All Things Wildly Considered

Let's Make a Bigger, Better SOLACE Memorial

2011-12-08T08:57:00.000-08:00

What Is the Purpose of a Memorial?

What is important about a memorial? Today, in particular, memorials are not just reserved for the most famous and powerful people of a society. Rather, memorials serve as a great equalizer that gives even the modest and meek hope. A memorial needs a design to last the ages because it not only commemorates the past but also extends the importance of the subject into the future.Typically memorials have been built with granite or bronze -- the kind of materials that assure the memorial will remain intact long after the elements have destroyed paper records or technology has made electronic records obsolete

Aside from helping assure a place in history for people and events, memorials can be great for helping families cope with the loss of a loved-one. By establishing permanent memorials, such as headstones, when loved-ones die; families can practice the sound advice that psychologists typically give to those going through the grieving process.

In today’s society, in which selflessness is a prized virtue, it may seem troubling to suggest that memorials are for the living, not the dead. But authorities in fields ranging from anthropology to philosophy to psychology would say it’s true, nonetheless. Mankind honors its dead with memorials, of all types, not necessarily because of a belief that memorials are somehow helpful to the dead but, rather, to help the living cope with the thought of death.

Maya Lin and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial

Maya Lin is a Chinese American born in Athens, Ohio. Her parents immigrated to the United States from People's Republic of China in 1949 when Mao-Tse-tung took control of China. They settled in Ohio in 1958, one year before Maya Lin was born. Her father, Henry Huan Lin, was a ceramist and former dean of the Ohio University College of Fine Arts.

Maya is the niece of Lin Huiyin, who is said to be the first female architect in China. Lin studied at Yale University, where she received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1981 and a Master of Architecture degree in 1986. She has also been awarded honorary doctorate degrees from Yale University (among the youngest to do so), Harvard University, Williams College and Smith College. She was among the youngest in Yale

She is married to Daniel Wolf, a New York photography dealer. They have two daughters, India and Rachel. Lin, having grown up as an Asian minority, has said that she "didn't even realize" she was Chinese until later in life, and that it was not until her 30s that she had a desire to understand her cultural background.

In 1981, at age 21 and while still an undergraduate, Lin won a public design competition for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial (the Wall), beating out 1,441 other competition submissions.The black cut-stone masonry wall, with the names of 58,261 fallen soldiers carved into its face, was completed in late October 1982 and dedicated on November 13, 1982. The wall is granite and V-shaped, with one side pointing to the Lincoln Memorial and the other to the Washington Monument.

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial was founded by Jan Scruggs, who served in Vietnam (in the 199th Light Infantry Brigade) from 1969-1970 as a infantry corporal. He wanted the memorial to acknowledge and recognize the service and sacrifice of all who served in Vietnam.

Jan Scruggs (President of The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, Inc.) lobbied Congress for a two acre plot of land in the Constitution Gardens. Significant initial support came from U.S. Senators Charles McC. Mathias, Jr. (on November 8, 1979, Senator Mathias introduced legislation to authorize a site of national parkland for the Memorial) of Maryland and John W. Warner (Senator Warner launched the first significant financial contributions to the national fund raising campaign) of Virginia. On July 1, 1980, in the Rose Garden, President Jimmy Carter signed the legislation (P.L. 96-297) to provide a site in Constitution Gardens near the Lincoln Memorial. It was a three and half year task to build the memorial and to orchestrate a celebration to salute those who served in Vietnam.

The VVMF raised nearly $9,000,000 entirely through private contributions from corporations, foundations, unions, veterans and civic organizations and more than 275,000 individual Americans. No Federal funds were needed.

Maya Lin's Memorial Design

Maya Lin's book, Making the Memorial (November 2000) gives great insight into her conception and design of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Deliberately setting aside the controversies of the war, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial honors the men and women who served when their Nation called upon them. The designer, Maya Lin, felt that “the politics had eclipsed the veterans, their service and their lives.” She kept the design elegantly simple to “allow everyone to respond and remember.”

Lin had to follow four established criteria for the design of the memorial. The memorial had to...

1. Be reflective and contemplative in character;
2. Harmonize with its surroundings;
3. Contain the names of those who had died in the conflict or who were still missing;
4. Make no political statement about the war.

Lin knew that this memorial must acknowledge lives lost in Vietnam without focusing on the war or on creating a political statement of victory or loss.

Lin states, "But on a personal level, I wanted to focus on the nature of accepting and coming to terms with a loved one’s death. Simple as it may seem, I remember feeling that accepting a person’s death is the first step in being able to overcome that loss."

One of her most important fundamental goals was to be honest about a death, since people must accept that loss in order to begin to overcome it. She knew that the pain of the loss would always be there and would always hurt, but everyone must acknowledge the death in order to move on.

Lin rejected the design of a categorical sculpture that focused on simple historical aspects of the war -- something that would be appreciated solely by veterans and history buffs. "A realistic sculpture would be only one interpretation of that time. I wanted something that all people could relate to on a personal level," states Lin.

Contemplating the concrete and the transcendent, Lin considered the power of simplicity, She found that names (print without image) were capable of creating vivid, personal memories that even photographs could not."The strength in a name is something that has always made me wonder at the “abstraction” of the design; the ability of a name to bring back every single memory you have of that person is far more realistic and specific and much more comprehensive than a still photograph, which captures a specific moment in time or a single event or a generalized image that may or may not be moving for all who have connections to that time," she reasoned. The inclusion of names seemed to be an answer to putting personal emphasis into historical significance.

Maya Lin knew she had to travel to the site to better understand a meaningful design. She says, "Without having seen it, I couldn’t design the memorial, so a few of us traveled to Washington, D.C., and it was at the site that the idea for the design took shape. The site was a beautiful park surrounded by trees, with traffic and noise coming from one side—Constitution Avenue."

Once there and familiar with the site, Lin knew her design should create a park within a park - a quiet protected place onto itself, yet harmonious with the overall plan of Constitution Gardens. She envisioned walls with a mirror-like surface (polished black granite) reflecting the images of the surrounding trees, lawns, monuments, and visitors. These walls would seem to stretch into the distance, directing visitors towards the Washington Monument, in the east, and the Lincoln Memorial, to the west, thus bringing the Vietnam Veterans Memorial into a historical context.

Interestingly, Lin felt alterations to the landscape must be made. This "inside park" needed special symbolism.These "cuts" she planned seem to represent both hurt and natural healing - hurt generated in the past and healing so necessary for the American conscience to come to grips with all the unrest that symbolized the Vietnam War. (Even when the chosen design was revealed to the public, many people voiced their displeasure, calling the wall "a black gash of shame.")

She remembers, "I had a simple impulse to cut into the earth. I imagined taking a knife and cutting into the earth, opening it up, an initial violence and pain that in time would heal. The grass would grow back, but the initial cut would remain a pure flat surface in the earth with a polished, mirrored surface, much like the surface on a geode when you cut it and polish the edge. The need for the names to be on the memorial would become the memorial; there was no need to embellish the design further. The people and their names would allow everyone to respond and remember."

The simple design would be an interface, between the world of the visitors and the quieter, darker, more peaceful world beyond. Lin chose black granite for the Wall in order to make the surface reflective and peaceful.

But - a wall? Isn't a granite wall just a massive black tombstone? Lin says, "I never looked at the memorial as a wall, an object, but as an edge to the earth, an opened side. The mirrored effect would double the size of the park, creating two worlds, one we are a part of and one we cannot enter. The two walls were positioned so that one pointed to the Lincoln Memorial and the other pointed to the Washington Monument. By linking these two strong symbols for the country, I wanted to create a unity between the nation’s past and present."

So, actually, changes in the famous, existing park required for construction of the Wall and "the park within the park" were meant to be of human design yet harmonious with nature. "The idea of destroying the park to create something that by its very nature should commemorate life seemed hypocritical, nor was it in my nature. I wanted my design to work with the land, to make something with the site, not to fight it or dominate it. I see my works and their relationship to the landscape as being an additive rather than a combative process," Lyn states.

After her visit to Washington, D.C., Lyn returned to Yale and quickly sketched her idea up, and, at first, even to her, it almost seemed too simple, too little. She toyed with adding some large flat slabs that would appear to lead into the memorial, but they didn’t seem to belong. The image was so simple that anything added to it began to detract from it.

Her final tweaks? Perhaps Lyn considered practicality as it related to visitors and symbolism as it related to more than war, history, and finality. "I always wanted the names to be chronological, to make it so that those who served and returned from the war could find their place in the memorial. I initially had the names beginning on the left side and ending on the right. In a preliminary critique, a professor asked what importance that left for the apex, and I, too, thought it was a weak point, so I changed the design for the final critique. Now the chronological sequence began and ended at the apex so that the time line would circle back to itself and close the sequence. A progression in time is memorialized. The design is not just a list of the dead. To find one name, chances are you will see the others close by, and you will see yourself reflected through them," she reasons.

Memorials and Lessons From the Wall

Almost everything in the design and structure of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial contributes to its enduring appeal and significance. Veterans and other visitors flock to the memorial to honor and remember the 58,267
(now) names on the east and west panels.In 2007, it was ranked tenth on the "List of America's Favorite Architecture" by the American Institute of Architects. It receives around 3 million visitors each year.

Besides accomplishing the stated criteria, Maya Lyn understood some vital aspects of a memorial.

Criteria Given and Adhered To By Lyn:

1. Be reflective and contemplative in character;
2. Harmonize with its surroundings;
3. Contain the names of those who had died in the conflict or who were still missing;
4. Make no political statement about the war.

Other Important Aspects of the Memorial Envisioned and Incorporated by Lyn:

1. Politics are not as important as service and lives.

2. Simplicity of design recreates personal, powerful realities and strong symbolic abstractions.

3. Honesty about death helps those dealing with grief to move on.

4. Print and names can be more meaningful than images.

5. People-made designs must create a meaningful tension (but not domination) while achieving harmony with natural surroundings.

6. Memorials should act as places where people can interface with the past and the present, and even offer opportunities to communicate with worlds beyond.

7. All materials and people-made constructions in a memorial should contribute to one overall image that makes sense: reflection, color, position, chronology.

8. Memorials that offer change and public interaction remain alive: addition of names to the Wall, etchings of names on the Wall, gifts and mementos left at the Wall.

9. Meaningful memorials must be widely accessible to the general public.

My Proposal

The SOLACE display in the central window of the empty Martings Building has to come down. Many people who fight against drug abuse see this meaningful display as a memorial for their loved ones and as a focal point for community action against drug abuse. The display has generated much publicity and attracts many visitors.

The same people continuing the fight against abuse feel that some kind of memorial should remain. In other words, they want to either move the same display to another prominent viewing area or to create a new memorial commemorating those lost in Scioto County's drug epidemic.

I propose we find an appropriate area to construct a memorial in the form of a year-round garden - a place for names, benches, flora (some that would be evident year-round and some that can be changed by season, and any other appropriate materials that would contribute for a reflective, contemplative design. This place could be a beautiful addition to our county, a place all could share.

We could enlist the help of our talented area artists, landscapers, builders, and naturalists. I am sure some volunteer help would go a long way towards making a meaningful memorial. Of course, the Task Force (SOLACE, Fix the Scioto Group, Youth Ambassadors, and others) would have to maintain the premises.

A small setback -- dismantling the Martings display -- will not stop the Task Force Action Team from doing what they know is right and essential. Our progress is measured by our continued work and dedication to the cause of saving lives and remembering all those who have struggled (or struggle today) against the demons of drug abuse. This would be a LIVING memorial to the lives we cherish.

Let's do this or someone, please, come up with another great memorial idea. Rise up!

No Drug Testing For People in Need-Based Programs (Ohio Welfare)

2011-12-07T14:10:00.000-08:00

Ohio Senator Tim Schaffer (R-Lancaster) has introduced Senate Bill 69 requiring drug testing "for adults who apply for need-based programs that provide cash assistance, medical assistance, housing assistance, food assistance, or energy assistance." Schaffer says, "We want to make sure that in this tough, tough budget era when the state budget is so, so very tight and cuts are going to be made that what money we do put out there in the communities is actually getting to the kids, the children, the family members that need it. And not going to buy illegal drugs."

Good idea? No doubt, reports from police, courts and human services indicate that illegal drug users are getting public welfare benefits funded by taxpayers and using the money to purchase illegal drugs. The public outcry over this illegal activity is warranted. This behavior represents direct abuse of the welfare system, hands down. I know that, you know that, everyone with half a brain in Ohio knows that.

Still, the question remains: "Will drug tests for those on assistance (a) improve the problem of drug abuse and (b) save the taxpayers' money?" I have some serious doubts about this policy doing either of these things.

Why I Have Doubts

1. In the proposal, a urine test would be used to detect alcohol, amphetamines, cocaine, heroin, marijuana and other drugs at levels prohibited while operating a motor vehicle.

As far as I can tell, the proposed urine test will cover the following drugs (Ohio code 4511.19):

1. Alcohol

2. Amphtamines (opium, oxycodone, methadone, morphine, fentanyl, 90 mg of pure codeine, etc. Also known as speed, crank, uppers, etc.")

3. Cocaine and Cocaine Metabolite

4. Heroin and Heroin Metabolite

5. L.S.D.

6. Marijuana

7. Methamphetamine (also known as "meth, ice, crystal, etc.")
8. Phencyclidine (a potent veterinary analgesic and anesthetic known as PCP and "angel dust")
9. Salvia Divinorum and the amount of salvinorin A (a perennial wild member of the psychoactive mint family whose active constituent, salvinorin A, produces powerful hallucinogenic effects and synesthesia. Also known as Salvia.)

Some of the obvious objections to the urine tests are

(a) a limited day detection window,

(b) the procedure is somewhat invasive,

(c) cut-off levels for the drugs apply,

(d) tampering can occur, and

(e) false reads are possible. (The most common false positive result for methamphetamine comes from pseudoephedrine, an ingredient in many sinus and cold medications.)

Consider the following information for urine detection periods. Can you see some interesting contrasts?

Substance and Approximate Values for Detection Periods with Urine Testing

Alcohol 6–24 hours Note: Alcohol tests may measure EtG which can stay in urine for up to 80 hours

Amphetamines (except methamphetamine) 1 to 5 days

Methamphetamines 3 to 5 days

MDMA (Ecstasy) 72 hours

Barbiturates (except phenobarbital) 1 day

Phenobarbital 2 to 3 weeks

Benzodiazepines Therapeutic use: up to 7 days. Chronic use (over one year): 4 to 6 weeks

Cannabis 2 to 7 days, up to >30 days after heavy use and/or in users with high body fat

Cocaine 2 to 5 days with exceptions for certain kidney disorders

Codeine 2 to 3 days

Cotinine (a break-down product of nicotine) 2 to 4 days

Morphine 2 to 4 days

Heroin 1 to 4 days

L.S.D. 12 to 24 hours

Methadone 3 days

PCP 3 to 7 days for single use; up to 30 days in chronic users

Drug testing is more likely to catch cannabis users, since THC metabolites are fat soluble and have a longer duration in the body than those of other drugs which are widely considered more dangerous such as cocaine and heroin. This can potentially lead would-be cannabis users to switch to harder drugs, most of which generally have significantly shorter detection times and/or are less likely to be tested for. (Rodney Skager, PhD, "Beyond Zero Tolerance: A Reality-Based Approach to Drug Education and School Discipline," Safety1st.org, 2007)

According to the Ohio Drug Threat Assessment (http://www.justice.gov), marijuana is the principal illicit drug of abuse throughout Ohio. But, consider the drug most abused -- ALCOHOL. With detection evidenced within the short period of 6-24 hours, how easy will the abuser of alcohol be able to avoid detection by urine test? And, how much easy will it be for alcoholics to retest after the 30-day stipulation?

The news media seriously under-report the role alcohol plays in violent crimes, injuries and traffic accidents, according to a national study in the Journal of Studies of Alcohol (2006). Some of the largest discrepancies occurred in reporting alcohol use in violent crimes, particularly for television news. Only 1.4 percent of television news stories in the sample mentioned the role of alcohol in their reporting of homicides, according to Michael Slater, co-author of the study and professor of communication at Ohio State University. "The result is that the public may underestimate the dangers of alcohol use," Slater said. (Michael Slater, "Study: Media Rarely Notes When Alcohol Plays Role in Violent Crimes and Accidents," http://researchnews.osu.edu)

In 2005, Ohio had approximately 690,000 people who had an alcohol addiction and 259,000 people with a drug dependency. Of those, only 38,000 alcoholics and 31,000 drug abusers got the help they needed from an Ohio treatment program. ("Ohio Rehabilitation and Intervention for Drug Abuse and Alcohol Abuse," Addiction Recovery Programs, 2007)

Leaving nearly 700,000 addicts without treatment is not helping the situation of drug and alcohol abuse in Ohio; in fact it’s only making matters worse. And, Senate Bill 69 makes no provisions for assisting those with serious addictions. Would Senator Schaffer be willing to invest all the money he believes will be saved with Senate Bill 69 into intervention and rehabilitation of addicts? That would entail helping drug and ALCOHOL dependent Ohioians?

