Historical Analysis of Drug Abuse

Historical Analysis of Drug Abuse

Introduction

The problem of illicit drug abuse and addiction can be traced back for centuries. However, it has been challenging to understand the nature of the issue due to social attitudes and scientific theories that are dominant at the time. The problem of drug abuse affects people from all walks of life, regardless of race, age, and background. People begin using drugs for different reasons; some want to experiment with drugs out of curiosity, because friends are doing it, to have a good time, or to ease problems such as anxiety, stress, or depression. Currently, the issue of drug abuse is becoming a lifestyle trend that is prevalent in poor and rich countries. Addiction to drugs, alcohol, and smoking of cigarettes is now regarded as a public health problem. Drug addiction has extreme action of the nervous system, especially the brain. Some of the drugs such as cocaine, opium, caffeine, marijuana, psilocybin, and mescaline are found from natural resources, while others are designer or synthetic drugs (Merritt 37).

Additionally, some of the drugs such as nicotine and alcohol are legal, while others can be obtained legally through prescription and have the potential to be addictive. Most of the addictive drugs are illegal in many countries hence the emergence of the illicit drug trafficking business that is often linked with criminal activities. The use of these drugs induces a state of wellbeing, reward, and euphoria that may lead to psychological and physical dependencies. Withdrawal syndrome happens when people try to stop substance abuse leading to a dependency cycle. Dr. Benjamin Rush, the founder of the first medical school in the United States and a signer of the independence declaration, is one of the pioneers of drug abuse research in the US (Merritt 38). He, however, faced the challenge of a shortage of resources to study the issue. It was challenging to understand the effect of substance abuse without the knowledge of complex cellular biochemistry, a technology developed in the latter decade. This paper provides a historical analysis of the problem of drug abuse research to resolve the issue of drug addiction experienced today.

The funding of drug abuse research has increased over the years from 1960 from grants by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) (Stanton 13). However, significant research on the topic of substance use began much earlier. Variations in the study have led to changes in professional and popular attitudes towards illegal drugs and users and also provide information on the relationship between drug policies and scientific findings. Benefits, as well as modern problems of drug use, can be attributed to technological and scientific progress. Morphine was the first addictive product obtained from natural resources, excluding distilled spirits. Morphine was extracted from crude opium in 1806 by a German pharmacist known as FWA Serturner and revolutionized the control of pain as it contained 10% crude opium (Razjouyan 1217). The first study of morphine addiction was done by Levinstein in 1875, who identified critical addictive elements in the drug that warranted research (Razjouyan 1217). He identified the fixation of the drug that made it a priority even when the user’s life was on the decline and the withdrawal effect that could get reversed by providing more opiate. At the turn of the century, researchers used the approach used to investigate infectious diseases, antibodies and antigens, and the immune system to study the effects of drug abuse and addiction. It was boosted by the rapid developments seen in the pharmacology and biochemistry. It created a form of medical optimism that it was possible to end the issue of drug abuse and addiction.

The medical optimism, however, came to an end around the time of the first world war with extensive drug abuse occurring in the United States. A growing fear of substance abuse developed due to the combination of heroin, opium, morphine, and cocaine. More restrictive legislation was established to deal with the association of cocaine with African Americans, opium with Chinese immigrants, and morphine addiction with careless physicians, which led to secure access to the drugs. The Harrison anti-narcotics act was established in 1914 as a way of fighting and controlling the distribution of cocaine and opiates in AS (Burt 92). The Harrison Act indicated that the treasury department would not be responsible for maintaining nonmedical addicts of narcotics to prevent withdrawal, and it should not get considered as sound medical practice. The federal government then began prosecuting doctors that prescribed drugs for that purpose. The interpretation of the law was later ratified in 1919 by the supreme court (Winters 51). The controversial position against the maintenance of those using narcotics by the national treasury as it intruded the medical practice and also the hypothesis developed by Gioffredi and Valenti that use of opiates leads to permanent physiological changes by the creation of a toxin or antibodies (Winters 51). This theory provided support to those who considered addiction a disease that required medical help. An assistant chemist in New York City by the name Pellini published a negation of their suggestion. It was then concluded that there was no organic basis for addiction and withdrawal, and the issue was more psychological and functional.

