Substance Abuse and Public
Health Policy
Andrew S. O’Connor, DO
Case Western Reserve
University
Department of Epidemiology
and Biostatistics
Division of Public Health
I.
Substance Abuse-Definitions
A. What is it
B. What’s being used and by whom
1. Tobacco
2. Alcohol
3. Marijuana
4. Cocaine/Crack, Heroin,
“Ecstasy”, Methamphetamine,
5. Inhalants
C. Legal vs. Illegal/Illicit substance abuse
II.
Whose
Involved-the epidemiology of substance abuse
A. Males vs. Females
B. American Youth
C. The Inner city and substance abuse
D. The rise of rural issues and substance abuse
III.
The Impact of Substance Abuse
A. Personal
1. Physical issues—rising
comorbities and associated health problems related to substance abuse
a. HIV and addiction
b. Hepatitis
c. Chronic liver, lung,
cardiovascular disease
d. Sexually transmitted
diseases and substance abuse
2. Emotional/Psychological
relationships of substance abuse
a. introduction to addiction
b. changes in the view of
addiction as a personality flaw and deviant behavior to a medical model with
emphasis on treatment of a chronic disease
3. Personal economic impacts
of substance abuse
B. Substance abuse and the American family
1. Rates of Divorce in
families of substance abuse
2. Children
a. rates of violence/sexual
abuse amongst children involved in substance abuse, psychological illness
b. developmental delay and
scholastic achievement
c. physical illness—asthma,
obesity
C. Societal impact of substance abuse
1. Loss of work and
productivity decline due to impaired work force
2. Increases in violence—the
1980’s and the inner city,
3. Loss of life due to
alcohol and motor vehicles
4. % of GNP spent on “the war
on drugs”
5. Developing nations and
drugs as a cash crop
IV.
Policies of
education and substance abuse prevention
A. The question of legalization and regulation
of current illegal drugs
B. Tobacco and environmental exposure—zero
tolerance and implications on personal civil liberties
V.
Addiction
A. reemphasis on role of the medical model of
addiction as a disease requiring treatment
B. models of treatment
1. total abstinence vs.
attempts to “control” addiction
2. heroin and methadone
maintenance—trading one addiction for another in order to control the
associated aspects of addiction and addictive behavior
C. Issue of Mixed diagnosis and addiction
Few Americans can claim they
have never heard of the term “substance abuse”. Pick up the local newspaper,
turn on the radio, watch the evening news and references to “the war on drugs”,
the health consequences attributed to substance use and abuse, or deaths
associated with the use or abuse of illicit substances are wide spread.
The legal and illegal use of various organic and manufactured substances has
become a true “hot topic” for politicians, employers, and heads of
household. But what do we mean when we say “substance abuse”? Are
we merely referring to the health, social, and economic consequences of
“illegal” drugs such as heroin, crack cocaine and marijuana? Do we mean
the broader definition that includes these substances and the consequences of
alcohol? How about the health consequences of “legal” use of substances such
as tobacco? Is this encompassed by the term “substance abuse”? And
if so, how are we to view the use of various substances for “medicinal”
purposes, such as the control of chronic somatic pain or the improvement of
athletic performance? How do we view the intake of caffeine, arguably one
of America’s most widely ingested substances? Is this also substance
“abuse”, and if so, why is it not regulated by the legal system? If this
is not “substance abuse” then why not and where do we as a collective society
draw the line between “acceptable” and “unacceptable” substance use and abuse?
Obviously the topic of
substance abuse is a large one. Entire textbooks and journals are devoted
to the health, societal and economic impacts of the use and abuse of various
substances. A single chapter in a public health textbook could never do
an adequate job of exploring each of these topics. Instead, the focus of
this chapter will be to introduce a framework for defining what is meant by
“substance abuse”. Specific substances will be touched upon. An
exhaustive list is outside of the scope of this text and the discussions will
be limited several main psychoactive substances. I will also examine
estimates of the epidemiology of those involved both directly and indirectly in
substance abuse and the impact that the use of various substances has on
them. I will examine the growing view of substance abuse as a chronic
medical condition, and efforts to treat this condition. Finally I will
briefly discuss the “war on drugs”, efforts to decriminalize the use of
specific substances, and to provide drug use education and prevention, as well
as efforts to limit the health and societal impacts of substance use and abuse.
substance abuse: noun
Excessive consumption or
misuse of substance: the excessive consumption or misuse of any substance for
the sake of its nontherapeutic effects on the mind or body, especially drugs or
alcohol (Encarta)
This is the dictionary
definition of substance abuse. Other authors have tried to categorize
substance abuse or “drug problems” by the class of drugs that are used.