Are all people who benefit from Ohio's need-based programs drug and alcohol dependent or even in danger of becoming drug and alcohol dependent? Exactly who will be found positive in Senate Bill 69's urine screen? Don't you think many occasional (recreational, if you will) drug and alcohol users will be denied assistance? Are those the people you most want to punish? Think of the potential damage to children of such households.

According to Ohio law, a drug dependent person means "any person who, by reason of the use of any drug of abuse, is physically, psychologically, or physically and psychologically dependent upon the use of such drug, to the detriment of the person’s health or welfare."

The law says a person in danger of becoming a drug dependent person means "any person who, by reason of the person’s habitual or incontinent use of any drug of abuse, is in imminent danger of becoming a drug dependent person."

We cannot be content to punish every poor person who consumes alcohol unless we, as a State and a Nation, change our perceptions of the meaning of being alcohol dependent to the point of making everyone adhere to tighter drinking standards that will stop the "detriment" and "danger" caused by those who drink.

Remember, The Columbus Dispatch reported that the Ohio Statehouse is adding its first full-service bar soon. The bar will be conveniently placed where the existing coffee restaurant is on the building's lower level in Columbus. The Ohio agency that oversees the Statehouse says that the bar will be stocked with beer, wine, liquor, multiple flat-screen televisions and will hold "private happy hours" for state lawmakers and at certain times the public.("Ohio Statehouse Installs Full-service Bar," Huffington Post, July 1 2011) I mean, in a way, aren't Ohio lawmakers on public assistance, too?

Finally, if you test for drugs and alcohol, why not test for tobacco? You and I know many people receiving benefits smoke. A recent cost check at Sam's Club found Marlboro cigarettes were selling for just under $50 a carton. Check out these statistics. ("The Toll of Tobacco In Ohio," http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/facts_issues/toll_us/ohio, November 28 2011)

Smoking-Caused Monetary Costs in Ohio

Annual health care costs in Ohio directly caused by smoking	$4.37 billion
Portion covered by the state Medicaid program	$1.4 billion
Residents' state & federal tax burden from smoking-caused government expenditures	$614 per household
Smoking-caused productivity losses in Ohio	$4.85 billion

Deaths in Ohio from Smoking

Adults who die each year from their own smoking	18,500
Kids now under 18 and alive in Ohio who will ultimately die prematurely from smoking	293,000

2. In the proposal, a person refusing to take the test or testing positive for a controlled substance would not be eligible for assistance and would have to wait 30 days before reapplying.

Understandably, an exception would be made for individuals testing positive for a controlled substance if the substance was prescribed by a licensed health professional and taken as directed. Others? Schaffer's bill would require adults asking the state for help to pay for their own drug test, at a cost that he says can be as little as $15 (Oh boy -- Have you ever known the state to spend the least money on anything?) And I wonder who will benefit from landing the urine testing contract? (Surely, nary one Columbus politician.)

Why shouldn't these people get reimbursed if they are drug-free?

But, how much will these drug tests cost a person who legitimately reapplies numerous times? If you believe in public assistance at all (discount your hatred of those who abuse the system) how can you expect the poorest of the poor in Ohio to fork out their own money for testing? Aren't they asking for help because they don't have the money to pay for such a test in the first place?

3. Before the proposal no concrete data was ever gathered to show a problem even existed.

Schaffer has stated, "Well, we'll have data once we implement the system. Once we implement the testing. If 100 percent of the people who apply for public assistance come out clean and don't have any drugs in their system, then fine, great. But my suspicion is we'll find some. And we'll get those folks help." He continued, "Well, we have strong suspicions there's a problem, but I don't think it's too much to ask for somebody to submit to a drug test who is asking the state taxpayer for hundreds or thousands of dollars in assistance."

"100%?" Who in their right mind would expect such a result? Of course, some people who apply for public assistance are using drugs. "Suspicions?" Of course, we all have suspicions. But who sponsors state legislation based on hearsay and on suspicions?

In fact, according to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, a part of the Department of Health and Human Services, (2002) 9.6 percent of people living in households that received government assistance used illicit drugs in the previous month, compared with a 6.8 percent rate among families who received no assistance. So, the answer is that 2.8 percent more welfare recipients actually abuse drugs than other members of the public, hardly a significant difference.

The administration also found that heavy alcohol use was slightly lower in households receiving assistance than in those that do not. (Alan Greenblat, "Should Welfare Recipients Get Drug Testing?" NPR, March 31 2010)

4. Senator Schaffer does not see how passage of Senate Bill 69 would be a penalty on poor people.

In fact, a person applying for services obviously is there because he/she doesn't have any extra money to spend. Schaffer says his legislation will "make sure that what public taxpayer dollars are going to families. Going to put food on the table, shoes on the feet, shirt on the back." Yet, who could argue that paying for the tests will be wasting money for those who don't do drugs?

The Fourth Amendment guarantees that no individual in America can be subjected to a search by the government unless there is reasonable suspicion that they have committed some crime. Welfare recipients are poor; however, being poor is not a reasonable suspicion for a crime, at least not yet.

5. Does Senator Schaffer know other states have tried testing and failed?

Though surprising to many, an early experiment with such a policy in Michigan proved ineffective, experts say. "A decade ago, Michigan implemented mandatory testing in three welfare offices. Out of 258 new and continuing applicants tested, 21 tested positive for illicit substances. All but three of these women tested positive for marijuana only. In light of such experiences, few states have chosen to pursue similar efforts," says Harold Pollack, the Helen Ross Professor of Social Service Administration at the University of Chicago. (Laura Bassett, "Kentucky Lawmaker: Drug Testing Welfare Recipients Would Save 'Millions and Millions,'" Huffington Post, January 18 2011)

After Michigan imposed random drug testing on welfare recipients, it found that 10 percent tested positive for illicit drugs, with 3 percent testing positive for hard drugs such as cocaine. "These rates are consistent with the general population," according to the liberal Center for Law and Social Policy.

In 2003, a federal appeals court halted Michigan’s attempt to impose mandatory drug tests on all welfare recipients. The judge seemed especially concerned with the rights of ordinary citizens whose only offense is that they are in need of government help. U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts ruled that no one should have to choose between their constitutional rights and providing for their families.

6. How much more Ohio government bureaucracy would Senate Bill 69 cause?

"I oppose such legislation for both philosophical and practical reasons," says Darin Preis, executive director of Central Missouri Community Action, which works with poor families. "The proposal here would have state social workers taking on yet another task for which they are not prepared. This will add cost and more bureaucracy, and with our state budget in the fix it is, I don't think we can pull this off," he reports. (Philip Smith, "Feature" Bills to Require Drug Testing for Welfare, Unemployment Pop Up Around the Country," stopthedrugwar.org, March 19 2009)

"Philosophically, I think we should be holding people accountable for what we want them to do, not for what we don't want them to do," states Preis. "People want to take care of their families, to do the right thing. It just doesn't make sense to me. Taking away benefits from someone struggling with substance abuse issues isn't going to help them; it will only make matters worse."

My Beliefs

Drug testing without suspicion of misconduct or abuse is wrong. We have the Fourth Amendment guarantee that, as Americans, we can be subjected to a search by the government unless there is reasonable suspicion that we have committed some crime. I refuse to give up my Constitutional rights.

Being poor is not against the law. And, receiving welfare and support is not against the law. Rules and penalties are already in place for those who receive need-based cash assistance, medical assistance, housing assistance, food assistance, or energy assistance. Why should any citizen, no matter his or her financial standing, sacrifice their rights as an American citizen?

I do not wish the government to search my body or my property without reasonable suspicion. I have fought and I will continue to fight for this right. Reasonable is the operative word. Acting with reason means operating with sound judgment, fairness, and without excess. Drug testing poor people is judgmental, unfair, and excessive action by the government when it does not have any suspicion. Many of the same Americans who scream about individual rights evidently do not see this because many of these same people want to drug test welfare recipients

Reform has been enacted. The welfare reform of 1996 ended the idea of welfare as an entitlement. Federal funds were sent as block grants to the states, which were given more discretion over how to spend the money. The new model included work requirements and limits on how many years people could receive benefits.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, (BLS) Illinois, Ohio, Rhode Island, Florida, Michigan and Nevada have some of the highest unemployment rates. These same states are vying for drug testing welfare recipients. Does this seem to be a "reasonable" time during such unemployment to do this?

The BLS shows the national unemployment rate of about 9% does not include ‘underutilized’ workers. What are underutilized workers? Unemployed people seeking full time work, someone who has been unemployed for a long time and has given up hope of finding any work or someone who wants a full time job but has to take a part time one just to survive. Low wage, no benefit jobs do not help people out of poverty.

In general, the reviewed national research finds welfare-assisted families moving in and out of the labor market. Many welfare recipients report only qualifying for jobs in low-wage, secondary markets; jobs that are often temporary, seasonal and/or part-time; jobs offering unstable work hours and neither healthcare nor family leave benefits. The need for basic supports such as child care and transportation assistance further limits their employability. (National Evaluation of the Welfare-Work Grant Program, http://www.utexas.edu, /depts/ic2/et/learner/general.html, September 2004)

More than half of the families that left welfare in the past year worry about having enough food. Seventeen percent of families with a full-time worker and 27% with a part-time worker actually went hungry at some point during the first year off welfare. Former welfare families also had difficulty meeting other basic needs, such as housing, health care, and child care. (Bethney Gundersen, Family Hardships Suffered By Recent Welfare Recipients," Economic Policy Institute, July 25 2001)

Source: EPI Analysis of National Survey of American Families

The BLS also shows the unemployment rate is rising for the non college educated people over college graduates holding a Bachelor degree or higher. (Linda Wolf, "Drug Test Welfare Recipients. Really. Hmm,?" November 20 2011)

Ohio Representative Marcia Fudgez recently found out that nearly half of food stamp recipients (SNAP) have children under 18.

Do you agree with this quote? Nancy Scheper-Hughes, chairwoman of the anthropology department at the University of California at Berkeley, states, "Most of what gets labeled 'welfare fraud' is little more than the creative ingenuity of mothers trying to overcome the odds against them and their children, still so often viewed as 'surplus' populations."(Nancy Scheper-Hughes, "Welfare Recipients Can Help Break Stereotype, The New York Times, June 6 1996)

If Senate Bill 69 becomes law, then what's next? Maybe this -- an Ohio state senator, Tim Grendell, recently said he plans to introduce a bill to require the unemployed to take a drug test before they receive unemployment benefits.

Self-medicated Society: Effects of Television and Ads

2011-12-06T08:31:00.000-08:00

In his book, Death by Prescription, Ray D. Strand poses the question: "Why do pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars on direct-to-consumer advertising, when consumers can only obtain prescriptions for these drugs through a doctor? Wouldn't it seem that consumers have no influence whatsoever on the success of a prescription drug, so advertising should be directed entirely toward doctors?

We are what Strand calls a "self-medicated" society. Consumers do not actually write their own prescriptions, but they practically do, based on whatever drugs they see advertised on television.

"Surveys reported in medical literature reveal

that when a patient comes into a doctor's office and requests

a specific drug that he has seen advertised in the media, the doctor writes the exact prescription the patient requested

more than 70 percent of the time!"

(Dana Veracity, "The Great Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising Con:

How Patients and Doctors Alike Are Easily Influenced to Demand Dangerous Drugs,"

http://www.naturalnews.com, July 31 2005)

Of course, medical doctors claim are scientifically trained, supposedly rational people. They claim to give only prescriptions that are medically necessary. Yet, it seems when a patient comes in and mentions the name of a drug, all rationality and scientific thinking is seriously compromised.

Commercials can be very seductive. Drug companies routinely exploit this seduction, this form of influence, to create demand for products in the minds of consumers, and then to make sure these consumers go to their doctors' offices and request those products, thus generating sales.

Surprising Research

Does TV does create enough of an impression on several levels to be considered mind control.? American doctors have complained that patients come to them demanding prescriptions for advertised drugs, sometimes even before the MDs know of them.

"Researchers sent a group of people, who said

they saw the drug Paxil in a TV advertisement,

into doctors’ offices. Many of these patients

didn't even show signs of depression,

but when they named the drug,

50 percent were diagnosed as having depression,

and 55 percent were given a prescription

for the exact prescription drug they named."

(Mike Adams, "Experiment Shows Medical Doctors To Be Glorified Drug Dealers,

Easily Manipulated by Drug Companies," http://www.naturalnews.com, July 2 2005)

In the experiment, when people named Paxil, they were more than five times as likely to be given a prescription for it than someone who didn't name it. Does this simple experiment demonstrate how many doctors are puppets of the pharmaceutical industry?

Have many doctors been reduced to glorified drug dealers

controlled by American pharmaceutical companies?

The FDA allows Big Pharma to promote drugs with TV commercials. Only two nations in the world that allow this -- the USA and New Zealand.

Reporter Alix Spiegel ("Selling Sickness: How Drug Ads Changed Health Care," National Public Radio, October 13 2009) says:

"It used to work like this:

Doctors decided what to prescribe.

Drug companies — through medical advertisers — tried to influence doctors.

Patients did what they were told."

But, for the drug companies, this system was far too slow. Then, doctors held the "keys to the kingdom," and drug companies spent enormous amounts of time and money trying to get their attention. At that time, the average doctor got around 3,000 pieces of mail a year from the drug industry, and to break through this noise often took years. After all, doctors are very busy people with very little time to review advertisements.

So, ad people decided would advertise drugs directly to the patient. They'd get the patient to go into the office and ask the doctor for the drug. The advertising executives decided to let the patient "pull the drug through the system."

At first the ad execs faced a hitch. The ads had to scroll the whole disclosure information over the television screen: with so much disclosure, this was a big problem for something like a brief television commercial designed to reveal good points of a product. In the early 1980s, FDA regulations required that drug ads include both the name of a drug and its purpose, as well as information about all the side effects. They got around this by never giving the drug's name and using something like this: "Your doctor now has treatment which won't make you drowsy. See your doctor."

Before they used this strategy, a drug named Seldane (an antihistamine-decongestant removed from the U.S. market in 1997) made about $34 million in sales a year, which at the time was considered pretty good. Their new goal was to get the drug up to $100 million in sales. But when sales went through $100 million, then through $300 million, then through $400 million, then through $500 million, and eventually to $800 million, pharmaceutical companies were ecstatic.

Today, drug companies spend $4 billion a year on ads to consumers.

In 1997, the FDA rules governing pharmaceutical advertising changed, and now companies can name both the drug

and what it's for, while only naming the most significant potential side effects.

Then, the number of ads really exploded. The Nielsen Co. estimates that there's an average of 80 drug ads every hour of every day on American television. And those ads clearly produce results. (Alix Spiegel, "Selling Sickness: How Drug Ads Changed Health Care," National Public Radio, October 13 2009)

So do pharmaceuticals make you happy? That's what's on TV, so why not "abuse" them? You have seen the commercials. What is the primary purpose of the pharmaceutical advertising you view? Of course, we all know the primary purpose of any ad is to sell the product. Do we have to have a chemical holocaust in this country before the FDA wants to do something to protect people?

Many people are questioning conventional medicine and doctors who diagnose diseases and think of them all as being chemical disorders that can be treated through pharmacology and prescription drugs. More and more intelligent, well-educated people are turning to natural medicine, natural health. They are avoiding toxins in the food supply, avoiding dangerous personal care products, and exercising with cardiovascular training, strength training, tai chi, Pilates, martial arts, swimming, etc.

More Research Says...

"Despite claims that ads serve an educational purpose, they provide limited information about the causes of a disease or who may be at risk; they show characters that have lost control over their social, emotional, or physical lives without the medication; and they minimize the value of health promotion through lifestyle changes. The ads have limited educational value and may oversell the benefits of drugs in ways that might conflict with promoting population health."

(Dominick L. Frosch, PhD, Patrick M. Krueger, PhD, et al, "Creating Demand for Prescription Drugs: A Content Analysis of Television Direct-to-Consumer Advertising," Report 27th annual meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making, October 2005)

"It is time to ban direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising of prescription drugs.... The use of broad media coverage to encourage prescription drug use is a shotgun where an individualized, personalized approach is needed. These ads present biased appeals to the masses to influence decisions about drugs that are designed (and legally required) to be prescribed within the context of a relationship between a knowledgeable professional and a person who is known as an individual. The broad scope of these ads dramatically increases the potential for adverse outcomes as many viewers may be influenced inappropriately in an attempt to reach a few who could benefit from the message."