The research to addiction became more controversial after 1919 because research would find evidence that would prompt the establishment of policies to support drug addicts (Gizyatova 905). The level of drug abuse research done in the 1920s was low as the public health service only produced an estimate of the number of people affected by drugs (Gizyatova 905).  In 1913, the Rockefeller institute supported drug research identifying it as a social problem that needed to be solved (Gizyatova 906).

A national research council on drugs was then formed to provide further direction on the best way to handle the issue of drug addiction. It involved medical school researchers, government scientists, and the federal bureau of narcotics. The committee decided that further sociological studies were necessary to help contain the drug situation. They chose to use morphine as their target drug test as it was considered to be more addictive compared to cocaine and other drugs. The goal of the study was to find substitutes that were not habit-forming. The research to find a method to treat substance addiction continued after world war II, with firms contributing funds to support it. Universities and pharmaceutical companies contributed to the research by funding it and also carrying out their research. In 1961, the committee received assistance from the World Health Organization and Veterans Administration to study the dependency of drugs (Olszewska 288). In 1965, it changed its name to the committee on problems of drug dependence to meet the new definition of addiction as propagated by WHO (Olszewska 288).

The period between world war I and 1960 led to the loss of faith in the fight of treating addiction to narcotics (Tempalski 364). The federal drug policy became more focused on controlling narcotics through law enforcement. Prevention and treatment for those addicted became of less importance. The unprecedented increase in the number of people using drugs, especially marijuana, was confronted by law enforcement. The rise in drug use may have resulted from the political and social turmoil, including the gaps caused by the Vietnam war. A comprehensive drug abuse and control act of 1970 was established in an attempt to deal with the increasing use of drugs by imposing penalties on those found in possession of illicit drugs, especially marijuana. They also created categories of medications based on the extent of the effect or dangerousness. A new commission called to the National Commission on Marijuana, and drug Abuse was established to report about issues linked to drug use in the country (VanGeest 16).

Graphic Illustration

Drug abuse and addiction became an issue of national concern in the 1970s due to changes in the use pattern of drugs. The Ford Foundation provided a grant of $17500 to a drug abuse survey project to determine what should get done to end the issue of drug use (American Addiction Centers Editorial Staff). The support for drug abuse research continued in the 1980s with a national alarm raised over the substance abuse problem. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) was established from the drug abuse office and treatment act of 1972 in an attempt to find a cure for drug abuse and as a way of responding to public fear of drug use among the youth and the fear that war veterans from Vietnam addicted to drugs would be a threat to social order (American Addiction Centers Editorial Staff). The establishment of NIDA was an indication that the government did not expect the drug problem to go away any time soon, and sustainable research on the prevention, treatment, and drug abuse biology was a national necessity. Over the years, the budget set for drug abuse research and treatment has varied depending on external grant funding. The cost of drug abuse is economically taxing in the United States. The cost estimates that lost work productivity and crime are over $600 billion that is equivalent to 17.1% of the United States budget (American Addiction Centers Editorial Staff). Addiction researchers use demographics such as gender, age, drug of abuse, geography, and other characteristics to understand the scale and scope of addiction. The information can then be used by policymakers to design better treatment and prevention programs. NIDA has a mission statement to “lead the nation in bringing the power of science to bear on drug abuse and addiction.” NIDA collects, analyzes, and publishes drug abuse data in the USA, providing statistical data across a range of various drugs such as marijuana, alcohol, heroin, and cocaine. It is, however, disappointing to find that not many drug users seek drug treatment, as indicated in the chart below. According to SAMHSA, 23.5 million people in the US required treatment for drug abuse problems (American Addiction Centers Editorial Staff). Of this, only 11% seek medical treatment (American Addiction Centers Editorial Staff). It means that only one person in ten seeks treatment. It is a disappointment to researchers who have put a lot of effort into trying to treat and end the problem of drug use in society.

fig. 1 statistical data across a range of drugs and the number of patients seeking treatment (American Addiction Centers Editorial Staff)

Conclusion

The issue of drug abuse has evolved to be a menace in the community leading to increased cases of crime as addicts find methods to fund their drug behavior. A lot of research has been done by institutions and scientists to find treatment for drug dependence and to prevent addiction. The government has also established different policies in its efforts to fight drug use. The number of people using drugs has increased over the years, making drug addiction a national problem in the US. A lot of people require treatment for drug use, although most of the users do not seek treatment. Researchers must continue developing ways to end the substance abuse problem to ensure the community is free from deaths caused by the issue.

