(Page 3 of 9 In This Section)

 

"Epidemic" Or Simply Hype?

 

Back in 2006, there were many who were cynical about the methamphetamine problem, and based most of their opinion on studies and surveys that were conducted in the latter part of that year.  On the basis of those studies and surveys, they arrived at the conclusions outlined below.  This is relevant today as we head in to the summer of 2008, because these same methods of measurement are still being used today to "monitor" the extent of the meth problem in the U.S.  And as you'll find out, they were inherently flawed then and are still flawed now.  And we feel this is important, because if you're trying to start a coalition, raise funds for a task force, or retain your funding, you might have to address some of these arguments from those that are still cynical (or in denial) about the meth issue.

"The survey in 2006 indicated among other things, there's less meth being used right now in North America overall."

Well now in 2008, we realize how completely wrong this "finding" was, but at the time, we had a few questions as to how the "survey" was conducted.  For example, who did this survey, who was actually surveyed, and how did they conduct the survey?  From what we could learn, the agency that did the survey was the "National Survey On Drug Use and Health," and who they surveyed is the "household" population.

As a result, that "survey" excludes those in prison, jail, residential treatment facilities, dormitories, single people, the homeless population, people not included in census data, people at work, and people in the military.

Well obviously this is not exactly what you could call an accurate cross-section of the population, and in fact, it actually excludes most of those areas where you're likely to find the highest concentration of meth users, or for that matter, drug users in general.  In October of 2006, the U.S. Department of Justice figures indicated that prior methamphetamine use among state and federal prisoners had increased, and particularly among women.  Why were they excluded from the survey?

And here's a real shocker - not only is there a negative stigma about substance abuse and addiction in general, there's a extra negative stigma about meth use.  In many user circles, meth users are considered "the lowest of the low."  Those convicted of meth crimes also seem to receive inordinately harsh sentences, particularly when it comes to manufacture and distribution.  So outside of their personal "meth circle," meth users are reluctant to willingly admit to drug use, much less use of meth.

Meth Users Aren't Famous For Participating In Surveys

The hard-core meth addict is anti-social and paranoid, often in the extreme.  Outside their circle of other meth users and "associates," they have a chronic mistrust of everyone, and are in various states of "high-alert" paranoia, or post-binge crash 95% of the time.  Everything the meth addict experiences is at a wildly exaggerated level, and as a result, meth addicts don't exactly qualify as ideal candidates for taking "household surveys" on methamphetamine use, by phone or in person. 

So if your "survey" is trying to identify the extent of meth use, and by it's nature, it's excluding the very people it's trying to identify, how accurate or relevant are your findings?   This is like surveying people in Florida in mid-July to see how many people have been ice skating in the past week.  And if your survey is trying to identify people who are in any way involved with a drug that carries such a strong negative stigma, and for which there are serious legal penalties if you're caught, you'd get more positive responses if you were asking people how many of them cheated on their taxes last year.

For that reason, we didn't put much faith in that aspect of that "survey," not would we today in 2007.

There's Less Meth Coming In To North America?

There's less meth coming in?  The Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security issued an interim report that covered illegal immigration and well as drug smuggling, and according to Federal authorities, there is a tidal wave of drugs coming over the U.S. border, and an ever-increasing part of that tidal wave is methamphetamine.  A 2006 report by the DEA revealed total cocaine usage in the U.S. at 36.5 percent, topped only by methamphetamine at 38.8 percent.

Take a look at the picture to the left.  What you're looking at is the largest drug cash seizure in history.  It's 205 million dollars in U.S. one hundred dollar bills and it weighs two and a quarter tons. And this money came from methamphetamine, a drug described by some as "over-blown hype," and others as "a problem on the decline" based on yet more "surveys."

So Let's Take The Year 2005:

Of the nearly 8.5 tons of methamphetamine seized by Federal law enforcement in 2005, Border Patrol personnel were responsible for seizing 728 pounds, and they estimate that what they seize is likely 10 to 20% of the real amount coming across. But let's be real, nobody really knows - it might be one-tenth of one percent and it might even be lower than that.

But even using their estimates, that means what actually came across the border in 2005 was between 3.64 tons and 1.8 tons of methamphetamine. Now apply that same formula to the 8.5 tons of meth seized by all Federal Law Enforcement (excluding the Coast Guard.) As you will see, the numbers go into the stratosphere.

Or Take The Year 2006:

And what about 2006, the year in which these "meth is not a problem" surveys were done?  According to Customs Officials along the U.S. - Mexican Border, the most alarming rise in 2006 of illicit drug smuggling was methamphetamine in crystal or ice form - the most refined and purest forms.  The DEA seized more than two metric tons of methamphetamine on the Southwest Border in 2006, a 129 percent increase (Source: Gallup Independent - April 30th, 2007)  Again, keep in mind, this is the year that so many were saying that the meth problem was "under control" and/or on its way out."

 By July of 2006, the total amount of meth seized already exceeded what was seized for all of 2005.  In Canada as well, we have precursor chemicals coming in by the ton and they're certainly not all because the general population has the sniffles.  Meth seizures specifically at California's ports of entry rose 40 percent in the last year.  And since 2002, meth seizures at the border at El Paso, Texas, jumped 479%.

Or Take The Year 2007:

According to Senator Tim Bee, president of the Arizona Senate who represents District 30 in southern Arizona, Border Patrol report that four months into their 2007 fiscal year, they have already seized more cocaine and methamphetamine than in all of 2006.  That means that even the rate of increase from 2006 to 2007 over 2005 to 2006 is growing at a staggering rate.  Just look at one bust in Long Beach, California on April 11th, 2007 - 220 pounds of crystal meth in one bust.  Or let's go east to Ridley Township in Pennsylvania, where they seized 1.5 million in meth on April 12th, 2007.  And the cynics say there's less meth coming into North America?  Are they delusional?

As we close out May and head in to June 2007, in border states like Texas, all-time records have been broken for amounts of cocaine, marijuana, and methamphetamine seized.  And don't look at that as a "Texan problem," or a "border state" problem, it's a North American problem, because what's smuggled into the border states clearly doesn't all stay in the border states, it's distributed everywhere from there.

 

Top Of Page

| 1 | 2 | Previous Pages

                                                         >>>Next Page (4)