(Kurt C. Stange, MD, "Time to Ban Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Marketing," Annuls of Family Medicine, March 7 2007)

; border: medium none; color: black; overflow: hidden; text-align: center; text-decoration: none;">
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qoUNDgY4qDU/TqMS4AmKCRI/AAAAAAAADgY/o7faoYLjnOs/s400

Need a Prescription? Take Out a Loan.

2011-12-05T17:47:00.000-08:00

Four healthcare CEOs did something extraordinary at the Reiters Health Summit (May 2011):

"They admitted that drug companies

put up prices just for the hell of it."

It was a rare moment of group candor from Big Pharma and its allies,

who usually argue that prices are set by the market or that companies

need high prices to pay for innovative R&D.

(Jim Edwards, "4 Pharma CEOs Admit...," CBS Money Watch, May 17 2011)

Shire (SHPGY) Chief Executive CEO Angus Russell said:

"Prices were just shoved up every year to make more money and meet earnings, to be blunt."

How Drug Companies
Rip Off Consumers and Jack Up Prices

	“Tweak” original drug formulas to create a “new” version with a bigger price tag.
	Charge individuals the steepest price, big purchasers the smallest.
	Set prices higher in huge unregulated U.S. market than in nations with price controls.
	Claim new uses for old drugs and extend patents and monopolies to keep inexpensive generic versions off the market.
	Spend the huge sums of money on lobbying to keep government at bay.
	Saturate the media with slick ads, create new brands and generate new demands.

The United States spends $300 billion a year on prescription drugs -- twice as much as it spends on higher education. It spends more on medicines than do all the people of Japan, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand combined.

Melody Petersen, respected author (Our Daily Meds) and journalist (The New York Times, Los Angeles Times), reports, "Drug executives have long argued that Americans should eagerly fork over this money. They say we shouldn't think twice about paying an average of $120 for each brand-name drug we pick up at the pharmacy -- up from an average price of $65 in 2000." (Melody Petersen, "Healthcare Reform Without Drug Price Controls? That's Sick," Los Angeles Times, October 10 2009)

Executives warn if prices were limited, companies would be forced to cut back on scientific research and Americans would get far fewer new medicines. Discovering a drug can take more than a decade, they say, and run up a research bill approaching $1 billion.

Petersen thinks it's painfully clear that Americans are not getting their money's worth from what they pay for medicines. She understands that discovering a new lifesaving drug is expensive, but she questions whether the cost is as high as the industry claims. Why? The drug companies have refused to allow outside scrutiny of what they spend in their labs.

In fact, the companies' actual research costs are one of the industry's most closely guarded secrets. In the 1970s and 1980s, pharmaceutical companies waged a decade-long legal battle to keep even government auditors from reviewing those costs, leaving it unclear whether they include non-scientific costs such as promotion.

Petersen believes that most of the public does not know the truth. She claims, "Over the last 30 years, the industry hasn't focused its efforts on discovering those truly amazing innovations that can change the practice of medicine. Those are the projects that are risky and expensive. Instead, the companies have taken the easy path, ordering their scientists to turn out mostly rehashes of medicines already being sold. It's far cheaper to copy a medicine -- tweaking a molecule just enough so it gets its own patent -- than it is to do the years of work needed to find new and better cures."

This focus on copycat medicines is apparent in the list of drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

"Of the medicines approved between 1990 and 2004,

only 16% were what government reviewers deemed to be actually new and significant.

The rest were medicines we were already using in a slightly different form.

This explains why our pharmacies our stocked with a multitude

of medicines that reduce cholesterol in the same exact way." - Melody Petersen

Drug Patents

Once a new drug is approved, the company that made and tested it receives a patent. This means that no other company can make the drug until the end of the patent, which is usually 10-15 years after the drug is released. This allows them to fairly recoup their investment costs. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, patent protection for a drug typically lasts an average of 11 years. A generic drug can enter the market only after the brand-name patent or other marketing exclusivities have expired and FDA approval is granted.

When a patent for a brand name drug expires, any other company can copy the drug and sell a generic version. Under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, also known as the Hatch-Waxman Act, generic drug companies don't have to repeat expensive clinical trials. These generic companies must only prove that their product is the same as the brand name drug. This means that generic drug companies do not have to spend as much time and money because they do not have to invent or test the drug for safety and get FDA-approval. This is why generic drugs cost less.

Generics have the same quality, safety, and strength as branded medicines. Most often, the savings range from 30% to 50%. According to the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, the average retail price of a generic prescription drug in 2008 was $35.22. The average retail price of a brand name prescription drug was $137.90. (http://healthinsurance.about.com, February 25 2010)

Evergreening

Sometimes to protect their patents and profits, the drug industry “evergreens” or reformulates a product by claiming some new formulation such as a time-release version or by combining it with another existing drug, marketing it for another illness or even claiming a patent on an inactive ingredient. A minor change extends the effective duration of a product's patent and a product’s profits for at least another three years.

The "new use" patent extends claims for a "known" drug on the grounds of a change in formulation or method of administration rather than an alteration in the active chemical entity. Proponents say "evergreening" fosters continued innovation.

Evergreening claims are made late in the life of the original patent, very often just before it goes off official patent. When successful, evergreening can delay the entry of generic products into the market while the company that manufactures the original product, known as the innovator company, maintains the commercial advantage of a familiar, established brand. (Scott Strumello, "Evergreening Does Not Refer to Trees," Scott's Web Log, July 9 2009)

An example of evergreening? That popular little blue pill, Viagra, ($1 billion a year in U.S. sales) was scheduled to go off-patent in 2012. The drug compound behind Viagra, which was first intended to treat high blood pressure, was originally set to expire next year. Global drug giant Pfizer had applied for a separate patent, which was granted 10-years ago, for the drug’s use for treating impotence.

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries and other generic drugmakers have questioned the validity of the second patent in hopes of being able to sell the popular drug sooner. Teva argued that Pfizer withheld documents when applying for the Viagra patent and that after the initial patent was filed for the drug compound, known as sildenafil, the use of the drug for erectile dysfunction was obvious. If the use was determined to be obvious, then the patent could be deemed invalid.

Facing generic competition, Pfizer started selling a chewable form of Viagra in Mexico. They called it Viagra Jet and said it may also market Jet to other nations in the developing world, if not the United States. (Duff Wilson, "As Generics Near, Makers Tweak Erectile Drugs," The New York Times, April 13 2011)

As it turns out, the company didn't have to rely on evergreening to continue sole production of their patent. Just recently Pfizer won a legal case preventing Teva from producing generic versions of Viagra. A US court ruled the patent Pfizer holds for Viagra is valid until 2019, stopping any other companies from manufacturing unbranded versions. (Alan Rappaport, "Pfizer Wins Case To Keep Viagra Patent," The Financial Times Limited, August 15 2011)

Pay for Delay Deals

Brand-name drug companies also pay generic drug companies to delay bringing their drugs to the market.

Here's how it works. (Carolyn Thomas, "Big Pharma’s 'Pay for Delay' Tactics Keep Generic Drugs Off the Market," The Ethical Nag, ethicalnag.org, April 14 2010)

"Let’s say that a drug company like Bayer Corporation is gearing up for a big sales drop when its antibiotic Cipro loses patent protection. A less expensive Cipro would still be on the market and prescribed by many physicians, but many more docs will now opt for the cheaper generic version of the drug ciprofloxacin for their patients. Cipro will suddenly cease to be a big blockbuster name brand drug for Bayer.

"So Bayer decides to approach three of its competitors, Barr Laboratories, Rugby and Hoechst-Marion Roussel – all manufacturers of generic drugs. According to California Superior Court documents:

'…HMR and Rugby agreed to refrain from selling or marketing a generic Cipro in exchange for a lump sum of $49.1 million and quarterly payments to Barr and HMR that have totalled several hundred million dollars.'

"Bayer is happy because they can continue to sell their blockbuster brand name drug for six more profitable years, long after Cipro’s patent protection is legally lifted. The three competitors are happy because they’re essentially getting paid not to work.The only stakeholders who are not particularly happy are patients. Their access to cheaper generic versions of the brand name Cipro has been effectively blocked.

"Oh, make that two unhappy groups of stakeholders: the other is your neighborhood drug store owners, who earn much higher profit margins on the generic drugs they sell there compared to brand name drugs. So let’s also say that two unhappy American drug store chains called CVS and Rite Aid decide to challenge the Pay for Delay deal. Make no mistake: although they may look like consumer activists and local heroes standing up for their poor deprived customers, they too are looking out for their own profits."

Pricing

Not everyone pays the same prices for U.S. pharmaceuticals. And prices for different payers are often secret. Neither the government nor the manufacturers disclose that information because the drug industry claims that such information is a trade secret—proprietary information. To make a parallel, the situation is much like passengers on a jet plane all headed to the same destination: no one knows how much the person in the next seat paid for their ticket.

The "best price" is a proprietary federal determination of the lowest price paid by a manufacturer's best customers after rebates and discounts have been applied. Best price is one of the factors used to calculate the rebates owed to state Medicaid programs. Yet certain customers getting some of the best deals are left out of the best price equation. (Bob Huff, "Paying for Life: The Issues Behind Drug Pricing," The Body, HealthCentral Network, November 2003)

Because they want to corner the market on popular drugs, drug makers who manufacture competitive drugs, such as Zocor®, Mevacor® or Lipitor® for cholesterol control, curry favor with volume buyers—federal agencies such as the Defense Department and the Veterans’ Administration—through lower prices. Other bulk buyers, including hospitals, HMOs, insurers and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs)—the for-profit companies that insurers and large employers hire to administer drug benefits—also get price breaks.

The Big 4? The four largest purchasers of pharmaceuticals within the federal government: the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Defense, the Public Health Service, and the Coast Guard. The Big 4 often get pricing below Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) on brand name drugs.

The drug pricing game in the United States looks even more unfair when compared with the way big pharma deals with foreign markets. On average, Italians pay 53 percent of the U.S. cost for a brand-name drug, while the French pay 55 percent, Swedes 64 percent, Germans 65 percent and Swiss and United Kingdom residents 69 percent.

The only official price released by a pharmaceutical company is called the wholesale acquisition cost (WAC), which is the list price that industry middlemen are supposed to pay to the pharmaceutical maker. The wholesaler, in turn, distributes the drug to pharmacies for retail sale.

A more widely quoted price for drugs is the average wholesale price (AWP), which is an average of list prices quoted by wholesalers to pharmacies. But because of an arcane system of discounts, rebates, and charge-backs, almost no one pays the "official" price.

The acquisition cost (AC) is the actual amount that a pharmacy pays for its drug inventory. This cost varies depending on the quantity purchased, as well as on the rebates and discounts available to the pharmacist. Large buyers can obtain significant discounts: you can almost be sure that a drugstore chain like Duane Reade is paying less for pharmaceuticals than an independent neighborhood drugstore, although this may not translate into lower prices for consumers.

After acquiring a drug, the pharmacy then resells it to consumers with or without an additional markup, plus something called a dispensing fee added on. The dispensing fee is a charge for the professional services of the pharmacist, plus an additional percentage of the drug's cost to cover overhead and profit. Each of these steps may be regulated or fixed by prior agreement. For example, some Medicaid programs may limit the dispensing fees charged by retail pharmacists.

As an example, take tenofovir (Viread), produced by Gilead Sciences.

(A) The published WAC is $360 for a 30-day supply;
(B) An online pharmacy advertises it for $435;
(C) A state ADAP program may pay $380.
(D) Gilead has offered tenofovir to antiretroviral treatment programs in developing countries at $39 per month, roughly the company's cost of manufacturing.

Want a surprise (at least according to one survey in New York City)? A survey (2003) of 155 New York City pharmacies found the highest prices at the biggest chain stores, which charged, on average, eight percent more than mom-and-pop stores. Shockingly, the report also found that chain stores in the poorest neighborhoods charged prices well above the citywide average, meaning that those who can least afford high drug prices in New York are paying the most. (Bob Huff, "Paying for Life: The Issues Behind Drug Pricing," The Body, HealthCentral Network, November 2003)

What does a person pay? Uninsured, cash-paying individuals pay the most. Katharine Greider, author of The Big Fix: How the Pharmaceutical Industry Rips Off American Consumers, says on average the same drug that costs a cash-paying patient $100 costs the federal government $58 and costs private insurers or PBMs $70 to $95. (Mike Hall, "What Drug Companies Aren't Telling You,"American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations, aflcio.org, 2011)

Lobby

One way to rein in the questionable practices, pricing and other abuses of the pharmaceutical industry would be to pass tough new laws and regulations, including price controls that most other nations use to keep medicine affordable for their citizens. But according to Greider, the drug industry’s powerful presence in Washington, D.C., makes such legislation next to impossible.

In 2011, the pharmaceutical industry can count on a team of 825 lobbyists to influence legislation seeking to limit the industry’s power or decrease its profits, such as new prescription drug benefit legislation for seniors or prescription drug price controls. Cost totals for the industry reached $115,571,832.

Speaking of lobbying, in the 1999-2000 election cycle “drug companies spent more money to influence politicians than did insurance companies, telephone companies, electric companies, commercial banks, oil and gas producers, automakers, tobacco companies, food processors and manufacturers—more, in short, than any other industry,” Greider writes.

“Most of that—about $177 million—went to hire lobbyists from 134 firms,

including 21 former members of Congress.

The industry also gave $20 million in campaign contributions

and spent $60 million on issue ads.”

(Mike Hall, "What Drug Companies Aren't Telling You,"

American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations, aflcio.org, 2011)

A Final Word

Public Citizen issued a major report on drug company research and development issues, which received considerable national media attention. It was also used by ABC News in a Peter Jennings special Bitter Medicine. ("Would Lower Prescription Drug Prices Curb Drug Company Research and Development?" http://www.citizen.org, 2010) Here some reasons why lower prescription prices would not curb R&D:

* New drug discoveries are much cheaper than the industry claims

* Huge profits allow for price elasticity

* Lower prices will induce demand

* Drug companies will shift priorities

* Future research costs will decline

* Industry R&D risks are significantly reduced by taxpayer-funded research

* Drug company advertising is growing faster than R&D

* Price cuts could foster more drug innovation

Entire "What Drug Companies Aren't Telling You" Article: http://www.aflcio.org/aboutus/thisistheaflcio/publications/magazine/0503_bigfix.cfm#jackupprices

Entire "Would Lower Prescription Drug Prices Curb Drug Company Research and Development?" Article:
http://www.citizen.org/congress/article_redirect.cfm?ID=7909

Getting High With Grandpa and Grandma

2011-12-03T07:28:00.000-08:00

"The use of narcotic pain relievers such as OxyContin and oxycodone

has increased nearly 1,000 percent on a per capita basis since 1997,

said Orman Hall, director of the Ohio Department of Alcohol and Drug Addiction Services."

(Dave Larson, "Seniors at Higher Risk of Abusing Prescriptions, Dayton Daily News, November 7 2011)

Would it surprise you to know that death rates from unintentional drug/medication-related poisoning are highest for Ohioans ages 45-54, with rates for males 1.5 times greater than the rates for females? ("Epidemic of Prescription Overdose In Ohio, Ohio Department of Health)

A recent national report estimated that adults over 65 account for more than 175,000 emergency department visits for adverse drug reactions each year, and commonly prescribed medications accounted for 33 percent of these drug reactions.

“Essentially, we are treating chronic pain with pharmaceutical-grade heroin, which we believe is a very dangerous practice,” Orman Hall, director of the Ohio Department of Alcohol and Drug Addiction Services, says. “Seniors, along with most people in our state, really don’t have an adequate understanding of how dangerous and addictive these types of substances are.”

The Silent Epidemic: What Is Happening To Put Seniors At Risk?

1. Lack of Information

Seniors (and most other people in the state) don't have an adequate understanding of how dangerous and addictive these substances are.

2. Polypharmacy

The use of multiple medications, or “polypharmacy,” can increase a person’s risk for bad interactions and unintended side effects, especially in older patients who metabolize drugs differently than younger people..

About 80 percent of seniors have at least one chronic health condition and 50 percent have at least two, according to SAMHSA. “Simply having two or three chronic conditions can get them a prescription list of six to 10 medications,” Dr. Brian Clymer, medical director of Miami Valley Hospital’s hospitalist program says.

3. Multiple Physicians

Services aren’t being coordinated across different practices, and this error may create a degree of risk for seniors to be in receipt of opiates and other controlled substances that might put them at risk.

