Except for the Northeast, methamphetamine use continued to decline in every other part of the United States last year, according to a report from one of the the nation's largest drug-testing companies. Officials said the crackdown on the over-the-counter drugs and chemicals used to manufacture meth is the main reason for the decline in the drug's use.
According to Quest Diagnostics, a drug-testing company in New Jersey, the number of employees who tested positive for methamphetamine use dropped 22 percent in 2007 compared with 2006. Quest also reported that cocaine use dropped 19 percent in 2007, the largest decline in more than 10 years.
Meth Lab Seizures Down
Meanwhile, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration reported that the number of meth lab seized in the U.S. dropped from 7,347 in 2006 to only 5,080 in 2007.
The Quest report did show an increase of positive tests for amphetamines last year, up five percent from the previous year, suggesting that some users may be substituting the less powerful amphetamines for meth.
The report was based on data from 8.3 million workplace drug tests conducted in the U.S.
More About Meth:
- The Health Effects of Methamphetamine
- Books About Methamphetamine and Meth Addiction
- The Face of Meth Use
- 'Meth Mouth' No Myth for Dentists
If you actually follow the meth situation, what you really see, particularly in the last seven months is a massive resurgence of meth labs, and way more meth being seized in general. Border seizures are way up, as well as seizures in most states and regions. And the individual amounts seized keep getting larger and larger.
The Federal government commissions these so-called studies to come up with the exact findings they want them to. They wanted to justify cutting back state funding for meth enforcement, and they needed a study to rationalize and justify it. And that’s exactly what they got.
I cannot see how workplace testing for meth in facilities where testng is Federally mandated has any bearing on how much meth is or isn’t being used. Meth addicts aren’t in the habit of applying for these types of jobs.
In my opinion, the study is rubbish and pure propaganda.
I agree that the conclusions presented in this article from the statistics are flawed. I wondered at the outset “what are they measuring to come up with this conclusion?” While I do think workplace positive rates have some bearing on actual use — these are not just SAMHSA (federal) tests — and regular people in average jobs get caught up in meth all the time. However, I specifically remember that this same report last year included the news that 2006 cocaine (+) rates were up sharply from 2005. So, to report now that they are down 19% from 2006 . . . does that return them to historically average, or is that a real trend? This article is incomplete and therefore misleading. Give us some credit for critical thinking; put some depth into it or leave the topic alone.
You are right. The headline should have been written to indicate that the study was reporting that workplace meth use declined, not necessarily overall meth use.
I have changed the headline to reflect that.
BuddyT
. . . and I didn’t need to be so bratty. Not everyone has spent the last 19 years immersed in workplace testing. Your audience is much broader than that, and you do a great job of keeping track of multiple tangents. Sorry for the tone.