For instance, Goldstein categorizes drugs into seven categories: nicotine,
alcohol and related drugs, opiates, cocaine and amphetamines, cannabis,
caffeine and the hallucinogens. (Goldstein) But what about other
nonclassified substances, such as anabolic steroids and other performance
enhancing drugs. What about the misuse of various medicinal preparations
for purposes other than what they were designed for (e.g. erythropoietin to
increase blood volume and potentially improve athletic performance). Is
this also substance abuse?
Using the broad definition
of the term “substance abuse” listed above, these would be termed substance
abuse. A broader split would be to classify these potential substances of
abuse into those with “psychoactive” effects (effects on mind, mood and thought
processes) from those with effects on physical or performance processes.
Each of these classes of drugs or substances has particular ramifications on
the overall health of the person using the substance. The Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder 4th edition (DSM-IV) makes the
distinction between dependence and abuse:
|
Dependence: Three
or more of the following: |
Abuse One or
more of the following occurring over the same twelve month period: |
|
1. Tolerance |
1. Recurrent substance use resulting in
a failure to fulfill major role obligations at work, school, or home |
|
2. Withdrawal |
2. Recurrent substance use in
situations in which it is physically hazardous |
|
3. Substance is often taken in larger
amounts or over a longer period than was intended |
3. Recurrent substance-related legal
problems |
|
4. Any unsuccessful effort or a persistent
desire to cut down or control substance use |
4. Continued substance use despite
having persistent or recurrent social or interpersonal problems caused or
exacerbated by the effects of the substance |
|
5. A great deal of time is spent in
activities necessary to obtain substance or recover from its effects |
|
|
6. Important social, occupational, or
recreational activities given up or reduced because of substance use |
|
|
7. Continued substance use despite
knowledge of having had persistent or recurrent physical or psychological
problems that are likely to be caused or exacerbated by the substance. |
|
Addiction is defined as “compulsive drug seeking and using,
even in the face of terrible personal and social consequences . . . A chronic,
and complex, but treatable brain disease.” (McCrady, Epstein)
II. The
Epidemiology of Substance Abuse
Now that we have a rough
idea of what substance abuse is and a broad structure for classifying potential
substances of abuse, we should turn to examine what groups of people are
abusing various substances. The hallmark investigation of the epidemiology of
substance abuse in the United States is the National Household Survey of Drug
Abuse(NHSDA). (A link to the statistic portion of this trial is provided in the
reference section of this chapter) One of the useful constructs of this
survey is to split substance abuse into both legal (Alcohol and Tobacco) vs.
Illicit drug use and abuse. In this survey, the illicit drugs are split
into 9 categories: marijuana, cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants,
non-medical use of pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants and
sedatives. Separate categories are provided to estimate the use of
alcohol and tobacco, which can also be thought of as legal substances.
The NHSDA, which has been conducted by the federal government since 1971, is
the primary source of statistical information on the use of drugs by the U.S.
population, and is overseen by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA). Data is collected by the administration of
questionnaires to a “representative sample” of the population age 12 and older,
through face-to-face interviews, and are updated yearly. The
interpretation of the data provided by the NHSDA is somewhat limited however.
This survey omits homeless persons not living in shelters as well as
institutionalized subjects. This may lead to an underestimation of the use
patterns of these groups (Goldstein).
ILLICIT
Drug Use (highlights from NHSDA 2000 report)
|
-An estimated 14 million
Americans were “current” illicit drug users (used within the month prior to
interview). This represents 6.3% of the population age 12 years and
older. -Men have higher rates
of current illicit use than women (7.7% vs. 5.0%). -Among youths age 12 to
17, 9.7% had used illicit substances within the 30 days prior to interview -Approximately 2.1
million youths age 12 to17 had used inhalant some time in their lives (8.9%
of youths) the primary inhalants used included glue, shoe polish, Toluene,
gasoline and lighter fluid. -Among youths who were
“heavy drinkers” 65.5% were also current users of illicit drugs.