"Many of those people who are using opiates at the highest level are receiving drugs from multiple physicians,” Hall said.

4. Deadly Prescription Combinations

Taking opioids for pain in conjunction with benzodiazepine drugs such as Xanax and Valium for sleep or anxiety disorders can be a dangerous combination. Nearly 60 percent of Montgomery County’s unintentional prescription drug deaths in 2010 involved a combination of opioids and benzodiazepines," says Russel Falck, the Center for Interventions, Treatment & Addictions Research at Wright State University’s Boonshoft School of Medicine. CITAR’s associate director.

People who have been prescribed narcotics or benzodiazepines to help control their symptoms “usually have a good reason to be on them and it’s not a pathological dependence,” Dr. Brian Clymer, medical director of Miami Valley Hospital’s hospitalist program says.

Also, Dima M. Qato, from the University of Chicago (Journal of the American Medical Association) found that 68 percent of older adults used prescription drugs plus over-the-counter medications or dietary supplements. Among those combining drugs, 4 percent were in danger of having an adverse drug reaction. (Steven Reinberg, "Drug Combinations Putting Seniors At Risk," http://prohealthcare.org, December 23 2008)

Moreover, the rate of adverse drug interactions increased with age, particularly among women. Over 50 percent of these interactions involved the use of over-the-counter medications, the researchers found.
The most common adverse interactions occurred with blood thinners such as warfarin and antiplatelet drugs such as aspirin, Qato's group found.

"Physicians and pharmacists need to ask older patients about all the medications they use -- prescription and nonprescription -- and patients need to be prepared to share this information," Qato said. "This is especially important in patients who see multiple providers and patients that fill at multiple pharmacies."

5. Shame To Admit a Problem

Ruth Sanchez-Way, director of the federal Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. She says many older people either don't realize or are ashamed to admit they've got a drug problem. Yet her agency estimates that 17% of Americans age 60 and older abuse prescription drugs or alcohol. Sanchez-Way says that, in many cases, prescription drug abuse goes hand in hand with a drinking problem. (Kathleen Fackelmann, "More Seniors Are Addicted to Prescription Drugs, USA TODAY, July 23 2001)

"Valium, Librium, Xanax, Halcion and ProSom are some brand names for these drugs that are prescribed for anxiety and insomnia, two common problems among older Americans," says Sidney Wolfe, director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group in Washington, D.C. "In most cases, they are addicted to them," he says.

6. Increasing Doses for Insomnia, Chronic Pain, Fractures, and Other Legitimate Health Problems

Many seniors get an order from their doctor for legitimate health problems such as insomnia and fill it legally at the local drugstore.

In some cases, seniors get addicted to painkillers like Demerol or Vicodin, morphine derivatives often prescribed after painful hip fractures, says Cathy Napier, the director of a drug and alcohol treatment center at the Presbyterian Hospital of Dallas.

But more frequently, an older person gets a prescription for a benzodiazepine, then gets into trouble without ever realizing the risk, she says.

In many cases, people feel better while taking a benzodiazepine. They take more and more of it, then ask the doctor to refill their prescription. To make matters worse, doctors often prescribe an inappropriately high dose of these drugs to seniors, Kenneth Schmader, a geriatric medicine specialist at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, N.C. says. Older people metabolize drugs less efficiently and thus need a lower dose, he says. Age-related changes influence the way in which their bodies respond to prescription drugs.

NIDA advises against taking these drugs for more than four months. Schmader and others say these drugs can be used safely — if used as directed for short periods of time

7. Denial From Family Members

Often, family members look the other way when an older relative suffers from a drug problem, Napier says. They may not realize that an older person's drug use has escalated, Schmader adds. They'll say: "There's no way that Grandma is abusing these drugs." But if the dose has gone up and Grandma is nodding off in the corner, Schmader suggests that family members take a closer look.

Families often don't realize the harm that such drugs can do. For example, older people taking a high dose of benzodiazepines run the risk of developing memory or thinking problems, Schmader says. A higher than necessary dose of these drugs can trigger confusion, a problem that can result in a car accident or difficulty getting home from a familiar place. (Kathleen Fackelmann, "More Seniors Are Addicted to Prescription Drugs, USA TODAY, July 23 2001)

8. Increased Injury In the "Fog" of Medications

Another risk with a benzodiazepine-induced fog is that an older person will stumble. "They can fall and fracture a hip," Schmader says. A hip fracture can kick off a cascade of serious health problems, he says.

And in some cases, a benzodiazepine problem can trigger an addiction to another drug or to alcohol. That's what happened to 73-year-old Gerry Lucas of Durant, Okla. Lucas says she became addicted to Valium during the 1960s and kicked the habit only to suffer from alcohol abuse later in life.

9. Other Addiction Factors Include

(a) Loneliness,
(b) Depression.

“There is literature to support the notion that people who are depressed or who have suffered some degree of trauma may be more predisposed to opiate addiction than people who don’t have those conditions,” Hall said.

And, Seniors Can Choose To Become Criminals

Seniors in Ohio are being recruited by drug dealers to obtain prescription medication for “diversion” or illegal resale. “A higher percentage of seniors are living on fixed incomes and prescription painkillers are a pretty hot commodity,” Orman Hall says. Drugs such as Percocet or Vicoden sell from $7 to $15 on the street, while in-demand opiates such as OxyContin can bring as much as $40 per pill.

A new state report describes this activity in Ohio. “Reportedly, dealers stand outside of drugstores and approach seniors about selling their prescriptions, or dealers will convince a senior to go to the doctor and fake pain to get a prescription,” according to a description of activity in the Toledo area. (Andrew Welsh-Huggins, "Report: Drug Dealers Tap Seniors For Pills," Associated Press - The News Herald, October 5 2011)

“If the senior agrees, the dealer will drive the senior to the doctor and to the pharmacy to fill the prescription and will then pay them,” the report says. “That’s the only way they can make ends meet,” the report continues, referring to activity in the Youngstown area.

In Dayton, “people who had suffered injury and the elderly who were given a legitimate prescription were identified as dealers,” the report says.

These trends could continue as the economy worsens, Hall said.

Appalachian Abuse Fighters

2011-12-02T11:56:00.000-08:00

"There are 1 million fewer prescription pills

on the streets in 2011 as compared to 2010,

according to the Ohio Department of Alcohol

and Drug Addiction Services.

"The decrease in pills comes

in Scioto and Gallia counties,

ranked among the worst in the state

for prescription drug abuse.

"Residents in other counties wonder

if the state can also decrease the problem

in their county.

"Ohio Department of Alcohol

and Drug Addiction Services (ODADAS)

credits the decrease to several factors,

including actions taken by

Ohio's Drug Abuse Task force

and crackdowns on pill mills."

(Nadia Bashir, "Winning War on Prescription Drug Abuse, State Says,"

nbc4i.com/news, October 31 2011)

News and Video Link: http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2011/oct/31/5/state-says-its-winning-war-prescription-drug-abuse-ar-810257/

I feel like quoting Jerry Garcia and the Grateful Dead's song "Truckin'":

"Lately it occurs to me: what a long, strange trip it's been."

But, then again, maybe the Dead (for some obvious reasons) is not the best allusion for a fight against drug abuse. The fight has definitely been "long" and "hard" taking members of the Scioto Rx Drug Task Force and its Action Team into numerous protests on the street; prayerful vigils; formations of support groups and Facebook groups; meetings with local, state, and federal officials and agencies; trips to the Ohio Statehouse and hearings with legislators; media coverage from from local, state, and national levels; sessions in courtrooms statewide; meetings and workshops at schools, colleges, and counseling centers: on and on.

We have met with the Federal Drug Czar, Governors, Senators, State Representatives, the Ohio Board of Pharmacy, DEA and law enforcement heads, clinical professors from universities, representatives from pharmaceutical companies, officers of the Appalachian Regional Commission, religious leaders, national talk show hosts, popular entertainers, counselors, and, of course, youth of all ages.

We have fought negative attitudes such as

1. "It's our right in a free society to sell drugs to anyone with a prescription."

2. "Alleviation of individuals' pain supersedes the deadly cost of high distribution."

3. "No one makes a person take a pill: addicts kill and maim themselves; doctors and pharmacies are not to blame."

4. "Nothing you can do will help the problem of drug addiction besides legalization."

5. "Keep religion out of the issue -- remember separation of Church and State."

6. "Closing pill mills will result in the undertreatment of legitimate pain."

7. "Just Say No is the only thing that works - money spent on drug education and behavior modification is wasted funds."

8. "To say there is an Rx Drug Health Emergency of epidemic proportions is gross overstatement."

9. "The children of good parents do not take drugs."

10. "Jobs and the economy deserve precedence over high rates of death and destruction caused by drug abuse."

11. "I don't see a prescription drug problem; after all, these drugs are legal and controlled by professionals."

12. "Pharmaceutical companies and state reporting agencies adequately control and stop all illegal rx drug distribution."

13. "Commerce, even in the face of public harm, must be protected and allowed to flourish."

14. "People are exposing drug abuse just 'to give the area a black eye.'"

In the last couple of years, the first steps were taken in the fight against prescriptions drug abuse:

1. The Action Team identified the problem and verified its extent in Scioto County.

2. The Action Team declared rx drug abuse a public health epidemic.

3. The Action Team realized and stressed the urgency of acting swiftly upon the problem.

4. The Action Team met and planned strategies with health officials, law enforcement, government agencies, churches, lawmakers, and the public to combat the problem.

5. The Action Team informed locals about the health epidemic and exposed the details to the nation through mass media and town hall settings.

6. The Action Team began a grass roots campaign to protest pill mills, distribute information, and recruit supporters.

7. The Action Team formed committees of support groups and individuals that addressed abuse issues such as prevention, intervention, jobs, crime, related health issues such as hepatitis, and rehab.

8. The Action Team networked with existing institutions, groups, and individuals to establish better communication and to promote better awareness of available area resources.

9. The Action Team received help from educational institutions, commissions, state boards, and government agencies to fight the problem.

10. The Action Team opened its membership to all those committed to saving lives and preventing rx drug dependency.

11. The Action Team lobbied and supported House Bill 93 that more strongly governs how clinics operate and closely monitors prescriptions and doctors while giving medical and pharmacy boards more authority.

12. The Action Team lobbied and supported a Pain Clinic Ordinance for the city of Portsmouth, Ohio.

13. The Action Team lobbied and supported a levy for drug abuse prevention in all county schools.

14. The SOLACE Organization Support Group received verbal commitments from 14 Ohio Counties to start a local chapter (Ashtabula and Pickaway Counties have groups already up and running.)

Much more work remains to be accomplished; however, being a part of a movement that has already produced remarkable results is very gratifying. So many have worked so hard to advance the cause and to reduce prescription drug abuse.

The Scioto Rx Drug Abuse Task Force Action Team stimulated many ideas and much support for many of the needed changes enacted by the Ohio Drug Abuse Task Force and the State Legislature.The Scioto team served as the spearhead of the fight in Ohio and proved to be a national model for effective action against drug abuse.

The results of "people power" are far reaching. What began in Appalachian as a problem with "hillbilly heroin" is being felt everywhere. The rest of the nation is beginning to realize and to experience the terrible toll of rx drug abuse. Many officials have already contacted the Scioto Action Team and inquired about successful strategies for community awareness and involvement.

I am proud of my town -- Portsmouth, Ohio; proud of my county -- Scioto County; proud of my state -- Ohio; and proud of my area -- Appalachia. We have come together to prove that individuals can make a difference: a difference in government, a difference in living conditions, and a difference in saving lives from extreme misery, suffering, and death.

In a once-prosperous place now suffering from joblessness, poverty, high crime rates, health issues, meager education, and a malaise of depression, I still find hope. We are working on a problem related to many of our other ills, and we are making wonderful strides that can greatly reduce drug abuse. We have fought well, but we must realize the battles we have won still don't guarantee the end of the war is near. The Action Team has much, much more to do. Each one of you needs to join our efforts and find a place for your particular talents. The work will enrich your spirit. After all, Appalachian brothers and sisters, we were born fighters.

Taken from Keturah Gray's

"Children of the Mountains Struggle To Survive,"

a segment of ABC's 20/20,

February 13 2009

Central Appalachia has up to three times the national poverty rate, an epidemic of prescription drug abuse, the shortest life span in the nation, toothlessness, cancer and chronic depression.

But everywhere in these hills,

there are also young fighters filled with courage and hope.

Settled by tough pioneers who clawed their way over the Appalachian Mountains to expand America's borders, the region has produced some of the fiercest military fighters the country has seen. Like their ancestors before them, the children of the mountains are born fighters,

Dee Davis, president of the Center for Rural Strategies in Whitesburg, Ky., said America should pay attention to the conditions in Appalachia.

"When the banking industry melts down, it's like, 'Oh, no, we have a structural problem. We need to reinvest in those people.' But when the folks in Appalachia or the inner city are poor, it's their fault," Davis said. "It's a lot easier to blame people for their poverty than to figure out what's next."

Only one in 10 men in the region will get a college degree -- less than half the national average. For those who do not, the only employment options are Wal-Mart, fast food, the drug trade or the mines.

When asked why they don't just leave the isolating hills, mountain people will tell you that once Appalachia is in your blood, it's in your blood forever.

"I love the voices," said Davis. "Every person, every challenge seems to be remembered in some story, in some way to make people feel better about who they are. I think, in many ways, Appalachia is America written with intensity.

"I mean, there's no reason to think

that somebody who comes from the mountains

of Appalachia can't succeed," he said.

"I think it's just changing the contours

of our expectations,

and maybe the geography of our heart."

See the entire "Children of the Mountains..." article here: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=6865077#.Ttkih1a63Gg

Are You Living the Good Life?

2011-12-01T10:36:00.000-08:00

The good life -- affluence, luxury, prosperity. As we acquire material possessions, we associate our worldly worth with accumulating real estate, dollar bills, expensive amusements, and all the trimmings that enhance our social status and our personal standing. We work diligently to "rise above" mediocre standards and to enjoy the quality fruits of our hard labor.

In our eyes, these valuable things make life "special," both satisfying and increasingly enjoyable. Of course, we generously share our good fortune with family and friends as we live our time on earth, and we hope that our loved ones will greatly benefit after we die from those chattels we have accumulated.

We live while pondering the cliche "He/She who dies with the most toys wins." Never has this philosophy been embraced more than now. In the United States, good jobs and money are scarce, and competition for advancement is keen. We toil to get "a leg up" so they can afford expensive homes, automobiles, and other costly components of the American Dream. And, in order to maintain high standards while ornamenting a simple life, we must often use whatever means necessary (within law and reason) to get distance from the pack. We all know this as "the way of the world."

In addition to a strong will to acquire our own share of material goods, most of us Americans have a high tolerance for income inequality. Our attitudes focus on equality of opportunity instead of fairness in equal outcomes. Among Americans, differences of opinion about inequality usually center on whether poor people deserve help and sympathy or whether they should instead pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.

Income inequality has been rising since the late 1970s, and now rests at a level not seen since the Gilded Age—roughly 1870 to 1900. In reality, now the gap between America's rich and poor is so extreme that levels of inequality are worse in the land of the free than they are in many developing countries. Figures show the U.S. ranks way behind the European Union and the United Kingdom in terms of inequality of pay.

According to Elizabeth Gudrais...

"Research indicates that high inequality reverberates
through societies on multiple levels,

correlating with, if not causing, more crime, less happiness,
poorer mental and physical health,

less racial harmony, and less civic and political participation.
Tax policy and social-welfare programs,
then, take on importance far beyond determining
how much income people hold onto.

The level of inequality we allow represents our answer
to 'a very important question,'says Nancy Krieger,
professor of society, human development, and health at Harvard School of Public Health

'What kind of society do we want to live in?'"

(Elizabeth Gudrais, "Unequal America," Harvard Magazine, July-August 2008)

I think the question should be "What kind of society do we want everyone to live in?" I think we all know the answer. In risk of sounding like a preacher or a soapbox orator, I believe the best rewards in life are "the little things." Yes, most of us are well-meaning capitalists chasing after stacks of legal tender; however, we understand, deep down, that "the good life" is something money cannot buy.

Despite our good intentions (especially evident in token giving around the Christmas season), most of us are perfectly content to let the Scrooge side of our nature dominate our daily lives. As long as we live on the high ground, above the gap and above the poor, we continue to invest in our kingdoms of real property. We may feel it necessary to drop a crumb every now and then to those we don't know, but we tend to file these people in the back of our minds under tabs like scumbags, dumb-ass hillbillies, and welfare queens.

