Welcome to Drug Abuse articles category.

You can find informaion on Drug Abuse articles and news.

The roots of drug abuse are often found in a disturbed childhood and puberty; if not; then what starts off often as an ostentation of respective macho-ness grows into a compulsive habit within no time. Perhaps it is the only field where the teenagers and the young adults never fall short of ambition. For the aged, it is a different story altogether; while some begin because of unmatched wealth accumulated all in a sudden; others start off to seek an easy refuge from psychological, sociological and finance-related problems. However, all roads lead to Rome and all these so-called Romans must be brought under drug abuse treatment.

Prior to commencing further upon the details regarding drug abuse treatment, it is vital to differentiate between a drug abuser and a drug addict. This is chiefly due to the fact that what may easily allay the agonies of the former may not at all have an effect on the other. Drug abuse treatment can be a mild process or a severe one, depending upon the intensity of the use.

Drug abuse treatment is the last refuge sought when a certain individual starts showing certain symptoms including irritability, insomnia, convulsions, anxiety, paranoia, violent behavior, memory loss, learning problems, increased heart rate, lethargy and panic attacks due to no apparent reasons. Psychoactive or prescription, the general symptoms do not vary much but one must also be aware that psychoactive drug abuse treatment has some difference with prescription drug abuse treatment while involving medicament though the basic psychological drug abuse treatment is more or less the same.

Drug abuse treatment must start at home, for no counselor can be as compassionate as the nearer and dearer ones to the abuser. Compassion plays a large role and can bring forth positive outcomes if the problem is in its initial stage; the developing stages can be handled by reducing slowly the quantity in a careful and discreet manner. Besides, getting the victim under drug abuse treatment interested in constructive and recreational activities diverts his/her mind from the compulsive urge. But this kind of drug abuse treatment is effective for the victims who have developed a psychological dependence; for the ones with physical dependence, professionals should administer drug abuse treatment besides doctors with specialization in the field of drug abuse treatment.

When a prescription drug is used in quantities more than the recommended dosage or when not required, it is termed drug abuse. Painkillers, tranquilizers and anti-anxiety drugs are some of the most commonly abused prescription drugs.

Generally, patients take medicines as prescribed by their doctors. When taken this way, there is very little chance of the patient getting addicted. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), millions of people today use medications for non-medical purposes.

People try to justify drug abuse by convincing themselves that an overdose of prescription drugs is not as bad as street drugs such as heroin or ecstasy. The truth is that any kind of abuse is unwarranted. The problem with prescription drug abuse is that it starts with the consumption of a few extra pills for quick relief. The patient does not realize that abuse or addiction is likely.

If the doctor discontinues the prescription, an addict will seek out another doctor for a prescription of the same drug under false pretexts. Abusers use various methods to get a high. They even mix prescription drugs with alcohol, marijuana or any other similar drug. Drugs such as Ritalin and OxyContin are among the most abused drugs. Prescribing these drugs is carefully monitored and given only when urgently required.

To battle prescription drug abuse, medication directions must always be followed carefully. The physician must always be consulted regarding any change in dosage. It is not advisable to crush the tablets or take them with alcohol or any other intoxicating substance. Also, patients must never use someone else?s prescription, even if the symptoms are similar. The doctors should also exercise caution while prescribing drugs with any possibility of abuse. They must ask patients if they have any history of drug abuse.

Alcoholism and alcohol dependency is a fatal chronic illness affecting the lives of 20-30% of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender population (GLBT). Studies have found that 35% of lesbians had a history of gay alcohol abuse, compared to only 5% of the heterosexual women. In addition, further studies have shown that 30% of lesbians and gay men suffer from drug abuse or drug addiction, suggesting that the gay and lesbian community constitutes a high-risk population with regard to alcohol abuse and drug abuse.

Why is Gay Drug Abuse and Gay Alcohol Abuse Such a Problem?

It is important not to assume that homosexuality causes gay drug abuse or gay alcohol abuse. When gay men, lesbians and bisexuals internalize society’s homophobic attitudes and beliefs, the results can be devastating. Society’s hatred becomes self-hatred. It can lead to feelings of alienation, despair, low self-esteem, self-destructive behavior and substance abuse. Some gay men, lesbians and bisexuals resort to substance abuse as a means to numb the feelings of being different, to relieve emotional pain or to reduce inhibitions about their sexual feelings.