Amongst nondrinkers, only 4.2% were current illicit drug users. For
concomitant use of tobacco, 42.7% were current users of illicit drugs, for
nonsmokers this number was only 4.6%. -7.0 million persons
reported driving under the influence of an illicit drug at some time in the
past year. This corresponds to 3.1% of the population age 12 and older,
however this rate is lower than the rate for 1999 (3.4%). |
Several important points can
be taken from these figures. First, substance use and abuse is a problem
which affects a large number of people, and a great number of these people
begin to use various substances early on in life. Second, this brings up
the theory of “gateway” drugs, such as tobacco, alcohol and marijuana, as
leading into the potential use of more damaging and addictive drugs.
Finally, this table highlights that the substance abuse problem is not only
impacting the persons who are using substances, but also has the potential to
cause harm to others around them.
Alcohol
(highlights from NHSDA 2000 report)
|
Almost half of Americans aged 12 and older
reported being current drinkers of alcohol in 2000 (an estimated 104 million
people) |
|
Heavy drinking was reported by 5.6% of the
population aged 12 and older |
|
One in ten Americans (22.3 million persons)
had driven under the influence of alcohol at least once in the 12 months
prior to interview. Among young adults (age 18 25) 19.9% had driven under the influence of
alcohol in 2000. |
Tobacco use
(highlights from NHSDA 2000 report)
|
An estimated 65.5 million Americans age 12
and older (29.3%) reported current tobacco use in 2000 (any product).
55.7 million used cigarettes, 10.7 million used cigars, 7.6 million used
smokeless tobacco |
|
Current cigarette use declined between 1999
and 2000 among youths aged 12 to 17 (14.9% to 13.4%) and young adults ages 18
to 25 (39.7% to 38.3%). No changes were seen however to adults age 26
and older. |
|
Among youths, females were slightly more
likely to use tobacco products. Among all age groups however, males
were slightly more likely to use than females. |
|
Despite nationwide campaigns regarding the
legal age to purchase tobacco products, among youth smokers age 12 to 17 more
than half reported they personally bought cigarettes. |
Is substance abuse a purely
“inner city” problem? The data from the NHSDA would speak
otherwise. Among all age groups, the rate of illicit drug
use in metropolitan areas was higher than the rate in nonmetropolitan areas.
Rates of use were 6.5 percent in large metropolitan areas, 6.7 percent in small
metropolitan areas, and 5.1 percent in nonmetropolitan areas. Rural
nonmetropolitan counties had lower rates of illicit drug use than other
counties. Rates were 3.9 percent in completely rural counties and 4.5 percent
in less urbanized nonmetropolitan counties. This statistic however misses
the fact that among youths ages 12-17 the rates of illicit drug
use were essentially the same in rural areas as in metropolitan areas.
Another interesting and somewhat disturbing statistic is the use of alcohol in
different geographic regions. Among youths aged
12 to 17, rates of past month alcohol use as well as heavy alcohol use were
higher in rural areas (18.9%) than in large metropolitan areas (16.1%). Among young
adults aged 18 to 25, the rate of past month use was higher in large
metropolitan areas than rural areas, while there was no difference in heavy use
rates across these county types. For older adults (age 26 and older), past
month use was greater in large metropolitan areas while heavy use
was greater in rural areas. Among current users, the rates were the same for those who were
classified as heavy drinkers among various age groups. Similar patterns
of use are also noted among tobacco user, with slightly higher use rates in
rural areas than in metropolitan regions. These changes in trends of
substance abuse have important implications for metropolitan and rural health districts
alike. First with regards to the nation’s youth, patterns of substance
abuse are often viewed as a continuum, with tobacco and alcohol viewed as
“gateway” drugs, as mentioned previously. Theoretically the early use of
these substances leads to lifetime patterns of substance use, abuse and
potentially addiction. Also the lay press and political action groups
have for years highlighted violence in the inner city as causally linked to
substance use and abuse, with many of the effected being the youth of the
nation. However the rural areas of America have long been ignored despite
statistics such as these that highlight patterns of use among rural
youths. Recent newspaper reports have highlighted that the rates of both
nonviolent and violent crime associated with substance abuse have been
rising. What is particularly concerning about this is that many suburban
and rural police departments and public health agencies are ill equipped to
handle the rising issues of substance abuse.(NY times, Butterfield)
Tobacco use is likewise a dangerous and actionable area, given the long term
consequences of lifetime exposure to tobacco. Programs to educate the
nations youth regarding the long-term health risks of tobacco, alcohol and drug
use are necessary.