It astounds me to see the trappings of those who place so much value in materialism. When is "enough, enough?" I believe everyone needs some extras -- those things that make life more comfortable and complete. But, am I the only one who sees overindulgence in material accumulation as outright wasteful gluttony? And, does money really produce any joy and pleasure beyond its ability to allow the person who possesses it to engage in personal and selfish indulgence?

I realize nothing about our quest for "the good life" is going to change dramatically because we are basically people programmed to "take care of our own." I'm sure this behavior is likely Darwinian in nature and somehow good for the survival of the species. Yet, I am interesting in inviting those living in luxury to consider the importance of their non-monetary expenditures and investments.

Maybe I am not the right person to render advice. After all, I know the mansion, the BMW, and the world vacation are well beyond my budget. I do not wish to acquire many luxuries, and I do not feel shorted by living my life without them. In truth, I think I live pretty well on a meager income. I admit I desire certain nice possessions (within limits) and I do already have most of these extras I desire. I realize that I, too, could live with less. Maybe my life would be just as rewarding with fewer possessions.

I just don't understand the desire to get to the top of life by spending and acquiring. Does it really make sense to think that money secures happiness? A person with a seemingly unlimited supply of money to spend does not impress me with his rich station. And, a person who acquires expensive worldly goods to make his/her estate lavish does not impress me either. Status, in my mind, is acquired through kindness, love, and simple virtues. Good life can be independent of monetary prosperity.

I want to consider the best feelings that anyone can experience. Volumes have been written about subjects such as family, religion, and friends. Without spending words in familiar phrases by lifting the value of these things, I want to write about the worth of simple, often spontaneous and fleeting feelings of joy and meaning. In my memory none of these experiences required that I spend money or live in great fortune. I have received these gifts from and given these gifts to those of all economic standards, creeds, and colors.

These things always make "the good life" come alive to me. I hope I am able to experience them until my last breath. I guess you could say I am greedy about them. And, I hope everyone in society can have the opportunity to let all of them enrich their lives. See what you think.

The Great 28 For "The Good Life"

1. A needed touch,

2. A thankful word,

3. A note of sincerity,

4. A special kiss,

5. A heartfelt smile,
6. A kind expression,
7. A view of understanding eyes,
8. An unconstrained laugh,
9. A meaningful song,
10. A sharing of food or drink,
11. A happy anticipation,
12. An unexpected surprise,
13. A ray of sunshine, a drop of rain, a cold chill -- a natural connection,
14. A moment of pride,
15. A restful sleep,
16. A new understanding,
17. A simple accomplishment,
18. A deep recollection,
19. A forgotten memory,
20. A given favor,
21. A promise of forgiveness,
22. A gathering of friends,
23. A moment alone,
24. A flame of desire,
25. A carefree moment,
26. A rush of freedom,
27. A touch of healing,
28. An answered prayer.

Addicts -- Voluntary or Involuntary?

2011-11-25T09:47:00.000-08:00

Addictive Personalities

Much of the established medical community does not accept an addictive personality as a diagnosis used to explain why some people become addicted to alcohol, drugs, activities, and even emotions.

The substance-based addictions, such as alcoholism, as well as nicotine, prescription and narcotic addictions, are more easily explained and identified neurologically. Dr. Alan Leshner, PhD, of the National Institute on Drug Abuse describes addiction instead as "a brain disease" and "a chronic relapsing disease," in that there are visible alterations in the brains of addicted individuals and these effects are long-lasting within their neurological patterns.

Particular drugs, such as crack and heroine cause massive surges in dopamine in the brain, with different sensations ranging from invincibility and strength to euphoric and enlightened states. Use of these substances almost immediately changes particular aspects of the brain's behavior, making most individuals immediately susceptible to future abuse or addiction.

But what about all the reasons people get into addiction? As Dr. Leshner can attest, many people still see drug abuse and addiction as a moral failure and a weakness that needs to be approached solely from punitive actions. These people believe addiction is not a disease but a choice in lifestyle. ("An Interview With Dr. Alan I. Leshner," Frontline, pbs.org)

Leshner says, "Deep in their hearts, many people believe that drug addicts

did it to themselves, therefore they're bad,

and the only way to deal with them is to tough it out."

Other people show great compassion for drug addicts. They philosophize that addiction results from involuntary behavior.

Leshner concludes, "Of course, it (addiction) is a combination of the two. Drug use is a voluntary behavior. You do make the initial choice to use the drug. The problem is that, over time, the drug use changes your brain in fundamental and long-lasting ways, and you develop, in effect, another brain state. The person you're dealing with isn't the same person who started using drugs voluntarily. They can't exert the same level of control."

Even if the addict is not using, according to Leshner, the changes in the brain are still there, which is why people relapse. Leshner believes drug addiction should be approached like other chronic diseases, such as diabetes and high blood pressure.

Dr. Nora D. Volkow, who succeeded Leshner as director at the NIDA in 2003, observed that the frontal cortical area of the cocaine addict’s brain was disrupted, even after not using for 100 days. Dr. Volkow found

"The disruption of the dopamine pathways leads to a decrease
in the reinforcing value of normal things, and this pushes
the individual to take drugs to compensate."

("Drug Addiction: Choice or Disease," drug-addiction-support.org, 2011)

So, Are Some People PRONE To Become Addicted?

Investigation began long ago and still continues into aspects of psychological makeup that may contribute to addiction. Are there common threads that weave through all addictions, from hard drugs to cigarettes, from gambling to overeating?

One often cited study (admittedly done close to 30 years ago) prepared for the National Academy of Sciences and authored by Alan R. Lang, a psychology professor at Florida State University, concludes that there is no single set of psychological characteristics that embrace all addictions. But the study does see common elements from addiction to addiction.

The report finds that there are several
''significant personality factors''

that can contribute to addiction:

- Impulsive behavior, difficulty in delaying gratification, an antisocial personality and a disposition toward sensation seeking.

- A high value on nonconformity combined with a weak commitment to the goals for achievement valued by the society.

- A sense of social alienation and a general tolerance for deviance.

- A sense of heightened stress. This may help explain why adolescence and other stressful transition periods are often associated with the most severe drug and alcohol problems.

Lang and others familiar in the field believe a continuing search for the personality traits that play a part in the development of addictions is an essential part of the broader fight against addiction. ''If we can better identify the personality factors,'' he said in an interview, ''they can help us devise better treatment and can open up new strategies to intervene and break the patterns of addiction.'' (Bryce Nelson, "The Addictive Personality: Common Traits Are Found," The New York Times, January 18 1983)

Implications For Certain Personalities

Wouldn't it make sense that parents, families, relatives, doctors, school officials, enforcement officers, and any others who occupy the roles of guardians look out for certain traits early on in the life of a child? As a retired educator, I know teachers are often faced with class members who exhibit nonconformity, alienation, compulsive behavior, and high rates of stress.

Usually, these students are sent to the principal's office or to the guidance office where they receive the traditional "good person" vs. "bad person" lecture, are given a chance for behavior modification, and are meted out a punishment crafted to improve general behavior and foster discipline. Does this adequately address the true needs of a potentially addicted personality? Will these strategies really prevent and help curtail negative personality traits? I think you and I both know the answers to these questions.

Why can't these personality factors, when evidenced, be used as significant signs of the need...

1. For professional intervention?
2. For medical and psychiatric evaluation?
3. For class instruction in stress reduction, impulsive behavior, etc.?
4. For school programs and activities designed to deal with alienation, nonconformity, etc.?
5. For parental and community education about addiction -- myths vs. realities?
6. For alternative disciplinary measures?

“No one wants to be an addict.

All anyone wants to be able to do is knock back a few drinks

with the guys on Friday or have a cigarette with coffee or take a toke on a crack pipe.

But very few addicts can do this.

When someone goes from being able to control their habit

to mugging their grandmother to get money for their next fix,

that convinces me that something has changed in their brain.”

-Dr. Herbert D. Kleber, the medical director of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse

Treatment is the only answer

regardless whether drug addiction is

a choice or a disease.

Zombies High On Krokodil

2011-11-22T07:25:00.000-08:00

The effects of this drug

make crystal meth look benign by comparison.

"The average user of krokodil,

a dirty cousin of morphine that is spreading like a virus among Russian youth,

does not live longer than two or three years,

and the few who manage to quit usually come away disfigured."

(Simon Shuster, "The Curse of the Crocodile: Russia's Deadly Designer Drug," Time Magazine, June 20 2011)

Krokodil has roughly the same effect as heroin but is at least three times cheaper and extremely easy to make. The active component is codeine, a widely sold over-the-counter painkiller that is not toxic on its own. But to produce krokodil, whose medical name is desomorphine, addicts mix it with ingredients including gasoline, paint thinner, hydrochloric acid, iodine and red phosphorous, which they scrape from the striking pads on matchboxes.

In 2010, between a few hundred thousand and a million people,

according to various official estimates,

were injecting the resulting substance into their veins in Russia,

so far the only country in the world to see the drug grow into an epidemic.

A Russian Appalachia: Does This Sound Familiar?

Shuster reports that Krokodil has spread the fastest in the poorest and most remote parts of Russia, like Vorkuta, a former Gulag prison camp about 100 miles (161 km) north of the Arctic Circle. The winters there last eight months of the year, and ...

(a) The young people there are in a constant state of boredom.

(b) Most of them drink.

The final product is often an impure, orange-colored liquid, with this impurity causing skin irritation, a scale-like look, and eventual destruction of the skin.This is likely due to the presence of hydrochloric acid still in the final liquid solution prior to injection, with the red phosphorous playing a role in furthering sickening the user.

According to Shuster, "The 'rotting' (experienced by users of Krokodil) explains the drug's nickname. At the injection site, which can be anywhere from the feet to the forehead, the addict's skin becomes greenish and scaly, like a crocodile's, as blood vessels burst and the surrounding tissue dies. Gangrene and amputations are a common result, while porous bone tissue, especially in the lower jaw, often starts to dissipate, eaten up by the drug's acidity." (Simon Shuster, "The Curse of the Crocodile: Russia's Deadly Designer Drug," Time Magazine, June 20 2011)

Some Quick Krok Information

1. Desomorphine causes the strongest levels of addiction, and is the hardest to cure.

"With heroin withdrawal, the main symptoms last for five to 10 days. After that there is still a big danger of relapse but the physical pain will be gone. With krokodil, the pain can last up to a month, and it's unbearable. They have to be injected with extremely strong tranquilisers just to keep them from passing out from the pain."

(Shaun Walker, "Krokodil: The Drug That Eats Junkies," independent.co.uk/news, June 22 2011)

Not everyone succumbs to the addiction, but those that manage to escape its clutch pay a high price. A former krokodil user named Zhenya says, “I managed to kick the habit, after spending weeks at a detox clinic, experiencing horrendous withdrawal symptoms that included seizures, a 40-degree temperature and vomiting. I lost 14 teeth after my gums rotted away, and I contracted hepatitis C.” (Will Wlizlo, "Tripping On Krokodil," http://www.utne.com/Science-Technology, June 27 2011)

2. Krokodil users are instantly identifiable because of their iodine smell.

It infuses all their clothes. There's no way to wash it out, all they can do is burn the clothes.

3. The key ingredient for krokodil – codeine pills.

There were plans to make codeine-based tablets available only on prescription, but that it was impossible to introduce the measure quickly. Opponents claim lobbying by pharmaceutical companies has caused the inaction.The tablets don't cost much but the profit margins are high. Some pharmacies make up to 25 per cent of their profits from the sale of these tablets. It's not in the interests of pharmaceutical companies or pharmacies themselves to stop this, so the Russian government needs to use its power to regulate their sale.

4. Unlike heroin, where the hit can last for several hours, a krokodil high only lasts between 90 minutes and two hours.

Given that the "cooking" process takes at least half an hour, being a krokodil addict is basically a full-time job.
The short time table causes addicts to be trapped in a full time, twenty-four hour a day cycle of cooking and injecting in order to avoid withdrawal.

5. Most krokodil users inject the drug only when they run out of money for heroin.

As soon as they earn or steal enough, they go back to heroin. In other more isolated regions of Russia, where heroin is more expensive and people are poorer, the problem is worse. People become full-time krokodil addicts, giving them a life expectancy of less than a year.

6. Users may have to use it for two or three weeks before becoming aware of the dangerous side-effects and thus realizing that what they were sold was something other than heroin.

Why Do People Choose to Become "Walking Zombies"?

Addiction is all-powerful and completely controlling. Also, consider that dual diagnosis is often found: mental illness and drug addiction often occur together. This condition of dual diagnosis presents a challenge to physicians. The patient has two brain diseases that influence one another, and which both need treatment.

Dual diagnosis may stem from developmental changes in the amygdala,

a walnut-shaped part of the brain linked to fear, anxiety and other emotions.

Dual diagnosis is common yet difficult to treat. Addiction of all types -- to nicotine, alcohol and drugs -- is often found in people with a wide variety of mental illnesses, including anxiety disorders, unipolar and bipolar depression, schizophrenia, and borderline and other personality disorders.

In his studies on the subject, Andrew Chambers, MD, cites clinical reports that at least half the people who seek help with addiction or mental-health treatment have co-occurring disorders. Epidemiological data says that from two to five of every 10 anxious or depressed people, and from four to eight of every 10 people with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or antisocial personality, also have some type of addiction. (American Psychological Association. "Mental Illness And Drug Addiction May Co-occur Due To Disturbance In Part Of The Brain." ScienceDaily, December 3 2007)

Teens: Helping Install Brakes

2011-11-19T07:56:00.000-08:00

The Teen Brain - A Stimulating Project Under Development

"It seems almost arbitrary that our society has decided
that a young American is ready to drive a car at 16,
to vote and serve in the Army at 18
and to drink alcohol at 21. Dr. Jay Giedd, chief of brain imaging
in the child psychiatry branch at the National Institute of Mental Health,

says the best estimate for when the brain is truly mature is 25,
the age at which you can rent a car.

'Avis must have some pretty sophisticated neuroscientists,' he jokes."

(Claudia Wallis, "What Makes Teens Tick," Time Magazine, September 26 2008)

Scientific evidence has shown that the adolescent brain is not equivalent to that of an adult in many important ways. In fact, some legal scholars and child advocates argue that minors should never be tried as adults and should be spared the death penalty. In an official statement that summarized current research on the adolescent brain, the American Bar Association urged all state legislatures to ban the death penalty for juveniles.

"For social and biological reasons," it read,
"teens have increased difficulty making mature decisions
and understanding the consequences of their actions."

This comes as no surprise to parents of teens."There's a debate over how much conscious control kids have," says Giedd, who has four "teenagers in training" of his own. "You can tell them to shape up or ship out, but making mistakes is part of how the brain optimally grows."

The reality --
teens live at risk,
do not have the ability to live independently,
and are bound to make mistakes.

The challenge --
adults must reduce risks that threaten teens,
help teens to live with increasing independence,
and reduce the number of mistakes they make.

Society (You and I) Must Help Teen Brain-Lapses

It might be more useful to help them make up for what their brain still lacks by

1. Providing structure,
2. Organizing their time,
3. Guiding them through tough decisions (even when they resist), and
4. Applying those time-tested parental virtues: patience and love.

The Limbic System = the Brain's "Tinderbox of Emotions" (Racy Engines Need Better Brakes)

The limbic system is the brain's emotional center. This is where the sex hormones are especially active. Adolescents experience flash points of intense feelings, and they tend to seek our situations in which they can allow their emotions and passions to run wild.

"Adolescents are actively looking for experiences to create intense feelings," says Dr. Ronald Dahl, a psychiatrist at the University of Pittsburgh. "It's a very important hint that there is some particular hormone-brain relationship contributing to the appetite for thrills, strong sensations and excitement."

This thrill seeking may have evolved to promote exploration, an eagerness to leave the nest and seek one's own path and partner. But in a world where fast cars, illicit drugs, gangs and dangerous liaisons beckon, it also puts the teenager at risk.

In adolescents, the brain regions that put the brakes on risky, impulsive behavior are still under construction. "The parts of the brain responsible for things like sensation seeking are getting turned on in big ways around the time of puberty," says Temple University psychologist Laurence Steinberg. "But the parts for exercising judgment are still maturing throughout the course of adolescence."

"So you've got this time gap between when things impel kids
toward taking risks early in adolescence,
and when things that allow people to think before they act come online."
It's like turning on the engine of a car without a skilled driver at the wheel," explains Steinberg.

Some Group Activities Can Encourage Teens To Take Dangerous Risks

Steinberg has been studying another kind of judgment: risk assessment. He has discovered, in an experiment using a driving-simulation game, that teens and adults make safe choices when playing alone.

But, Steinberg found, in group play,

teenagers start to take more risks in the presence of their friends,

while those over age 20 don't show much change in their behavior.