Where Gay Substance Abuse and Gay Alcohol Abuse Begins and Ends

Gay substance abuse often begins in early adolescence when youth first begin to struggle with their sexual orientation. When surrounded by messages telling you that you are wrong and sick for who you are, eventually you may begin to believe it. Having to hide your identity and deal with homophobic comments and attitudes — often made by unknowing family and friends — can have a profound effect on you. In response to this overwhelming shame and homophobia, many lesbian, gays and bisexuals turn to alcohol abuse and drug abuse.

Drug abuse testing is a way of determining if a person is under the influence of any drug. There are many methods of carrying out drug tests. Law enforcement officers, sports officials and school authorities carry out drug abuse tests.

Drug abuse can be detected by monitoring behavioral changes. These changes range from mood swings to a feeling of low self-esteem. A general lack of interest, a drop in grades and withdrawal from family members are noticeable in youngsters that are victims of drug abuse. Frequent absenteeism from school and changes in style of dressing or taste in music are also symptoms of drug abuse. For drug abusers at a work place, a decrease in their productivity is most noticeable.

The procedure for a drug abuse test is a two-step process. A urine sample is taken from the individual and divided in two parts. One part is tested using immunoassay, a relatively simple, inexpensive, yet highly accurate test. If this test is negative, then the result is declared to be negative, and more tests are carried out. But if the result of the first test turns out to be positive, then a second test is conducted using the other part of the sample.

This second or confirmatory test is performed using a more sophisticated and more expensive technique known as gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) or thin-layer chromatography (TLC). If this test too shows positive, then the person tested is declared to be under the influence of drugs. If this test shows negative, the earlier test is deemed inaccurate. As this virtually a 100% accurate process, the results can be upheld in a court of law.

There are also many drug abuse test kits available. The saliva and urine drug test can now be conducted using strips and integrated cups. The result of this test can be obtained in a matter of minutes. Schools conduct thee tests in order to keep a check on drug abuse in children and young adults, as they are highly impressionable and more susceptible to drug abuse.

Pre employment drug screening is absolutely essential. An employee’s background check is always considered as the first line of assurance in the hiring process. The essential tools for this screening are pre-employment background screening, drug screening, employment verification, etc.

Employee drug testing programs help to protect the health and safety of all employees, and palliate the costs associated with having drug abusers on the payroll. This helps to provide early identification and the ability to refer employees with substance abuse problems for treatment. The programs that are integrated with drug education and treatment not prove to be an effective way of managing substance abuse, but also a valuable tool in achieving positive employee relations, delivering significant cost savings, and providing corporations with a competitive advantage.

However, this type of testing does not go without controversy. The problems that are directly attributed due to substance abuse are rising causing employee turnover, absenteeism, tardiness, on-the-job accidents, health benefit utilization and costs, workers compensation claims, inventory shrinkage and employee theft, lowered productivity and workplace violence.

Drug screening can be used in other applications like testing teens for drug abuse. You can do a high school drug test or athlete drug test. Drug testing in prisons, probation drug testing, juvenile drug testing can also be done. Substance abuse rehabilitation drug testing can be done in treatment centers and rehabilitation centers. Thus, drug screening test can be conducted at various places and help you check the levels of drug intake either by employees, teens or any one.

Drug abuse is defined as the compulsive and habitual misuse of any drug for various purposes, such as achieving calming or euphoric effects, an escape from reality, dulling anxiety, and fighting depression. Drug abuse victims need a support system to help them overcome this negative habit. The rehabilitation of such drug abuse victims is conducted through special drug rehab programs that are designed to make the victim independent from the drug. Drug rehab statistics are an indication of the number of drug abuse victims and the common drug abuse methods.

According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, it is estimated that almost 22.8 million Americans need treatment for either alcohol or drug addiction. Out of these 22.8 million people, only a small percentage received help from rehabilitation, and the rest were not exposed to any rehab programs. Around 1.2 million drug abusers who did not receive any treatment admitted to having felt the need for treatment at some point in time. A small percentage of these people disclosed that they made attempts to get some kind of help, but were unable to contact any rehab support group.

The percentage of teenagers reported to be victims of drug abuse is alarming. There were 2.3 million youth between the ages of 12 to 17 who were found to need treatment for alcohol or any other illicit drug abuse. Only 8.2 percent of these youths received any rehab help. An increased use of illegal substances such as cocaine, heroin, and other drugs among the youth is also observed.

Chronic pain is known to affect sexual functioning and sexual relationships. Both pain and sexual functioning are multidimensional constructs. Different aspects of the experience of chronic pain are related to psychological, physical, and social health and to overall well-being (Penny, Purves, Smith, Chambers, & Smith, 1999), as well as to various dimensions of sexual functioning, such as arousal, drive, sexual behavior, and satisfaction with sexual relationships (Flor, Turk, & Scholz, 1987; Monga, Tan, Ostermann, Monga, & Grabois, 1998).

