmth, spurring a positive reaction to the drug. This use also prompts an increase in blood pressure and heart rate, which can lead to sleep problems and feelings of depression, confusion and even anxiety.

A new study from Columbia University indicates that there may be another good reason to keep marijuana from general use. Published in the online version of Epidemiologic Reviews, the findings show that there is a significant association between marijuana use and traffic accidents.

Using 2009 data, the National Survey on Drug Use and Health showed that drug use while driving is not uncommon. In excess of 10 million individuals over the age of 12 are believed to have driven under the influence of an illegal drug in the past year. Many of those drivers are using marijuana, which is the most frequently detected drug among drivers besides alcohol.

There has been some question as to whether marijuana has a significant effect on drivers involved in traffic accidents. In order to examine the role of marijuana in driver safety, researchers conducted a meta-analysis involving nine studies. They found that drivers that test conclusive for marijuana or who admit to driving in three hours or under of using the drug are twice as likely as their non-drug using counterparts to be implicated in an accident.

In addition, the researchers detected evidence that the risk of a traffic accident increases depending on the amount of marijuana in urine and with frequency of marijuana use, based on self-report.

The researchers found that in eight of the nine examined studies, drivers who were operating under the influence of marijuana were more likely to be in a traffic accident than those drivers who did not test positive for marijuana. The one case that did not support this trend was conducted in Thailand, where marijuana use is lower than that reported elsewhere.

Using drugs while driving can have serious consequences. The meta-analysis showed that 28 percent of fatally injured drivers and over 11 percent of general drivers tested positive for drugs other than alcohol, with marijuana the most popular choice.

Senior author Guohua Li, MD, DrPh, professor of Epidemiology at Columbia University, points out the urgency of understanding the role of marijuana in causing traffic accidents. The need to understand its various effects is necessary, given the popular support for marijuana as a legal medical treatment.

The use of prescription pain relievers outside of the directions given by a doctor can be dangerous. Pain relievers such as hydrocodone or Vicodin, and oxycodone or Oxycontin can quickly become addictive and early intervention is very important. Using the reports from the TEDS, programs can be developed to provide effective prevention and treatment options.

The report details how the number of admissions for pain reliever abuse has changed over a decade. In 1998, a total of 18,300 admissions were reported as primary pain reliever abuse, representing 1.1 percent of all admissions to treatment facilities. In 2008, there was an increase to 105,680 admissions for pain reliever abuse, representing 5.6 percent of admissions to treatment facilities.

The age at which admissions occurred declined from 1998 to 2008. The average age decreased by nearly six years, from 37.4 years in 1998 to 31.7 years in 2008. The average age for other types of treatment admissions increased during this time period, from 33.5 years to 34.6 years. The significant difference in the ages is largely derived from a growth in admissions in the 18 to 34 age group.

Primary pain reliever admissions in 1998 were equally male and female, while in 2008 there was a slightly higher percentage of male admissions. The admissions are mostly non-Hispanic Whites, growing from 85.1 percent of admissions in 1998 to 88.7 percent of admissions in 2008. Admissions were more likely to be unemployed in 2008 than in 1998, and the average educational level of admissions also decreased, from 35.6 percent having some education beyond high school in 1998 to 29.4 percent in 2008.

The admissions for pain reliever abuse differed by region. Between 1998 and 2008, the number of admissions in the Northeast grew from about one in four admissions to more than one in three in 2008. The number of pain reliever admissions decreased in the other regions.

The percentage of admissions with prior treatment episodes increased from 34.9 percent to 42.1 percent over the ten-year period. The admissions that had been in treatment three or more times previously decreased from 25.5 to 20.1 percent

The findings of the TEDS report indicate a growing need for addition prevention efforts to discourage prescription pain reliever abuse. There are several simple steps that occur at the individual level that may be very effective at reducing the number of admissions for prescription pain reliever abuse.

Doctors may seek an opportunity to discuss with patients the high risk for dependence on pain relievers when prescriptions are issued to a patient, including information about the danger of sharing medications with friends or family members. Parents can also be educated about the potential problem and encouraged to keep watch over medications and talk with the teens and young adults in the households about the potential consequences of misuse of pain relief medications.
 

In 1975, steroids were banned from use by Olympic athletes in competition settings. Media reports of illegal use of steroids reached a peak in the 1980s, urged on by use from professional athletes. During this time, more high school students began experimenting with steroids, prompting Congress to take a closer look at the problem of misuse.
By 1990, Congressional hearings had officially named steroids as a controlled substance in an attempt to remedy problems of abuse, and the Anabolic Steroid Enforcement Act was officially established. The act placed the possession of steroids, and punishment for the act, under state law. In 2004, the Anabolic Steroid Control Act was passed, which includes both prohormones along with anabolic steroids on the list of substances controlled by law.

Anabolic steroids are part of the Schedule III listing of substances, such as barbiturates, tranquilizers used in veterinary medicine and LSD-like drugs. Because of their ability to build muscle, anabolic steroids can be prescribed medically to correct growth problems or to help with degeneration caused by diseases like AIDS and cancer. Medical steroids are also considered Schedule III controlled substances.

Someone caught in possession of steroids without a prescription can receive a punishment of up to one year’s imprisonment and fines. Punishments can be stiffer if the person has prior drug possession offenses. In some states, the prison sentence for unauthorized steroids can reach five years.

In the U.S., the typical steroid user is a white male near the age of 25 who desires the drug’s ability to increase his physical size and strength. Taken either in pill form or by injection, some believe steroids were originally banned due to their addictive nature; others say it stems from the harm they can cause the user – both physically and psychologically. Side effects include stunted growth, infertility, hair loss and the potential for manic mood swings and even death.