"With this manipulation," says Steinberg, "we've shown that age differences in decision making and judgment may appear under conditions that are emotionally arousing or have high social impact." Most teen crimes, he says, are committed by kids in packs. (Claudia Wallis, "What Makes Teens Tick," Time Magazine, September 26 2008)

Blame Drug Experimentation On Changes In Dopamine?

Other researchers are exploring how the adolescent propensity for uninhibited risk taking propels teens to experiment with drugs and alcohol.

Traditionally, psychologists have attributed this experimentation to

1. Peer pressure,
2. Teenagers' attraction to novelty, and
3. Their roaring interest in loosening sexual inhibitions.

But researchers have raised the possibility that rapid changes in dopamine-rich areas of the brain may be an additional factor in making teens vulnerable to the stimulating and addictive effects of drugs and alcohol. Dopamine, the brain chemical involved in motivation and in reinforcing behavior, is particularly abundant and active in the teen years.

Why is it so hard to get a teenager off the couch and working on that all important college essay? You might blame it on their immature nucleus accumbens, a region in the frontal cortex that directs motivation to seek rewards. James Bjork at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism found that teenagers have less activity in this region than adults do.

According to Bjork,
"If adolescents have a motivational deficit,
it may mean that they are prone to engaging in behaviors
that have either a really high excitement factor
or a really low effort factor, or a combination of both."

Sound familiar? Bjork believes his work may hold valuable lessons for parents and society. "When presenting suggestions, anything parents can do to emphasize more immediate payoffs will be more effective," he says. To persuade a teen to quit drinking, for example, he suggests stressing something immediate and tangible — the danger of getting kicked off the football team, say — rather than a future on skid row. (Claudia Wallis, "What Makes Teens Tick," Time Magazine, September 26 2008)

Let's Apply This To Scioto County

1. Are parents and guardians assuming teens (especially older 16-19 year olds) are mature enough to handle and undertake MOST adult responsibilities because they are allowed SOME adult privileges?

Yes - adults assume a teenager can make critical decisions that require complex reasoning. The child receives little help and guidance about matters such as substance abuse, sexual conduct and consequences, childcare, finding and building positive relationships, and the real short-term and life-long impact of early behaviors.

Parents and guardians are guilty of diminishing a child's innocence while, instead, rushing him/her toward maturity. We should be structuring a transition that eases a child into independence

2. Do parents and guardians realize their teens will engage in risky behaviors and attempt to cut the risks by (a) providing structure, (b) organizing time, (c) taking the role of parental guidance counselor, and (d) exhibiting patience and love?

No - If anything, parents are busy in the workforce and rely upon their teens to take adult roles of ever-increasing responsibilities that the children are not prepared to handle. The adults think of this as positive teenage progression, but increased age does not necessarily equate to increased maturity (due mainly to some very important biological factors). Teens tend to be under tremendous pressure at school, at home, and in the community, so they are already under stress to grow up quickly without regard for their relative lack of knowledge and experience.

Teens require both adult help and supervision just as much as younger children. Too often, parents and guardians think they are contributing to their teen's independence by letting the teen organize and structure his/her own time 24/7. The result is often disastrous.

3. Do parents and guardians understand that teens desire thrill-seeking behaviors and teens are especially prone to engage in risk while associating with groups?

No - Adults warn teens to avoid all danger and run with the "good" group. Parental warnings may draw a child's boundaries but warnings do not insure compliance. Also, most parents do not take the responsibility of discovering the personality of the individuals in their teen's peer groups. They rely on second-hand information about their teen's friends and make assumptions based on incomplete information.

Chances are the excitement experienced by teens during thrill-seeking adventures will fuel their desire to experiment even more, and they will continue to test their limits. Adults must give priority to safety and even offer alternative activities that provide acceptable thrills. More attention must be given to immediate risks, and this can be accomplished partly through adequate structure.

4. In the face of dangerous teen actions that tend to be fueled by young, lightning emotions, do parents employ advice that illustrates immediate and tangible effects risked by the teen instead of those more akin to the far-off future?

No - Parents and guardians use this line: "This behavior could ruin (affect you) for the rest of your life." What does that statement really imply to a sixteen year old? The bullet-proof attitude possessed by most teens overrides threats about their future.

What does matter to a teen is "today" -- the moment. Concrete examples and immediate concerns strike home to teens because they structure their priorities different from adults. Adults must engage in the real world of adolescents and educate themselves to ever-changing risks that threaten their teen. They must be willing to help a teen sort out his/her immediate decisions, all the complications of situations, and the possible effects of both good and poor judgments.

At-risk Children Need Us All

2011-11-17T09:20:00.000-08:00

The National Center for School Engagement promotes programs for "at-risk" youth. NCSE states that the term at-risk youth typically implies a future with less than optimal outcomes. Youth are considered at-risk for a number of reasons. Examples include youth who may be:

* Homeless or transient
* Involved in drugs or alcohol
* Abused sexually, physically or emotionally
* Mentally ill
* Neglected at home or live in stressful family environments
* Lacking social or emotional supports
* Involved with delinquent peers

These at-risk youth are often identified after running away, skipping school, drinking under age, engaging in sexual behavior, displaying disruptive behavior, bullying/harassment, fighting, and committing acts of vandalism. According to NCSE, "These behaviors can be precursors to dropping out of school, acquiring low paying jobs and/or unemployment, and adult criminal behavior." ("At-risk Youth," National Center for School Engagement, schoolengagement.org)

Do we really comprehend the stress 21st century kids are under? Gang warfare, street stabbings and shootings, proliferation of drugs, binge drinking and the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases -- all of these obstacles to a safe, healthy lifestyle put their very lives in jeopardy.

It is evident the youth of today need tremendous help and guidance to navigate successfully the hazardous waters of their lives. Often, the support necessary for enabling them to acquire their needs is lacking in their very homes and communities. What happens when children experience a significant mismatch between their circumstances and needs? In America, so many people depend upon the public school to provide for at-risk youth.

BUT

Is the school always willing

to accept,

accommodate,

and respond to those at risk

in a manner that

supports and enables

their maximum social,

emotional

and intellectual growth and development?

AND

Does the school even have

the capacity and resources

to support and enable

these important factors of growth and development?

The National At-risk Education Network believes all schools should reach out to at-risk kids. NAREN provides some shocking statistics concerning youth at risk from a bad start. According to research by the Children's Defense Fund (2008), every day in America ...

4 children are killed by abuse or neglect
1 young person dies from HIV infection
5 children, or teens, commit suicide
8 children are killed by firearms
181 children are arrested for violent crimes
383 children are arrested for drug abuse
2,383 children are reported abused or neglected
1,153 babies are born to teen mothers
2,411 babies are born into poverty
2,261 children drop out of high school every school day (1 of every 4 high school freshmen fails to finish high school in four years in the USA — multiply that by 180, and the annual figure astounds!)
4,356 children are arrested

This is every day! Multiply these figures (except for the dropout numbers) by 365 if you can bear it. Also:

9,200,000 children are without health insurance
12,423,000 children live in poverty

No doubt, schools must do a better job of meeting the needs of at-risk kids. Public education has too long concentrated its main efforts on identifying "troublemakers" and "risky prospects" and then removing them from the school setting or dealing them punishment that only reinforces their troubling behaviors. But, let's wake up and understand that schools cannot, alone, significantly change the lives of at-risk students. The best schools can do is provide positive experiences that offer at-risk students many good opportunities to help themselves.

Who Needs To Do What?

Any responsible member of a community understands the vital role schools play in nurturing, protecting, and educating children, but that same person must also understand his/her obligation not only to support education but also to help foster positive personal relationships with youth.

Did You Ever Consider This?

Why is a child at risk?

The at-risk child is a victim of lacking

or destructive relationships.

Every child will develop relationships that influence his thinking and his actions. For a child, these relationships and their related consequences develop as a result of involuntary (his/her very birth) or voluntary (his/her friends and peers) situations.

Consider this: involuntary situations that put a child at risk demand outside assistance. If, for example, a child is being abused by his parents, this abuse must be reported by those who witness it; Children's Services must intervene to save further risk to the child; and law and enforcement must act appropriately and swiftly to assure such horrible behavior will stop and never occur again. We, as a responsible society, demand these obligations from individuals and organizations.

Yet, voluntary situations that put a child at risk are not viewed the same. If, for example, an unhealthy peer group exposes a child to numerous unhealthy relationships, the at-risk child is typically blamed for his/her own willing participation and ignorance for becoming a part of such "a crowd." We, as an unsympathetic society, demand little more than the at-risk child "straighten up" and "find new friends."

Peer group relationships are often not healthy since they are based upon immature people's values. The at-risk child cannot grasp this. Instead, he/she sees the group (peer or friends) as a partial solution to his critical, immediate needs. And, they may be a partial solution. Gangs can offer security and a substitute family

But, a gang or any other peer group can not offer unconditional hope, unconditional love, and unconditional forgiveness. It takes a mature caring adult to offer a genuine and valuable relationship to a teen. Many at-risk youth do not have but desperately seek, such as, a healthy relationship with a mature adult, teacher, mentor or friend. We all must become involved.

A Group That Believes In Helping

Non-toxic Youth Alternatives is a group that believes in helping at-risk youth. The group believes in values communicated through relationships from caring adults as well as providing positive and constructive activities for teens.The activities offer alternatives for teens tempted to become involved in destructive behavior. Read about their strategies here: http://www.nontoxicteencenter.com/mission.htm

Here is the belief of Non-toxic Youth Alternatives:

"Teens cannot be forced to make healthy decisions but they can be offered an alternative to dangerous and destructive choices. When a healthy relationship is begun many teens will choose the value rich relationship over the negative temptation. Young people want to feel loved, accepted and valued. The Non-Toxic Teen center is a place this can be realized and experienced."

The group believes values are determined by what we believe is valued by God.

There are four areas dealt with in this mission of value (quoted from their site):

1. Teens are highly valuable.

"Despite failings in character, wrong choices or willful rebellion, teens are highly valuable. Value does not nullify responsibility but it does force the mature adult to see each person as God sees him or her- Valuable. Value is not based upon performance but upon the very existence of an individual."

2. Genuine Relationships are Highly Valuable.

"Through unconditional love and acceptance trust and value are communicated. Relationships don't just happen, and they do not naturally nurture themselves. A genuine relationship is one where the caring adult seeks to look beyond the teen's life resume, and instead gazes at each teen as an individual, as possessing intrinsic value and a life whose story is just beginning to be written."

3. Positive Alternatives are Highly Valuable.

"Unless a young person is actively involved in a number of extracurricular school activities (and this is no guarantee) the time available to begin a harmful habit or the temptation to partake of a dangerous activity are overwhelming."

4. Quality is Highly Valuable.

"Parks, Malls and the city streets have become the place most frequented by teens. In these areas little or no supervision is available and the opportunity to be involved in destructive activities is overwhelming. In order to compete with these exciting avenues of potential destruction any type of alternative program must be of a high quality. The facilities provided by Non-Toxic are clean, neat and contemporary offering many different types of games and activities and positive alternatives. Adult supervision is always present."

Bulletproof : The Risk-Taking Teen

2011-11-16T08:10:00.000-08:00

I was in a seminar recently and the group discussion centered upon why teenagers take risks and experiment with drugs. You know, the kind of precociousness that can lead to early substance abuse. Marker ink was soon filling up the flip charts as the brainstorming got intense.

Although never a dabbler in the drug scene (Alcohol doesn't count, right?), I had thrived on plenty of other risky behaviors as a teen. I had something to add, so I raised my hand and searched for appropriate words to describe feelings and behaviors I could still vividly recall from decades past when piss and vinegar drove many of my actions. I wanted to share this with the scholarly group.

I said, "As a teenager, I wanted to have adventures every weekend, the kind that brought me close to the edges of forbidden territory - road trips, drinking soirees, concert and dance experiences, hopeful sexual flirtations, back-road parties, involvement in all kinds of pranks and tricks, and scary midnight mysteries bordering on raunchy stupidity."

Many of the people at the seminar pretty much passed my comments over, probably choosing to ignore them as the ramblings of a once-rebellious, wanton soul. After all, admitting to my teen desires for dangerous activities requiring sex, risk, and rock'n'roll didn't seem to fit the more nondescript lists that read "loneliness, peer pressure, and increasing student responsibilities."

But, I hold my ground in the belief

that the adrenaline/testosterone-driven needs

for peril and novel adventures

create situations that make drug experimentation

(yes, including alcohol consumption)

attractive to 21st century teens.

When I was sixteen, my own teenage fumblings and inexperienced direct assaults toward ecstasy fed my early fantasies and fueled my further quests for ever-hotter realities. Fast cars, dangerous girls, 3.2% beer, rock music, dark nights, and the need to race my internal motor ever higher "just for kicks" made teenage camaraderie FUN and even USEFUL. My daily dopamine fixes were "rewards" for finding new adventure: they felt good, strong, and RIGHT.

Now, getting back to the seminar experience,

I must confess I don't know the answer to this question:

"What safe, structured, drug-free, alternative activities

could fulfill a teen's desire for peril and genuine adventure?"

This question seems contradictory in nature -- safe with peril and structured with genuine. It seems to me that most answers -- be they sporting activities or perilous simulations -- deflate much of the air from the balloon of acquired social impact and real experience. After all, don't we commonly associate fear, fun, romance, and "hanging out" with spontaneity and whimsy?

Damn it, I want the kids to have fun

as they have a gradual transformation

from innocence to experience.

I just don't want them to step over the line of reason into dangerous,

life-threatening, drug fueled, often criminal and destructive behaviors.

But what may be at work here is a crucial gap between what young people rationally know and what knowledge they use in making decisions—a gap that fills in gradually as they learn more from the outcome of each decision.

Risk taking in itself is normal and even necessary for learning to live in the world,

but it becomes a problem when carried out in excess,

or when it persists in the face of clear warnings about significant, needless danger.

This is one reason that practice with risk-carrying situations, especially talking them over beforehand with people an adolescent trusts, can be very helpful. Forethought and discussion also put decisions into better context, enabling a teenager to take into account the thoughts of people close to them but detached from the immediate situation.

The National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health, which surveyed more than 12,000 high school students throughout the country, has noted that feelings of “connectedness” (feeling close to people at school, fairly treated by teachers, and loved and wanted at home) helped significantly to lower an individual’s likelihood of emotional distress, early sexual activity, substance abuse, violence, and suicide.

Alarmed by the rising toll of accidents and violence among teenagers, the Federal Government and private foundations have embarked on a major new program of research on why teenagers take so many foolish risks - and how such dangerous behavior can be curbed.

From acrobatics on skateboards to sex without contraceptives, teenagers are notoriously reckless. Research suggests a combination of hormonal factors, an inability to perceive risks accurately and the need to impress peers help explain this. All of these influences seem to peak in the years between 10 and the mid-20's.

Driving the new research effort is a chilling fact: adolescents are the only age group in which mortality has risen since 1960. Three-quarters of adolescent deaths are caused by accidents, homicide and suicide, all of which indicate a lethal propensity for risk-taking. Accidents alone account for 60 percent of those deaths. PLEASE NOTE: STATS TAKEN FROM ARTICLE DATED 1987)

''The three biggest killers of young people are essentially psychological,''

said Lewis Lipsitt, a developmental psychologist at Brown University.

''They are dying of their own reckless behavior.''

Dr. Lipsitt organized a meeting of scientists at the National Institute of Mental Health to draw up a research agenda on risk-taking by teenagers and what to do about it. The meetings are part of efforts by the Government and foundations to identify teenagers most likely to take dangerous risks and to find ways to head off the peril. (Daniel Goleman, "Teen-Age Risk-Taking: Rise In Deaths Prompts New Research Effort," The New York Times, November 24 1987) Read the article here: http://www.nytimes.com/1987/11/24/science/teen-age-risk-taking-rise-in-deaths-prompts-new-research-effort.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Teens and Traits: Most Likely To Take Dangerous Risks

1. One of the major deficits in the thinking of teenagers, particularly in early adolescence, is in evaluating the probabilities of a risk - luck vs. reality.

''Often, if a teenager does something several times - like not breaking his neck when he does something stupid, or not getting pregnant after sex without contraceptives - he will assume it becomes less risky each time, not more so,'' Dr. Hamburg said.

2. Teenagers are also prone to exaggeration.

Dr. Hamburg said, ''Adolescents tend to grossly over- or underestimate based on their immediate experience. When they say, 'Everyone's doing it - why shouldn't I?' they wildly overestimate the actual numbers. And, by the same token, they wildly underestimate the safety of the dangerous things they do.''

3. What seems a clear danger in the eyes of an adult, may seem safe, or safe enough, to the teenager.

Dr. Lipsitt and other researchers say teenagers can seem to live in an orbit all their own, in which the reasonable imperatives of the adult world have little, if any, relevance.