In studying these effects, much of the research on chronic pain and sexuality has focused on patients involved in chronic pain treatment programs or other types of medical care and, in particular, on the sexual functioning of men with various disabilities. In the broader research literature, the experience of chronic pain, depression, the quality of intimate relationships, and child sexual abuse have all been shown to be related to sexual function; however, no study has looked at these factors in combination.

This study contributes to research in this area by examining sexual functioning in a nonclinical sample of women with chronic pain who may or may not have been involved in treatment and thus are more diverse than patient samples. The aim of the study was to clarify and extend the results of previous studies with primarily male participants who were receiving medical care (Coates & Ferroni, 1991; Flor et al., 1987; Monga et al., 1998; Tan, Monga, Thornby, & Monga, 1998). This study focused on women who suffer from chronic pelvic pain, as research has shown them to have difficulty with sexual functioning due to the pain (Fry, Crisp, & Beard, 1991; Collett, Cordle, Stewart, & Jagger, 1998) and a higher probability of having experienced childhood abuse (Collett et al., 1998; Walling et al., 1994). The main objective of the study was to develop a model of sexual functioning in women with chronic pelvic pain, incorporating key predictor variables such as pain experience, depression, relationship mutual support (i.e., support in intimate relationships), and childhood sexual abuse.

Chronic Pain

Chronic pain has a deleterious effect on sexual functioning. Factors that have been addressed in the area of chronic pain and sexuality include pain-related variables such as pain severity and frequency of pain (Ambler, Williams, Hill, Gunary, & Cratchley, 2001), as well as appraisal of control over life, the extent of interference caused by chronic pain (Monga et al., 1998), depression (Averill, Novy, Nelson, & Berry, 1996; Tan et al., 1998), and marital satisfaction (Flor et al., 1987). Work-related and demographic factors also affect sexual functioning in people with chronic pain, specifically unemployment, disability status (Monga et al., 1998), and age, with older age having a negative correlation with sexual frequency, drive/interest, and satisfaction (Monga et al., 1998; Tan et al., 1998).

Being a gynecological condition, chronic pelvic pain is, to some degree, more directly associated with sexual dysfunction than chronic pain at other sites. In one study of chronic pelvic pain patients’ feelings and beliefs about their pain or illness, 40 out of 64 participants cited sexual dysfunction as one of the chief problems the illness had caused, making it the most frequent complaint (Fry et al., 1991).

Relationship Mutual Support

The quality of intimate relationships is closely connected with sexual function (McCabe, 1999; Metz & Epstein, 2002; Trudel, 2002). Satisfaction with the sexual relationship appears to be associated with higher marital functioning (Flor et al., 1987; Trudel). In addition to its relationship with marital dissatisfaction, sexual dissatisfaction is related to sexual dysfunction (Flor et al., 1987). In cases in which one partner suffers from chronic pain, the ability of both partners to cope with the pain and the extent to which partners are supportive of the chronic pain sufferer have been found to be a predictor of sexual functioning (Flor et al., 1987; Jenson, 1985).

Depression

Depression is one of the most frequently-studied aspects of chronic pain’s impact on psychological health. Rates for probable depression in pain patients range from 38% to 87% (Flor et al., 1987; Holzberg, Robinson, & Geisser, 1993; Monga et al., 1998; Tan et al., 1998). Independently, pain-related factors such as pain duration and pain intensity do not appear to account for significant variation in depression scores (Averill et al., 1996; Turner, Jensen, & Romano, 2000), though Heinberg, Fisher, Wesselmann, Reed, and Haythornthwaite (2004) found that pain severity independently predicted depression. Other factors may mediate the effects of pain on depression, such as work status, education, and marital status (Averill et al.).

Apart from its link with chronic pain, depression also independently has a powerful influence on sexual relationships. A problematic issue in addressing the relationship between depression and sexual function is that while depression is closely associated with decreased sexual function (Basson, 2001; Philipp et al., 1999), sexual function is also often negatively impacted by medication taken for depression (see Ferguson, 2001 for a review). However, Michelson, Schmidt, Lee, and Tepner (2001) evaluated the effects of the drug fluoxetine in treating depression and found the sexual function improved for the majority of patients. Deterioration in sexual function appeared to be related to increases in depressive symptoms rather than to side effects of the drug.