We have already explored the
definitions of substance abuse and addiction as well as estimates of the number
of people who are involved in the use of various substances. Now we
should focus on the short and long term consequences of the use of some of
these substances. A useful framework for examining this aspect of
substance abuse is to begin at a micro-, or personal level, and move to a more
macro or family and societal level.
On the personal or micro-
level, substance abuse has both physical and psychological effects. Since
the early 1980’s the rates of Human Immunodeficiency Virus transmission have
been linked with the “drug culture” of injectable drug use. Doubtless,
this was, and still is true. However, due to early success in a drop in
the number of new cases of HIV/AIDS that are injection drug use associated (36%
initially down to 28% in 2000) some may take the view that the epidemic of
HIV/AIDS is almost over. (CDC) This attitude may have dangerous consequences
for the individual and for the public health of the nation in general.
One recent report locally (Cleveland) is that for the first time since 1996 the
number of new HIV diagnoses actually rose in 2001. (McEnery) Whether this
related to the rate of intravenous drug use is unclear, however the intravenous
route of substance abuse is a clear route of blood borne transmission.
The danger of this is self evident both for the drug user and for those who
have close personal contact with the potential HIV carrier. The impact of
substance abuse in terms of physical illness is not limited purely to the user
him or herself. Many cases of HIV, Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C are linked
to the sexual transmission from the injection drug-using partner to his or her
mate. Also vertical transmission (mother to child) is a tragic and
striking problem. Strategies to limit the spread of these types of
diseases among drug using populations include access to community out reach
services, HIV testing and risk factor counseling, drug abuse treatment
programs, and access to sterile syringes (needle exchange programs).(NIDA) But
what about noninjection substance abuse-cocaine, crack, ecstasy, alcohol?
To the extent that the use and overuse of these substances leads to impairment
in judgment, potential promiscuous sexual behavior, unwanted sexual advances,
and violence the use of these agents are also causal pathways to many different
diseases. A recent well publicized report of college age individuals
estimated that 1,400 deaths per year are directly related to alcohol
abuse. In addition approximately 500,000 injuries and 70,000 cases of
sexual assault and date rape were related to alcohol. Likewise, 400,000
students aged 18-24 reported having had unprotected sex as a result of
drinking. (NIAAA)
Tobacco also has well
documented negative physical and psychological impacts both on the user and on
those exposed to environmental smoke. Data from the U.S. Centers for
Disease Control (CDC) put the number of deaths due to tobacco at 430,000 (the
leading cause of preventable death in the U.S.), and approximately 10 million
worldwide. Aside from death, tobacco smoke exposure has negative effects
on blood pressure, cardiovascular, pulmonary and immune function. Approximately
87% of lung cancers are attributable to smoking as well as the majority of
cases of emphysema and chronic bronchitis. The economic costs in terms of
direct health care expenditures and lost productivity to the United States are
estimated at $97.2 billion each year.
The extreme psychological
impact of substance abuse is addiction, which is described in the introductory
section of this chapter. Not until recently, however, has the topic of
addiction been dealt with as a medical illness. Prior to this time, persons
who were addicted to various substances were viewed as having “weak wills” or
personality flaws. While these stigmas continue to exist, and impair
discussions regarding substance abuse, increasingly addiction and substance
abuse are being viewed as a medical illness. This view has opened new and
innovative strategies for treatment. The CDC, for instance, has begun an
online campaign to highlight what we can realistically expect of substance
abuse treatment. One of the highlights that this web site nicely points
out is that treatment is an ongoing and evolving process, and that while a
“cure” may not always (or potentially ever) be possible, effective treatment
strategies are available. Additional information on the topic of
treatment will be highlighted below.