4. The ability to evaluate risk seems to be skewed in many teenagers.

For instance, when they were asked to anticipate what risks become more or less dangerous over time, they saw addiction from drug use and pregnancy from unprotected intercourse as becoming less rather than more likely, according to Charles Irwin, a pediatrician at the University of California at San Francisco.

5. Perception of some risks may fade in the face of peer pressure.

For example, when it comes to using condoms, the major concerns of adolescents are not the risks of pregnancy, but rather such matters as whether they think their peers use condoms and whether condoms are inconvenient or might make them look ''silly,'' according to Nancy Adler, a health psychologist at the University of California at San Francsico, and a colleague of Dr. Irwin.

6. So-called "bad girls" had already started smoking and experimenting with drugs and were exposed to other risks - such as riding in cars going too fast - far more than other girls their age.

Dr. Adler said that the risks that these ''bad girls'' took included drinking, fighting, hitchhiking, arguing with strangers, seeking entertainment in high-crime areas and carrying a knife.

A hallmark of the most reckless girls, Dr. Adler found, was their intent to become sexually active in the next year. This intention was far less common among girls who engaged in few risky behaviors.

7. So-called "macho boys" in the same age group, a cluster of activities set the most risk-prone youths apart from their peers, but no single marker emerged.

The activities included drinking, smoking cigarettes and marijuana, riding on motorcycles and getting knocked unconscious.

8. Biology, too, seems to push some adolescents to take more risks than others,

According to studies of sensation-seeking by Dr. Marvin Zuckerman, a psychologist at the University of Delaware, sensation-seeking is a personality trait that includes the desire for thrills and adventure, the enjoyment of physically risky activities and the need for sensory and social stimulation such as loud music or parties.

According to Dr. Zuckerman, there is a direct relationship between how people score on a personality test for sensation-seeking and how fast they say they drive on an open highway. People who have the lowest sensation-seeking scores drive, on average, at 55 miles an hour. As the scores rise, so does the average driving speed; in the highest range it is over 75 miles an hour.

9. Another biological factor in sensation-seeking may be monoamine oxidase, or MAO, an enzyme that regulates levels of some brain chemicals such as serotonin, which regulates mood.

People with low levels of MAO can have very high or very low levels of serotonin, among other chemicals.

Sensation-seekers tend to have low levels of MAO, according to research by Dr. Monte Buchsbaum, a psychologist at the Univeristy of California at Irvine. People with low MAO levels, Dr. Buchsbaum found, tend to smoke and drink more than others and are more likely to have a criminal record. Although MAO levels have not been tested in younger teenagers, Dr. Buchsbaum found that among those he tested the lowest levels were in college-age people and that levels tended to rise with age.

''People in their late teens are at double biological risk, because of the combination of high hormone and low MAO levels,'' Dr. Zuckerman said.

Smart Kids Use More Drugs? Research

2011-11-15T05:49:00.000-08:00

Who would have thunk it?

"A new British study finds children with high IQs

are more likely to use drugs as adults

than people who score low on IQ tests as children."

(Jennifer Bixler, "High IQ Linked to Drug Use," CNN News, thechart.blogs.cnn.com, November 14 2011)

This data come from the 1970 British Cohort Study, which has been following thousands of people over decades. The kids' IQs were tested at the ages of 5, 10 and 16. The study also asked about drug use and looked at education and other socioeconomic factors. Then, when participants turned 30, they were asked whether they had used drugs such as marijuana, cocaine heroin, amphetamines, ecstasy, LSD, hallucinogenic mushrooms, and crack in the past year. (Dr. James White, "Intelligence Across Childhood In Relation To Illegal Drug Use In Adulthood: 1970 British Cohort Study, Journal of Epidemiol Community Health, November 14 2011)

The study defined high IQ as a score between 107 and 158 and an average IQ is commonly known as 100.

The authors used data from a large population-based birth cohort with measures of lifetime cannabis and cocaine use, parental social class and psychological distress at 16 years; cannabis, cocaine, amphetamine, ecstasy and polydrug use (more than three drugs) in the past 12 months; and social class, educational attainment and gross monthly income at 30 years. All members of the cohort with IQ scores at 5 or 10 years were eligible to be included in the analyses.

Findings in the study:

1. By the age of 30, around one in three men (35.4%) and one in six women (15.9%) had used cannabis, while 8.6% of men and 3.6% of women had used cocaine, in the previous 12 months.

2. A similar pattern of use was found for the other drugs, with overall drug use twice as common among men as among women.

Now, factor in intelligence:

3. Men with high IQ scores at the age of 5 were around 50% more likely to have used amphetamines, ecstasy, and several illicit drugs than those with low scores, 25 years later.

4. Women with high IQ scores were more than twice as likely to have used cannabis and cocaine as those with low IQ scores.

5. The same associations emerged between a high IQ score at the age of 10 and subsequent use of cannabis, ecstasy, amphetamines, multiple drug use and cocaine, although this last association was only evident at the age of 30.

6. The findings held true, irrespective of anxiety/depression during adolescence, parental social class, and lifetime household income.

"Although most studies have suggested

that higher child or adolescent IQ prompts

the adoption of a healthy lifestyle as an adult,

other studies have linked higher childhood IQ scores

to excess alcohol intake and alcohol dependency in adulthood," write the authors.

Why the Link Between High Childhood IQ And Illicit Drug Use?

"We suspect they may be more open

to new experiences

and are more sensation seeking," says White.

The authors point to previous research, showing that highly intelligent people are open to experiences and keen on novelty and stimulation.

Other research has also shown that brainy children are often easily bored and suffer at the hands of their peers for being different, "either of which could conceivably increase vulnerability to using drugs as an avoidant coping strategy," explain the authors.

The following graph shows a similar association between childhood intelligence and the latent factor for the consumption of psychoactive drugs among Americans. The data come from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. The childhood intelligence is measured in junior high and high school, and the adult drug consumption is measured seven years later, and constructed from indicators for the consumption of 5 different types of psychoactive drugs (marijuana, cocaine, LSD, crystal meth, and heroin). The association is not monotonic, but nevertheless, “normal” (90 IQ & 110), “bright” (110 IQ & 125), and “very bright” individuals consume more psychoactive substances than “very dull” or “dull” (75 IQ & 90) individuals.

(Satoshi Kanazawa, "Why Intelligent People Use More Drugs," The Scientific Fundamentalist, October 31 2010)

"The human consumption of psychoactive drugs,

such as marijuana, cocaine, and heroin,

is of even more recent historical origin

than the human consumption of alcohol or tobacco,

so the Hypothesis would predict that more intelligent people

use more drugs more frequently than less intelligent individuals."

("Why Intelligent People Tend To Use More Drugs," http://newzc.net)

The use of opium dates back to about 5,000 years ago, and the earliest reference to the pharmacological use of cannabis is in a book written in 2737 BC by the Chinese Emperor Shen Nung. Opium and cannabis are the only “natural” (agricultural) psychoactive drugs. Other psychoactive drugs are “chemical” (pharmacological); they require modern chemistry to manufacture, and are therefore of much more recent origin. Morphine was isolated from opium in 1806, cocaine was first manufactured in 1860, and heroin was discovered in 1874.

"The fact that the consumption of psychoactive drugs

has largely negative health consequences

and few (if any) benefits of any kind

is immaterial to the Hypothesis.

It does not predict that more intelligent individuals

are more likely to engage in healthy and beneficial behavior,

only that they are more likely to engage in evolutionarily novel behavior."

("Why Intelligent People Tend To Use More Drugs," http://newzc.net)

Better Defining the Drug Abuse Levy

2011-11-14T08:08:00.000-08:00

The noun definition may be generally understood as "the act of making distinct, or clear." We employ this simple act to find meaning and significance of words, phrases, idioms, processes or any alien concept we encounter. As we attempt to discover the exacting nature of something, we define it to determine essential qualities that both characterize it and distinguish it from anything else.

The Formal Definition

A formal (some call it logical or Aristotelian) definition is based upon a concise, logical pattern that includes as much information as it can within a minimum amount of space - usually a well-constructed sentence. The act of formulating a formal definition may lead to a thesis statement for an extended definition.

Definiendum = genus + differentia.

A formal definition consists of three parts.

A. The term (definiendum) which is the word or phrase to be defined
B. The class (genus) of the object or concept to which the term belongs.
C. The differentiating characteristics (differentia) that distinguish it from all others of its class

For example:

Water (term) is a liquid (class) made up of molecules of hydrogen and oxygen in the ratio of 2 to 1 (differentiating characteristics).

Even if we don’t state logical definition in precisely this way, we should still have it clearly in mind. This is so the concept doesn’t shift to something else without us noticing it (this can happen easily), and so our readers will be able to reconstruct the logical definition from what we do say. It’s safest and most considerate of our readers to state the logical definition outright, usually near the beginning of an extended essay.

The Extended Definition

There are reasons why extended definitions are made by writers.

1. One is that when the writer thinks or fells that the real definition of a particular term is distorted in the minds of the public, here extended definition is needed as replacement for the real definition.

2. Another is that it is used in removing confusions as well as to make the context more precise.

3. Extended definition is also use to set up an ideal meaning that is in contrast with the other meaning that merely reflects an existing fact.

Any definition helps clear misunderstanding. More often than not, an extended definition informs -- by clarifying something that is complex, by bringing the reader to a fresh appreciation of something familiar or taken for granted, by expressing feelings and relating experience, or by serving a persuasive purpose to point out a conclusion about a controversial issue.

Writing an extended definition usually requires the use of many sources as tools that will help us explain the term to our readers. This means considering all of the various sources of information that can help define the term adequately (for example, description, process narration, causal discussion, and classification). The key to writing a good extended definition is to choose the sources of definition to help readers understand the term being defined.

Notice the number of difference sources used in this example:

Often Employed Sources:

Analysis: The subject may be separated into different parts and those parts could be described separately. For example, if the topic is love then the many types of love could be explained individually. The writer may start with platonic love, then romantic love, unrequited love, and first love.

Comparison: By comparing the subject to something else, it might make it more lucid to the reader. If the topic is Communism, then comparing it to capitalism or socialism, may make the concept of communism much clearer.

Details: providing the reader with the physical and internal attributes, conceptual background and traditional thoughts of the subject is another way of making it more apparent to the reader.

Negation: Pointing out what the subject is not, may make what it is clearer to the reader. An essay on Hinduism I read started by stating that Hinduism was NOT Christianity, and then began pointing out the dissimilarities between the two religions. This was a very effective beginning.

Examples and Anecdotes: when explaining a very abstract concept, the best way to make your meaning clear is by giving examples. When defining “truth” for instance, a well placed story highlighting the truthfulness of a person may make a greater impact than a theoretical rambling on what truth could or could not mean.

Origins and Causes: discussing the background of a topic may also help. If you are writing about “fire” such as, then theorizing on how fire may have been discovered will add interest to your essay.

Results, effects, and causes: topics such as “Racism” or “Poverty” cannot be truly discussed without describing the effects that they render on the human psyche. Similarly topics such as “Pollution” and “Global warming” lack poignancy if the results and causes are not mentioned.

The Scioto County Drug Abuse Prevention Education Levy

The November request for a prevention levy has been defeated. Perhaps better definition could insure more votes at the polls the next time the levy is on the ballot. To make the distinctions necessary to gain more support, those in favor of the levy will work to clarify any issues voters have they may have caused them to reject the much-needed preventative measure.

These facts were widely available to voters before November:

The Scioto County Coalition for Drug Prevention has been formed to promote awareness of the importance of drug prevention education. The coalition consists of citizens in Scioto County who are interested in the future of Scioto County and would like to see more funding available in the county for prevention education to Save Our Kids

The ADAMHS (Alcohol Drug and Mental Health Services) board is proposing a $1 million levy for 5 years. The levy will generate $950,000 per year for prevention education. The money will go to all Scioto County schools.

The levy will cost 10 cents per $100.00 of property value/$1.00 per $1000.00. $4.17 per month for the owner of a home valued at $50,000.00

Currently there is less that $3.00 per child available in Scioto County for prevention education in the schools. With a continuing risk of drug abuse among youth, prevention education needs to start at a young age. Drug abusing youth have powerful influence over other youth. Scioto County is the epicenter for prescription drug abuse. It is the #1 cause of accidental death among our young people.

Families who have an addicted loved one or who have lost a loved one would be saved from pain and suffering associated with addiction. Prevention education will "save our kids" from experimentation with drugs, overdose, and academic and behavior problems, tobacco use and teen pregnancy.

Prevention education that is integrated into a community can save taxpayers money by: reducing crime and incarceration; reducing long term health care of babies that are born affected; the need for less addiction treatment; and by reducing other costs associated with drug abuse including lost wages.

How will the levy dollars be spent? Engage the schools, community, and faith-based groups in prevention education activities.

· Evidence Based Curriculum for drug use prevention will be implemented

· Educational materials/equipment to support the curriculum will be purchased

· A Certified Prevention Educator will be placed in each school district throughout Scioto County

· A Prevention Education program would align the county with State and Federal initiatives for additional funding

When Asked In Open Forum on Facebook,

People Said They Needed Better Definition

With The Following Comments:

Person 1: I would like to see the schools bring in former addicts to tell their stories, being allowed to talk openly about their pasts, and answer questions from the students without having to be censored (aside from any detailed sexual events and the use of extremely foul language). Will the levy allow this to be done? How?

Person 2: I feel the major items missing were how much money and who would control the money and who actually gets the funds. (Some more detail on administration of funds.)

Person 3: After taking to some that a lot of people did not know enough details about it. Some people aren't on Facebook, don't get the newspaper and I think if your family hasn't been touched by this disease, you have a tendency to look the other way.

Person 4: Did not The Ohio State pharmacy give curriculum to the counselors in the schools already? Locals have told me their concerns, not wanting to support Detroit, dope Boys, out of town, even out of state. We the people can not take care of it all. Why not the drug companies?

Person 5: Whatever happened to health class? Why don't we try to get the schools to teach it themselves?

Person 6: Let the schools do it? With all the cuts, fewer teachers, less time, more planning for increasingly higher stakes (for the teacher and school funding) testing, larger class sizes, schools should shoulder that responsibility too. Give me a break. Rest assured that we talk to kids about these behaviors, but to place the responsibility directly on schools is asinine. It takes a village, including the school, not just the school.

Person 7: I never saw anything that gave a detailed plan of how the money would be spent and what type of program would be implemented to educate the youth of our county. Our children recently graduated from high school and said that their classes had the benefit of the D.A.R.E. program and other programs advocating drug and sexual abstinence, and they still had many classmates trying drugs, using drugs on a regular basis, having sex and making babies. They feel as if these programs in the schools did not have the impact that family and church values taught from a young age had. What are you proposing that will be different and better than what has gone before?

Person 8: Maybe the issue was that "drug abuse prevention" is somewhat vague. I spoke to a lot of people who said they simply didn't know what the money would actually go towards, or who would be in charge of it.

Person 9: Being a part of the team and protesting against the pain clinics, a local group of people did, in fact, want to volunteer, who had many ideals to go to the schools different from Dare. The counselors took over. Yes, many addicts, wanted to share their stories with students. They are educated in the field and also grew up in alcoholic homes. After asking the counselors to remember us, we waited 1 year and a half, but a team of community members did not call once before Ohio Stare got the curriculum ready. Months later the counselor center got involved.

Please, let's further engage ALL the public and extend our definition of the Scioto County Drug Abuse Education Levy. With the expertise of the Scioto Rx Drug Task Force Action Team, the Counseling Center, and others, we can provide answers to any questions people ask.

I am dedicated to providing the county with a detailed definition of program and of purpose that will facilitate a positive response and lay the groundwork for a new vote soon.

In the meantime,

let's wear those funky green silicone bracelets

to remind everyone that our work towards prevention is ongoing.

I'd love to see everyone in the county

keep a green band around their wrist until Scioto County

commits to drug abuse education.

Please, Save Our Kids.

Youth At Risk In Scioto

2011-11-10T08:14:00.000-08:00

According to the 2010 U.S. Census, here are some demographics for Scioto County children:

Children In Scioto County, Ohio

    Age Number Percentage

Under 5 years              4,860                              6.1
5 to 9 years                  4,949                              6.2
10 to 14 years              5,178                              6.5
15 to 19 years              5,575                              7.0

The county has 9,943 households with individuals under 18 (32.2%). Of those households, the following is true.