A new study shows that meeting with an addiction peer counselor just once at the time of a routine physician visit and receiving a follow-up telephone call can motivate abusers of cocaine and heroin to reduce their drug use, according to a Jan 5, 2005, news release from the National Institutes of Health. The study was conducted by researchers at Boston University Schools of Medicine and Public Health, Boston.

The study included 1,175 men and women who tested positive for cocaine or heroin abuse. Participants were randomly assigned to an intervention group or a control group. Intervention consisted of

* a motivational interview with a substance abuse outreach worker who was a recovering addict,

* referrals to drug abuse treatment programs,

* a list of treatment options, and

* a follow-up telephone call 10 days after the intervention.

Members of the control group received only the list of treatment options.

The 20-minute, motivational interview used in the study was designed to establish rapport with participants. Interviewers asked permission to discuss drugs, explored the pros and cons of drug use, discussed the gap between real and desired quality of life, and assessed participants’ readiness to change. The intervention also included development of an action plan.

The researchers found that six months after enrollment, among those who abused cocaine, 22.3% of the intervention group was abstinent from the drug, compared to 16.9% of the control group; among those who abused heroin, 40.2% of the intervention group was abstinent from the drug, compared to 30.6% of the control group. Among users of both drugs, 17.4% of the intervention group was drug free, compared to 12.8% of the control group.

As someone who sees adolescents every day, you are no doubt concerned that the number of teens battling health-threatening weight problems is growing. What you may not realize is that NIDA researchers are discovering fascinating connections between obesity and another key teen health issue: drug addiction.

Amazingly, drug abusers and those who suffer from obesity appear to have a similarity in brain chemistry that seems partly responsible for these compulsive behaviors.

The common link is the neurotransmitter dopamine, the brain chemical responsible for stimulating feelings of pleasure. This year’s fourth and final installment of Heads Up discusses this link, as well as obesity research and treatment. Like all of the articles in the series this year, this one reinforces our understanding of addiction as a brain disease–a disease that can be treated, understood, and, most important, prevented.

Learning about the seemingly unlikely link between obesity and drug addiction will give students an intricate view of how science works. It will also teach them that researchers can never know for sure where the facts will lead them. NIDA-sponsored scientists started out doing work on drug addiction but soon found themselves researching obesity, as well.

Thank you for taking time to share the lessons of Heads Up with your students. You have helped set the stage for a healthier, smarter, and drug-free generation of young adults.

Ask experts to name the biggest health threats for teens today, and these two answers will rise to the top: obesity and drug addiction.

Are you surprised by the first answer? You shouldn’t be.

More and more teens weigh far too much, and the problem is growing. It’s no joke. Check out these numbers: 16 percent of young people between the ages of 12 and 19 are overweight, according to a 1999-2002 federal study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That’s more than triple what the rate was between 1976 and 1980. The same study revealed that an additional 15 percent of teens are at risk of becoming overweight.

What’s so bad about being overweight or obese? For starters, it can cause diabetes, a life-shortening disease in which the body loses its ability to metabolize sugar. It can also lead to asthma and can cause heart disease. Most obese people just aren’t healthy, overall.

HEADS UP: A WILD CONNECTION

What do you think? Could the health threats of drug addiction and obesity be connected? If you’re like most people, you probably think, “No way.” Well, you–and most people–are wrong!

Think about it. People addicted to drugs and those who suffer from obesity have at least one thing in common. It can be extremely hard for them to stop doing things that they know are harming them. For the drug abuser, it’s taking drugs. For the obese person, it’s usually excessive eating (although there are other factors as well, as we’ll learn). NIDA researchers decided to find out if and how the two disorders could be related. Their amazing new findings indicate that there is a link. If you think back to what you’ve learned from earlier articles in this series, you can probably guess what the link is. Got it? It’s dopamine and the brain.

Researchers are discovering that obesity (like drug addiction) is, at least in part, a brain disease.

HEADS UP: SEE SCIENCE IN ACTION!

How did researchers find the obesity-addiction link? They started by reviewing what they already knew: Dopamine is a brain chemical that stimulates pleasurable feelings. When dopamine binds to special structures in your brain–called D2 receptors–it activates the brain’s reward circuits. The end result? You feel good.

For some time now, researchers have known that people who are addicted to alcohol, cocaine, and other drugs tend to have a lower-than-average number of D2 receptors in their brains. That makes sense when you think about it. If you have a shortage of D2 receptors, it’s harder for you to feel good. It’s harder for dopamine to find a D2 receptor to bind to, so it takes more dopamine for you to feel pleasure. As it happens, most drugs of abuse cause a flood of dopamine in the brain. Taking drugs makes people feel better–in the immediate short term.