In terms of the impact of
substance abuse on the integrity of family units and the costs of substance
abuse to American society, the outlook is also grim. Estimates of the
incidence of substance abuse in the millions of reports of child maltreatment
(ranging from physical and psychological abuse, to neglect) range from 25 to 84
%( Moyers, Hester) with an average of 26%. A 1989 report by the National
Committee for the Prevention of Child Abuse estimated that 10 million children
were living in household with an adult substance abuser and that 675,000
children annually were seriously maltreated by substance abusing caretakers.
(Daro, Mitchell) Another well established link between parental substance
abuse and child issues is the development of fetal alcohol syndrome and later
life rates of developmental delay in these effected children.
The belief that alcoholism
causes domestic violence is a notion widely held both in and outside of the
substance abuse field, despite a lack of concrete information to support this.
Research indicates that among men who drink heavily, there is a higher rate of
perpetrating assaults resulting in serious physical injury than exists among
other men. However, the majority of abusive men are not high-level drinkers
and the majority of men classified as high-level drinkers do not abuse their
partners. (Zubretsky) Regardless of this the rates of injury to partners,
risk to children, and of sexual assault are higher in relation to substance
abuse. The integrity of the familial unit among substance abusing
partners is also in jeopardy.
The societal impacts of
substance abuse are also readily apparent. Substance abuse not only
impacts the individual and the family of the substance abusing individual, but
also has impacts on completely non-related parties. The substance abuser
has frequent contact with the criminal justice system through DUI, violence,
the courts and incarceration. Statistics from the National Highway and
Traffic Safety Administration(NHSTA), estimates that the number of people who
are injured in an alcohol related MVA is 25-40% of all accidents, or roughly
438,000 crashes per year (this may be an underestimation due to nonreporting
either by or to law enforcement). The economic estimates of these crashes
cost the US public over $110 billion in 1998 (>$40 billion in monetary costs
and an estimated $70 billion in loss in quality of life.) (NHSTA website)
The United States workforce
also bears a major burden of substance abuse. Although the rate
of substance abuse among the unemployed is higher than among the employed,
the vast majority of substance abusers (77%) work. (National Household
survey of drug abuse). Among full-time workers, it is estimated that 6.5%
are current illicit drug users, (>8.5% of part-time workers). The
impact from this substance abuse is on both the employer, and fellow
employees. Costs can be direct (lost days at work, accidents, errors) and
indirect (illness rates, employee morale). The monetary impact is large,
at approximately $81 billion in lost productivity per year. (USDHHS)
The costs of substance abuse
to the U.S. economy in general are also very large. The federal
government has waged a widely publicized “war on drugs” since the
mid-1980’s. Spending to finance this war has steadily increased since
1988, to an estimated $19.2 billion in 2000. States governments are
estimated to provide an additional $40 billion each year on anti-drug
policies.
To the extent that the use
of many substances is illegal, the trafficking, sale, and use of many drugs
also have a huge impact on the criminal justice system. The average cost
per prison inmate per year to taxpayers is approximately $20,000. For the
year 2000, 1.375 million adults were arrested for “drug abuse violations” and
an additional 203,000 juveniles were likewise arrested. Among state
prisons 57% of inmates admitted to using drugs in the month prior to their
arrest (45% among federal prisoners) in 1997. For use anytime in life
these numbers were 83% and 73% respectively. These statistics represent a
significant increase from a 1991 survey by the Department of Justice, Bureau of
Justice Statistics. Strategies to combat these rising numbers of
incarcerated who are involved in substance abuse are wide ranging. For
instance in 2000, California Proposition 36 or the Substance Abuse Crime
Prevention Act (SACPA) was passed by 61% of voters. Under this law,
“low-level” and non-violent drug offenders convicted of possession solely for
personal use are diverted into community based treatment programs rather than
incarceration. The program is still too new to determine success or
failure, however in seven California counties, over 9,500 persons who would
have been otherwise incarcerated, have been referred to treatment. The
economic justification for this program is that while a year in prison costs
taxpayers approximately $20,000/year, certain non-violent first time users can
be provided drug treatment and rehabilitation for approximately $5,000/year.