RELATIONSHIP TO HOUSEHOLDER

Own child (biological, step or adopted) 86.9%

Male householder with own children, no wife present        2.7%
Female householder with own children, no husband present                  7.2%
Grandchild                                                                                           9.4%
Other relatives                                                                                     1.6%
Foster child or other unrelated child                                                      2.0%

PRESENCE OF OTHER ADULTS

Unmarried partner of householder present 8.6%

Scioto County has 32,000 people (population 16 and over) in the labor force, which is 52.7% of the population. And, 17.9% of its families live below the poverty level. The children who live in households where income in the past 12 months is below the poverty level is 31.5%. 80.7 of the population 25 years or older are high school graduates.

Poverty Rates in Scioto County, Ohio in 2005-2009

People age 65 and over 14%

Related children under 18 years

31%

All families

18%

Female householder families

43%

Public Assistance In the Past 12 Months

Children (under 18) living in households with Supplemental Security Income (SSI), 39.6%

cash public assistance income, or Food Stamp/SNAP benefits

Research confirms that three in ten teens think prescription pain killers are not addictive. This large majority of teenagers believe that prescriptions pain relievers are not addictive and "much safer" than illegal drugs. Additionally, 56% of teens think prescription drugs are easier to obtain than street drugs. Teens can easily access prescription pain pills from their family members or friends, and they justify taking the pills because a doctor prescribes them.

With increased risk factors in Scioto County, children face incredible danger from prescription drug abuse. With nearly 18% of families below the poverty level, a graduation rate significantly lower than the national average, and 13.7 of children living in non-traditional families, Scioto is fertile ground for prescription drug abuse.

This means many teens in Scioto County

believe prescription pain killers are NOT addictive.

And, considering demographic characteristics

that put county children at increased risk

for emotional and social problems,

the number of misinformed

and/or uninformed children is surely

much higher than national averages.

Is it any wonder Scioto County children need

a proven prevention program of drug abuse education?

Four of the top five drugs abused by 12^th grade Ohio students are prescription drugs, according to the latest report by the Ohio Prescription Drug Abuse Task Force.

As of spring 2011 the Scioto County has had more than 120 drug related deaths over the preceding decade, and in 2009 had the second-highest death rate in the state from accidental drug overdoses, even though it is sparsely populated compared to the urban population centers of the state.

Because of the extent of the problem, the Drug Enforcement Administration has listed Scioto County on its watch list of the 10 most-significant places in the country for trafficking in prescription drugs. ( Holly Zachariah (2010-02-07). "Illegal prescription-drug trade is now epidemic," The Columbus Dispatch)

In Ohio, there were 327 fatal unintentional drug overdoses in 1999 growing to 1,423 annual deaths in 2009.

On average approximately four people died each day in Ohio due to drug overdose.

Article: "10 Frightening Facts About Prescription Pain Pills": http://www.medicalbillingandcoding.org/blog/10-frightening-facts-about-prescription-pain-pills/

Drug Abuse Prevention -- "Pay Me Now Or Pay Me Later"

2011-11-09T14:48:00.000-08:00

People in Scioto County loudly voiced their concern for the working class and good-paying union jobs as they voted down Issue 2 by a margin of 16,142 to 5,068 -- a more than 3 to 1 show of support. On the same ballot, Scioto voters rejected a 1-mil levy that would have provided measures to educate school-age youth about drug abuse prevention. I think rejecting the prevention levy will prove costly to Scioto workers and employers.

Scioto County is the epicenter of a prescription drug health epidemic that claims large numbers of lives and reeks untold misery through severe addiction. The rx drug problem is relatively new, so, unfortunately, good statistics on the economic impact of workplace prescription drug abuse are not readily available. Still, experts understand that consequences may be similar to those of illicit drug abuse.

Perhaps the public needs a better awareness of drug abuse in the workplace. After all, the election results do show most citizens are extremely concerned about jobs and the economy. Maybe the same voters should review the prevalence, the impact and the cost of drugs at work.

According to the U.S. Department of Labor...

The Prevalence

How does substance abuse affect the workplace? Take a look. (US Department of Labor. eLaws: drug-free workplace advisor. Available at: http://www.dol.gov/elaws/asp/drugfree/benefits.htm
Accessed August 19, 2009).

* More than six percent of the population over 12 years of age (13.9 million people) has used drugs within the past thirty days. Rates of use remain highest among persons aged 16 to 25–the age group entering the work force most rapidly.

* Seventy-three percent of all current drug users aged 18 and older (8.3 million adults) were employed in 1997. This includes 6.7 million full-time workers and 1.6 million part-time workers.

* Construction workers (15.6%), sales personnel (11.4%), food preparation, wait staff, and bartenders (11.2%), handlers, helpers, and laborers (10.6%,) and machine operators and inspectors (10.5%) reported the highest rates of current illicit drug use. Protective service workers reported the lowest rate of current drug use (3.2%).

* According to a national survey conducted by the Hazelden Foundation, more than sixty percent of adults know people who have gone to work under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

The Impact

Numerous studies, reports and surveys suggest that substance abuse is having a profoundly negative affect on the workplace in terms of decreased productivity and increased accidents, absenteeism, turnover, and medical costs.

Full-time workers aged 18-49 who reported any current illicit drug use were more likely than those reporting no current illicit drug use to state that they had:

* Worked for three or more employers in the past year (32.1% versus 17.9%),

* Taken an unexcused absence from work in the past month (12.1% versus 6.1%),

* Voluntarily left an employer in the past year (25.8 % versus 13.6%) and

* Been fired by an employer in the past year (4.6% versus 1.4%).

According to results of a NIDA-sponsored survey, illicit drug-using employees are:

* 2.2 times more likely to request early dismissal or time off,

* 2.5 times more likely to have absences of eight days or more,

* 3 times more likely to be late for work,

* 3.6 times more likely to be involved in a workplace accident and

* 5 times more likely to file a workers' compensation claim.

A survey of callers to the national cocaine helpline revealed that 75 percent reported using drugs on the job, 64 percent admitted that drugs adversely affected their job performance, 44 percent sold drugs to other employees, and 18 percent had stolen from co-workers to support their drug habit.

The Cost

The economic and human costs of drug and alcohol use are astounding. In fact, the National Institutes of Health recently reported that alcohol and drug abuse cost the economy $246 billion in 1992, the most recent year for which economic data are available.

("The Economic Costs of Alcohol and Drug Abuse in the United States." 1992. National Institute on Drug Abuse. National Institute on Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse. Rockville, MD.)

Conclusion

I believe it is evident that the levy dollar cost of establishing a first-rate, up-to-date drug abuse prevention program in Scioto County schools would have been money well spent. To a public so concerned with skilled local labor, such an opportunity to educate present and future workers about the prevalence, the impact, and the costs of drug abuse should not have taken lightly.

Remember the famous Fram Oil Filter marketing slogan, "You can pay me now, or pay me later"?
The auto mechanic in the commercial explained to us (the customers) that we could either pay a small sum now for the replacement of oil and filter (as a preventative measure) or pay a far larger sum later for the replacement of the vehicle's expensive engine (due to continued neglect). Consider this analogy as it applies to educating youth and their need for drug abuse prevention.

I, for one, do not want to pay the price of neglecting drug abuse education. I fear we are, indeed, going to suffer the tremendous cost of avoiding preventative maintenance. I am extremely confident a nominal investment in our youth will pay great dividends. Scioto missed a timely opportunity. I hope the voters realize this and correct the situation at once.

Voting? Apathy = Addiction

2011-11-09T06:38:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, the people in Scioto County voted "no" to providing drug abuse prevention in our schools. This is not to say that the schools in the county do not already provide some excellent prevention education -- they do. However, the levy for prevention that failed yesterday would have placed a much-needed, research-based, up-to-date, comprehensive program in every Scioto County school.

Almost everyone I spoke to before the election (and, I spoke to hundreds) supported the need for the levy and better prevention curriculum. The people SAID this, but the majority VOTED against the proposal. Herein lies a serious problem in our community. This is what I mean:

Paying positive lip service to obvious needs

is both easy and marginally beneficial.

Yet, acting upon concerns of the conscience

by offering sweat and dollars requires much more dedication.

I understand the hard financial times in which we live. I especially realize the plight of those who live in an area where poverty and joblessness is rampant like Appalachian Scioto County. I can understand why voters rejected a levy that would take money away from their meager pocketbooks. BUT, nothing is more important to solving a deadly problem than EDUCATION, and nothing will pay dividends like teaching our children important, thoughtful strategies to help them live fruitful lives free of the demons of drug abuse.

The evil, greedy participants in the drug culture won an important victory yesterday. Without developing a platform, putting an issue on the ballot, raising public awareness, or begging for votes, they insured their future success by merely letting apathy run its course. They knew they could reap great benefits by simply doing nothing and relying upon others to vote "down" a money issue.

Make no mistake, as the "bad guys" read the election returns,

they relish the results because

when the community says "no" to prevention,

the criminals understand their coffers will grow

and their "work" will remain relatively easy.

And, do you believe the criminals of the drug business will regret, for one an instant, the destruction and death that will occur in the wake of under-educating our children about the dangers of drugs? These despicable people look at the election results and smile because they could care less about other people's lives and the unimaginable misery caused by drugs than they do about their own profits.

One death of one child is more costly than paying for the prevention education of all. And, the sad fact is that we ALL know this. Not one of us in Scioto HAS NOT BEEN TOUCHED by tragic events caused by drug abuse. But somehow, we remain willing to give up the lifeblood of our area while refusing to give up the money and resources needed to educate youth and better the future.

The Scioto County Rx Drug Task Force Action Team suffered a severe defeat yesterday. Chalk one up for the bad doctors, the bad pharmacies, the bad dealers, the abusers, the purveyors of dangerous misinformation, and the apathetic. God bless the dependent. I so looked forward to a new generation better equipped to fight drug abuse. Now, we must find other methods of teaching these important strategies to our young people.

Pharmageddon must be defeated with the resources of all citizens. We cannot afford to let the tone of this election control our future efforts. Those who really care must stand together and rededicate ourselves to the common good of Scioto County residents.

Picture the child you love weaving tentatively

through the complicated maze of substance abuse

while desperately trying to avoid all the pitfalls

so prevalent in our county.

Do we have children at risk?

Do they need a better education?

Do we have an obligation to provide them with the best tools to avoid drug abuse?

The answers are obvious.

Part of the solution lies in the minds and ACTIONS of every individual.

Babies Born Addicted

2011-11-07T16:30:00.000-08:00

According to the Ohio Hospital Association,

Drug Withdrawal Syndrome in newborn babies

continues to rise statewide.

There were 413 cases in 2007 and 1,116 in 2010.

Newborns with Drug Withdrawal Syndrome -- it's bad, and getting worse. In some hospitals, 15 to 20 percent of newborns need treatment for withdrawal.

Across the country, almost 12,000 babies are born each year with newborn withdrawal syndrome, a rate that more than doubled from 2003 to 2008.

Florida, which has emerged as the epicenter of the problem, witnessed some 1,300 babies treated for withdrawal in 2010, a 30 percent increase from the previous year and four times the number just five years ago, according to Agency for Health Care Administration records. The number of mothers treated for pregnancy complications related to drug dependence almost doubled -- from 240 to 463 -- over the same five-year period. (Richard Martin, "Babies Born Addicted To Prescription Drugs On the Rise," The St. Petersburg Times, May 14 2011)

And while this epidemic in Florida is shocking, the problem appears to be even worse in Ohio, according to the Huffington Post:

“Nearly one in 10 babies were born addicted to drugs

last year in southern Ohio’s Scioto County.”

(Andrew Welsh-Huggins, "Extreme Pill Addiction Problem in Ohio: 1 in 10 Babies Born Addicted to Drugs," The Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com, December 22 2010)

It’s tough to say just how many babies in Ohio are born addicted to prescription drugs each year. Hospitals are not required to report them to the state. Some hospitals track the numbers, others don’t.

In most cases these babies are born dependent on opiates – especially prescription drugs. In some cases the drugs in question may be methamphetamines or cocaine, and in other cases severe addicts give birth to babies that are dependent on more than one substance.

Significant Threats to the Substance Dependent Baby

1. Withdrawal Symptoms

“Babies undergo a full-blown narcotic withdrawal,” says Dr. Jonathan Wispe, a neo-natologist at Columbus Children’s Hospital who has been taking care of infants for 30 years. (Mandie Trimble, "Opiate-Addicted Infants On Rise In Ohio," WOSU wosu.org/news, August 8 2011)

Dependent babies often must spend the first few weeks of their lives in neonatal intensive care units, where they are weaned off drugs. Treatment for withdrawal can be a very painful process lasting up to 30 days; it often includes vomiting, diarrhea, feeding problems, tremors, and muscle stiffness.

Treatment can include powerful drugs in tiny doses (morphine, methadone, phenobarbital or clonidine) to pave their withdrawals or simpler remedies, such as volunteers and nurses rocking and cradling the babies in darkened, padded rooms to ease their abnormal sensitivity to noise and light.

An article by the Partnership at Drugfree.ORG quoted Head Nurse Mary Osuch of Broward General Medical Center’s Neonatal Intensive Care Unit as saying; “[the babies] go through withdrawal symptoms; they’re crampy, miserable. They sweat. They can have rapid breathing. Sometimes, they can even have seizures.” Some symptoms can last as long as four to six months.

2. Serious Health Concerns

A. Dependent babies generally have a smaller head circumference.

B. Dependent babies generally have a lower birth weight.

C. Dependent babies generally have overall slower development.

D. Dependent babies born to opiate-addicted mothers are at higher risk for apnea (stopping breathing) and SIDS.

E. Dependent babies born to opiate-addicted mothers (taken just before or early in pregnancy) show a moderate increase in risks of birth defects, including congenital heart problems. (Centers for Disease Control study, April 2011)

F. Substance-dependent children are more likely to continue to have cognitive and learning disorders and difficulty adjusting socially later in life.

G. Because these children are born to an addicted mother, the chances for abuse and neglect are higher, which can lead to the child eventually turning to drugs on their own as a coping mechanism.

H. Toddlers of opiate-addicted mothers were found to be highly energetic, talkative, and easily distracted, with brief attention spans. Their goal-directedness was brief.

I. Some studies suggested that these toddlers had immature object manipulation, especially with regard to fine motor skills.

J. Speech, perceptual disturbances, and sleep disturbances were also noted in toddlers.

Read this article from The Miami Herald: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/05/21/2228407/born-addicted.html

A Gift From God -- A Beautiful, Healthy Baby

Where Teens Acquire Rx Drugs

2011-11-07T08:43:00.000-08:00

Teen users often get prescription pills like Xanax

from their parents’ medicine cabinets.

Once they’ve built up a tolerance to the pills,

they switch to heroin to achieve a more potent high.

Research from the Center for Disease Control

indicates that 60 percent of prescription drug addicts

begin using pills before the age of 15.

"To put it bluntly, today’s young

Percocet, Vicodin and OxyContin users

are becoming tomorrow’s heroin junkies,"

said New Jersey State Commission of Investigation

Chair Patrick Hobbs.

(Megan DeMarco, "Experts Say Prescription Pill Abuse Leads N.J. Teenagers

to Heroin Addiction, New Jersey Real-Time News, June 15 2011)

Where Do Teenagers Get Prescription Drugs?

1. Friends and Relatives

* Sixty-four percent of youth ages 12 to 17 who have abused pain relievers say they got them from friends or relatives, often without the other person’s knowledge. (SAMHSA, 2008) And in one survey, 54 percent of high school seniors said that opioid drugs other than heroin (e.g., Vicodin) would be fairly or very easy to get. (Johnston, LD, O'Malley, PM, Bachman, JG, & Schulenberg, JE.; Monitoring the Future National Results on Adolescent Drug Use: Overview of Key Findings 2010; 2011).

2. The Medicine Cabinet at Home

* More than 60 percent of teenagers say prescription pain relievers are easy to get from the medicine cabinet at home. (Partnership for a Drug-Free America, 2006).

3. Other People's Prescriptions

* Half of teens say they are easy to get through other people's prescriptions. (Partnership for a Drug-Free America, 2006).

4. Online or By Phone

*Almost forty percent of youth ages 14 to 20 say it is easy to get prescription drugs online or by phone. Of that total, more girls than boys said it was easy -- 48% vs. 31%. (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2007).

While research indicates that less than one percent

of teens acquire prescription drugs from the Internet,

adolescents do visit manufacturer and pro-drug Web sites

to obtain dosage information,

identify pills,

learn about drug interactions and effects,

and find out how to pass drug tests.

Teens also engage in online chat rooms and read blogs

to hear about others’ experiences using prescription drugs illicitly.

This online drug culture, researchers believe,

may contribute to the misconception

that most teenagers abuse prescription drugs and/or

that prescription drug abuse is relatively risk-free.

(Community Anti-Drug Coalition of America, 2008)