During negotiations for placing steroids on the Controlled Substances Act of 1990, many groups, including the Drug Enforcement Association and the American Medical Association were against including the drugs on the list because true dependence had not been proven.
While arguments continue as to whether steroids are truly addictive, many people who abuse them show addictive tendencies, like missing work or school to attain the drugs, a compulsion to keep using them and withdrawal symptoms upon stopping.

Legal debates surrounding U.S. restrictions of steroid use resurge often, but in a promising trend, teen use has remained relatively low compared with other illegal substances.
 

There are essentially two different types of anesthetics: general anesthetics will make the individual unconscious, while local anesthetics will simply numb one part of the body that would normally feel pain. The type of anesthetic used in the situation depends upon the procedure to be completed and the individual’s tolerance while under care.

General anesthetics will put a person in a state that will seem like sleep, yet the body is not asleep in the general sense. Instead, the individual is in a form of temporary unconsciousness that is carefully controlled by the anesthesiologist, or the medical professional administering the anesthetics.

This medical professional must administer the right type of anesthetic according to the type of operation and the weight of the individual. While the procedure is underway, different types of medications are added or removed to alleviate pain and maintain the right level of unconsciousness so the procedure can be completed without harm to the patient.

The anesthesiologist is a medical specialist who has spent roughly six years training in the specialty of anesthesia. To properly administer anesthetics to patients, the anesthesiologist will take a careful look at the history of the patient and his or her general health. During the procedure, the anesthesiologist stays with the patient at all times to be sure he or she is comfortable and safe.

The process includes not only controlling pain for the patient, but also replacing body fluids and measuring and controlling all vital functions of the body, including heart beat, blood pressure, and brain and kidney function. Such observations must also continue after the operation to ensure the patient can control his or her pain and will advise on when it is safe to eat or dink again.

While this is a very controlled process, anesthetics are considered safe, but not absolute as every operation carriers a very slight risk. A recent survey conducted in the United Kingdom found that a fatality due to anesthetics occurred in roughly five of every million anesthetics given. Those in poor health are at higher risk, putting even more importance on discussing medical history with the anesthesiologist.

Even as important as it is to control the administration and maintenance of an anesthetic in the medical field, medications used for this process are still abused recreationally. Users may find the substance on the street or medical professionals divert it while on the job. Users may prefer the high they achieve with the drug – or simply like the ability to pass out voluntarily. With each use, however, they put their life at risk as they cannot guarantee that the next time they use they will regain consciousness.
 

According to a recent Standard piece, heroin is challenging methamphetamines as the top abused drug as prescription drug abusers are looking for a cheaper fix. Sgt. Troy Burnett of the Weber Morgan Narcotics Strike Force noted there has been a rapid rise in the use of heroin in Weber County.

To demonstrate the contrast, Burnett noted that in 2008 and 2009 combined, the strike force was able to make 34 heroin arrests. The total for 2010 is already at 35. In the 2008-09 timeframe, just half a pound of heroin was seized by task forces. So far in 2010, the seizure has reached 5.4 pounds.

Burnett is convinced that the demand for heroin is being driven by prescription drug abusers seeking a cheaper fix. A big population of users exists among the high school student sector and many start off using pain pills such as OxyContin or Oxycodone. These pills are becoming more expensive to obtain and heroin is dropping in price. As all of these drugs are an opiate, the substitution achieves the desired effect.

Most of the drugs reaching Weber County are supplied through Salt Lake City. According to Burnett, 100 percent of the heroin comes from the city and the strike force works closely with agencies in the area to try and reduce the flow.

Roughly 85 percent of Utah’s prison population has a problem with substance abuse, according to the Utah Division of Substance Abuse and Mental Health. A report put out by this division shows that alcohol is still the most abused substance, followed by methamphetamine, marijuana, heroin, prescription drugs and cocaine.

A recent study looked at the associations between inhalant use, inhalant use disorders and antisocial behavior. Howard, Perron, Vaughn, Bender and Garland examined the antisocial behavior in a nationally representative sample of inhalant users. The findings were from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC).

The study looked at 20 childhood and adult antisocial behaviors and their lifetime prevalence in inhalant users who also had inhalant-use disorders, and those without an inhalant use disorder. They also looked at associations between inhalant use, inhalant use disorders and specific antisocial behaviors in multivariate analyses.

Finally, the study examined the relationships between inhalant use, inhalant use disorders and antisocial behaviors in those who are diagnosed with an antisocial personality disorder.

A total of 43,093 U.S. residents completed the NESARC, a multistage national survey including a structured psychiatric interview.

The results of the study show that inhalant users were significantly younger and more likely to be unemployed, male, single, and to report family history of drug and alcohol problems that their non-user counterparts.

Those with an inhalant use disorder were significantly more likely to have family histories of alcohol problems and personal histories of drug problems, compared with those who did not have a disorder. Those with an inhalant use disorder were also significantly more likely to have had childhood and adult antisocial behaviors than their counterparts.

There was also a significant association between inhalant use disorders and bullying behavior, starting physical fights, using weapons, and less violent behavior like staying out all night without permission, running away, and frequent truancy. It was also associated with irresponsibility in adulthood.

The study used multivariate analyses to determine that those with an inhalant use disorder had a significantly elevated risk for childhood and adult antisocial behaviors, compared with non-users.

Among those with antisocial personality disorder, inhalant use and inhalant use disorders were associated with greater levels of antisocial behaviors.

The findings of the study indicate that those participants with inhalant use disorder had increased difficulty with antisocial behaviors, including a wide range of violent behaviors. For those struggling with antisocial behavior disorder, there was an increased level of effect on the behaviors when inhalant use was introduced.