A similar program however has been in existence in Arizona since 1996 (Arizona
proposition 200). According to proponents of the program, Arizona
taxpayers were saved $6.7 million dollars in 1999. (Drug Policy Alliance)
The two state programs
mentioned above are good examples of changing attitudes toward substance
abuse. Rather than viewing this as a criminal and punishable activity,
abuse is now being seen as a treatable condition, much the same as mental
illness. For the current substance abuser or substance addict, what are
the prospects for rehabilitation and treatment? Is the substance abuser
doomed to a lifetime of relapse and recovery? What are the different
treatment options available and which one (s) work the best?
As knowledge of drug and
substance addiction has increased, there has been less of an emphasis on
substance abuse as a matter of personal choice or “lack of will power” on the
part of the substance abuser. The reality of treatment and the medical model of
substance abuse and addiction is that the substance abuser by and large cannot
get drug free without assistance. Also as addiction has been increasingly
viewed as a medical condition, there has been less of an emphasis on a quick
“cure”, and more on control of addiction much like a chronic disease. The
disease of addiction is multi-factorial, with roots in biology, physiology and
behavior. The most successful treatment programs address all of these
factors. The goal of substance abuse treatment is to help the individual
reduce or stop substance abuse altogether. The National Institute on Drug
Abuse has pointed out several keys to successful substance abuse treatment:
|
-Treatment should be readily
available to individuals who need it |
|
-Individuals need to be engaged
in treatment for an adequate period of time Participation in outpatient
or residential programs for less than 90 days is of limited or no
effectiveness Individuals should receive a minimum of 12 months of
methadone maintenance treatment |
|
-Treatment involves dynamic
decision processes requiring a person to decide to stay sober on a daily
basis. Recovery often involves relapse and multiple episodes of
treatment |
|
-Addiction is often accompanied
by many physical and mental health problems (so called dual or multiple
diagnoses), and treatment must incorporate considerations of these other
diagnoses. |
|
-Treatment works best if
tailored to the individual, i.e. there is no “one” right way to treat the
substance abuser/addict. Likewise it should be reassessed and adjusted
as needed. |
Links to the NIH/National
Institute on Drug Abuse are provided in the bibliography. Interested
readers are strongly recommended to review these documents as many useful,
evidence-based guidelines for effective substance abuse treatment are provided
in these documents.
More important than
treatment of the active substance abuser are effective strategies to prevent
the initiation of substance abuse. The above link to the National
Institute on Drug Abuse also has many useful links regarding tested programs
that are effective in preventing substance abuse. These “Prevention
Principles” include designer programs to enhance “protective factors” and
eliminating or reducing “risk factors” for substance abuse.
|
Protective factors for substance abuse |
Risk factors for substance abuse |
|
Strong
and positive bonds with a prosocial family |
Chaotic
home environments especially where parents are active substance abusers |
|
Parental
monitoring |
Ineffective
parenting |
|
Clear
rules of conduct that are consistently enforced |
Lack
of mutual attachment and nurturing |
|
Involvement
of parents in the lives of their children |
Overly
shy or aggressive behavior |
|
Success
in school performance |
Failure
in school performance |
|
Strong
bonds with other prosocial institutions |
Poor
social coping skills |
|
Adoption
of conventional social norms about drug abuse |
Affiliations
with deviant peers |
|
|
Perceptions
of approval of drug using behaviors in family, work, school etc |
|
|
|
Clearly prevention of
substance abuse is not as simple as teaching slogans such as “Just Say
No”. Instead the focus has to be on teaching life skills and on
identification of “at risk” youth and targeting these individuals with programs
designed to avoid the initiation of substance abuse.
Substance abuse is not a
condition that an individual willfully engages in.. Instead patterns of
behavior, coexisting mental and physical health issues often lead into
repetitive use, dependence and addiction over a gradual basis. Over time
and in the most severe cases, the securing of a steady source and the use of
various addictive substances can overwhelm even the most rational
minds. Fortunately as time has passed and attitudes have
slowly evolved, the negative label of drug addiction has somewhat worn off, and
more effective treatment and prevention programs have been developed. However
given the number of people who are injured every year due to the direct and
indirect consequences of substance abuse, we as a nation clearly have a long
way to go in terms of effective prevention and treatment strategies.