Researchers also knew that eating can stimulate the production of dopamine in the brain. Could it be that obese people suffer from a shortage of D2 receptors? They might need to overeat to get feelings of pleasure from food.

Using PET scanners to look inside the brains of obese and non-obese people, researchers Nora Volkow, M.D., who is now the director of NIDA, and Gene-Jack Wang, M.D., found that obese people do have lowered numbers of D2 receptors. In fact, Drs. Volkow and Wang’s research at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York showed that the more obese the person, the lower the number of D2 receptors. “The low number of receptors in obese people might be causing them to overeat,” says Dr. Wang. “They might be doing it to compensate for reduced stimulation in their brain’s reward circuits.”

“In the United States, there are now more than 318,000 people behind bars for violations of drug prohibition, more than the number of persons incarcerated for all crimes in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy and Spain combined,” writes Jeffrey A. Miron, professor of economics at Boston University, in his 2004 book Drug War Crimes: The Consequences of Prohibition. On any given day, that means that the number of people locked up in the United States for drug violations is just about equal to the total number of people living in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (the official population of Pittsburgh in the 2000 U.S. census was 334,563).

All told, in excess of 1.5 million people are being arrested each year in the United States on drug-related charges–overwhelmingly for possession, not selling. That’s more people arrested each year for breaking U.S. drug laws than the total number of people living in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; Buffalo, New York; Nor folk, Virginia; Durham, North Carolina; Spokane, Washington; and Cleveland, Ohio, combined.

Of these 1.5 million drug-related arrests, a full 1.2 million are for possession only. Touching only a small fraction of the nation’s estimated 28 million drug users, these arrests fall disproportionately on the poor. As Miron explains:

Many arrests for possession occur because the arrestee violated
some other law–prostitution, theft, speeding, loitering,
disorderly conduct, and so on–and was found to possess drugs.
Thus, otherwise law-abiding citizens who wish to purchase and
consume drugs face minimal risk of arrest or other sanction.

The cocaine in the purse of a downtown prostitute, in other words, is more likely to be spotted by the cops than the cocaine in the glove compartment of those who go about their business in more leafy sections of the country. Marc Mauer of the Sentencing Project in Washington, D.C., points to the discriminatory impact of America’s war on drugs, both in terms of the consequences of inequitable enforcement and the increase in the overall number of people being jailed.” In 1980 about 40,000 Americans were locked up for drug-only offenses,” writes Mauer. Now the number behind bars for drugs is eight times that high and “Three-fourths of them are black or Latino, though drug use is no higher in those groups than among whites.”

Bruce Western, a sociologist at Princeton University, points to how the government’s biased dealings in enforcement and sentencing have had a glaringly disproportionate impact on black men and race relations. In 1999, reports Western, 41 percent of black male high school dropouts between the ages of twenty-two and thirty were locked up. In 2002, reports the Justice Department, one in eight black men in their twenties and early thirties were behind bars, compared with one in sixty-three white men. Today the odds are one in three that a black male in the United States will go to prison in his lifetime.” I think,” concludes Western, “that this is one of the most important developments in race relations in the last thirty years.”

Disproportionately geared toward catching and jailing the poor and minorities, America’s war on drugs has also proven to be especially good at rounding up the small fry while letting the big fish off the hook. “Mandatory sentences,” explains Julie Stewart, president of Families Against Mandatory Minimums,” are filling federal prisons with low-level offenders instead of the kingpins they were supposed to catch.”

With over two million people now locked up, the U.S. prison population is the largest in the world, much of it the result of the war on drugs. At over 700 per 100,000 residents, for example, the U.S. incarceration rate is more than seven times higher than the rates of incarceration in Germany or France. On top of the price of inequitable enforcement and the $33 billion that the U.S. government is spending annually to enforce drug prohibition, Miron contends that the war on drugs has been more effective in fostering corruption among public officials than in reducing drug consumption.

Arguing that the war on drugs is a poor method of reducing drug use, Miron pulls together the evidence to show how prohibition has increased the level of street violence, expanded health risks for drug users, drained criminal justice resources away from more serious crimes, diminished civil liberties, restricted the medicinal uses of drugs, generated insurrection in drug-producing countries, and speeded the transfer of massive amounts of wealth to criminals. The costs of the war, in short, have exceeded the benefits. Miron’s answer: “Liberty and utility both recommend that prohibition end.”