Annotated bibliography

VanGeest, Jonathan B., Timothy P. Johnson, and Sonia A. Alemagno. “History of substance abuse research in the United States.” Research methods in the study of substance abuse. Springer, Cham, 2017. 3-25.

The article is written by Jonathan Vangeest, Timothy Johnson, and Alemagno Sonia affiliated to the department of health policy and management.it evaluates the long history of drug abuse in the US and evaluates its development from the nineteenth century to present. It also examines the science of addiction research. It is divided into chapters for ease of understanding.

Saloner, Brendan, and Colleen L. Barry. “Ending the opioid epidemic requires a historic investment in medication-assisted treatment.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 37.2 (2018): 431-438.

The article is written by Brendan Saloner and Barry colleen affiliated to the department of the orthopedics University of Zurich. It provides information on some of the factors leading to the use of opioids in the US and how the problem can be addressed. The article offers some of the strategies that should be used to reduce the effects of drug abuse and improve life quality for people with opioid use disorder. It has headings and subheadings for ease of understanding.

Works Cited

American Addiction Centers Editorial Staff. “Drug Abuse Statistics: Exploring Research, Stats And Trends”. Drugabuse.Com, 2013, https://drugabuse.com/statistics-data/. Accessed 12 Mar 2020.

Bauer, David E., et al. “Total knee arthroplasty in patients with a history of illicit intravenous drug abuse.” International orthopaedics 42.1 (2018): 101-107.

Burt, Marvin R. Drug abuse: Its natural history and clinical treatment. Routledge, 2017.

Durrant, Russil, and Jo Thakker. Substance use and abuse: Cultural and historical perspectives. Sage, 2003.

Gizyatova, Landysh A. “A historical perspective on the issue of youth drug abuse in Great Britain and Russia: Problem solving styles and approaches.” Man, in India 96.3 (2016): 899-906.

Merritt, Darcey, et al. “Parental history of drug abuse on potentially problematic youth substance use behaviors longitudinally indicated by CRAFFT scores.” APHA’s 2019 Annual Meeting and Expo (Nov. 2-Nov. 6). American Public Health Association, 2019.

Olszewska, Edyta. Drug abuse problem and ways of solving it in Poland. Diss. Zakład Filozofii i Etyki w Administracji, 2019.

Porter, Joseph H., Adam J. Prus, and Donald A. Overton. “Drug discrimination: historical origins, important concepts, and principles.” The Behavioral Neuroscience of Drug Discrimination. Springer, Cham, 2018. 3-26.

Razjouyan, Katayoon, et al. “Data on the prevalence of addiction to the Internet among individuals with a history of drug abuse.” Data in brief 21 (2018): 1216-1219.

Saloner, Brendan, and Colleen L. Barry. “Ending the opioid epidemic requires a historic investment in medication-assisted treatment.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 37.2 (2018): 431-438.

Shukla, Samarth, and Enrique Gomez Pomar. “Perinatal drug abuse and neonatal drug withdrawal.” StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing, 2019.

Stanton, Bonita F. “Substance Abuse in the United States: It’s Not New News.” Pediatric Clinics 66.6 (2019): xv-xvi.

Sundquist, Jan, et al. “Neighborhood linking social capital as a predictor of drug abuse: A Swedish national cohort study.” Addictive behaviors 63 (2016): 37-44.

Tempalski, Barbara, et al. “Predictors of historical change in drug treatment coverage among people who inject drugs in 90 large metropolitan areas in the USA, 1993–2007.” Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy 15.1 (2020): 3.

VanGeest, Jonathan B., Timothy P. Johnson, and Sonia A. Alemagno. “History of substance abuse research in the United States.” Research methods in the study of substance abuse. Springer, Cham, 2017. 3-25.

Winters, Ken, et al. “Assessing adolescent alcohol and other drug abuse.” The Oxford Handbook of Adolescent Substance Abuse. 2017.