Substance abuse is clearly a
tremendous problem and as previously stated this introductory chapter only
introduces a framework for identifying some of the issues involved with
substance abuse and addiction. Substance abuse is certainly a topic with
its roots in public health, from the epidemiology of spread of addiction among
at risk populations to health care economics and health care policy. The
interested reader is strongly recommended to several of the selected references
in the following section for further information and statistics about this huge
and growing area of public health and public policy.
American
Lung Association. www.lungusa.org
Butterfield
F; “As drug use drops in big cities, small towns confront upsurge”; NY Times,
section A, page 1, column 1
Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention www.cdc.gov
Links are available to specific information regarding HIV transmission,
surveillance and efforts to limit the spread of HIV disease
Chung
PH, Garfield CF, et al; “Youth Targeting by Tobacco Manufacturers since the
Master Settlement Agreement”; Health Affairs, 21(3): 254-163, (2002).
Cook
PJ, Moore MJ; “The Economics of Alcohol Abuse and Alcohol Control Policies”;
Health Affairs, 21(3): 120-133, 2002.
Daro
D, Mitchell L; “Child Abuse Fatalities continue to rise: Results of the
1988 annual fifty state survey” (fact sheet #14) Chicago: National
Committee for Prevention of Child Abuse.
Des
Jarlais DC, Marmor M, Friedmann P, et al; “HIV incidence among Injection Drug
Users in New York City, 1992-1997: Evidence for a Declining Epidemic”;
American Journal of Public Health; 90(3) 352-359, 2000.
The
Drug Policy Alliance, Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000,
California Proposition 36. www.prop36.org
Drug
Policy Alliance; Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000, progress
report; March 2002.
Goldstein,
A; Addiction, from biology to drug policy; 1994, W.H. Freeman and
company.
Grossman
M, Chaloupka FJ, Shim K; “Illegal Drug use and Public Policy”, Health Affairs,
21 (3): 134-145, (2002)
Gruber
J; “The Economics of Tobacco Regulation”; Health Affairs, 21(3): 146-162,
(2002).
Kosterman
R, Hawkins JD, Guo J, et al; “The Dynamics of Alcohol and Marijuana
Initiation: Patterns and Predictors of First Use in Adolescence”;
American Journal of Public Health; 90(3) 360-366, 2000.
McCrady
BS, Epstein EE, Addictions a comprehensive guidebook, ed McCrady BS,
Epstein EE, Oxford University Press, New York, 1999
McEnery,
R; “HIV diagnoses in Cleveland rise for 1st time since ‘96”; The
Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 3, 2002, b1.
National
Highway Traffic and Safety Administration. www.nhtsa.dot.gov search alcohol and
impaired driver.
National
Household Drug Abuse Survey, statistics on drug use and abuse indexed by
various subgroups (inner city vs. rural, age groups, etc). Office of Applied
Statistics of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA) division of the U.S. department of Health and Human Services. www.samhsa.gov link to the office of applied
statistics.
National
Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, www.niaaa.nih.gov/press/2002/college.htm
National
Institute on Drug Abuse. Principles of drug addiction treatment: a
research-based guide. NIH Publication No. 99-4180. http://165.112.78.61/PODAT/PODATindex.html
“Substance
Related Disorders” in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychiatry, 4th
edition; Washington, DC American Psychiatric Association
United
States Department of Labor www.dol.gov
working partners, small business workplace kit.
United
States Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics www.usdoj.gov.bjs
United
States Department of Health and Human Services, substance abuse and mental
health services administration www.samhsa.gov
“substance abuse and mental health services sourcebook”. 1995.
Woody
GE, Cacciola J; Diagnosis and Classification: DSM-IV and ICD 10 in Substance
Abuse a Comprehensive Textbook 3rd edition, Editors Lowinson,
Ruiz, Millman and Langrod. Williams and Wilkins.
Zubretsky,
Theresa M. and Karla M. Digirolamo. 1996. "The False Connection Between
Adult Domestic Violence and Alcohol." Helping Battered Women, 1st edition.
Ed., Albert R. Roberts.