Friday, December 11, 2009
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Science Writing
November 27, 2009
“That New Home Smell….”
By Phil Ammann
It all starts with a smell…
At first, it seems the acrid scent is a ‘new home’ odor of freshly completed construction. A little like a brand new car.
In early 2006, Robert Morris purchased his home, a contemporary Mediterranean styled townhome bathed in fashionable earth tones. The new three-story structure sits on the edge of a peaceful community 45 miles inland from the Gulf of Mexico.
Robert expected the smell to go away eventually.
He hoped.
An annoying blend of rotten egg and ash, the odor in his condominium is truly obnoxious. It comes from dihydrogen sulfide, carbonyl sulfide and carbon disulfide gases. Each is emissions from the sulfur-laden drywall imported through German manufacturer Knauf Plasterboard and sold to builders in the United States. Manufacturing the drywall was Knauf’s plant in Tianjin; a thriving industrial center located south of Beijing, China.
The U.S. imported 6.2 million sheets of drywall from China in 2006, totaling about 67.3 million pounds. Much of it used in the construction and repair projects throughout Florida and the Gulf Coast.
Chinese drywall entered the U.S. as early as 2002, sold mainly through retailers such as Lowes and Home Depot. Both companies have since discontinued selling the Knauf product. Beazer Homes used Knauf Plasterboard to build the interior of Robert’s home.
Robert Morris’ home is in a quiet middle-class community named Hampton Lakes, just outside of Tampa. Only four years old, Hampton Lakes is one of the instant communities typical to Florida. The entire complex sprang up almost overnight. It was as the quick growing St. Augustine grass used in their lush, green lawns.
In his tastefully designed living room, Robert tensely sits on a tan leather sofa. He had always prided himself as an industrious man whose family owns several ice-cream trucks. Nevertheless, children are not buying as many treats as they once did. Due to the sagging economy, Robert was also forced to close his interior design office in North Tampa. Times have been tough.
Robert paid $300,000 for his home in 2006. It was a time when his fortunes were better. At the time, the condominium seemed to be a good purchase. He had even considered buying the unit next door. Now Robert sees his home, as well as his investment, as “worthless.”
All due to the smell.
“It is going to be a bad year for Florida,” Robert says. “I am forced to leave my home and find a second place to live.” His voice rises in frustration, “I just can’t afford it.”
“For example, I spend three times my normal electric bill running my air conditioner just to get the smell out.”
The smell had not gotten better at all. It was worse. Seeping into everything within its reach, the stench fouls everything Robert owns. However, the odor is only part of his problem.
Robert is coping with the same trouble affecting hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Floridians. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission in the past 12 months received over 1900 complaints from families with tainted Chinese drywall. Nearly 75 percent of the complaints have been from Florida.
The first warning sign is the smell. The odor permeates carpets, upholstery, drapes and all surfaces in the home. People in 26 states have been found to be living with the same black oxidation, the same rotting wiring and plumbing. It is more than just a nuisance.
Families living in the homes also are suffering from the same nosebleeds, asthma, headaches and breathing problems.
William Bracken is president of Bracken Engineering, a Tampa firm that specializes in the repair and remediation of buildings damaged by environmental disasters. For the most part, his expertise comes from dealing with hurricanes and mold.
Bracken is a man who understands Chinese drywall. He is acutely aware of the huge economic result in the removal and repair of homes affected by the contaminated product. Several insurance companies and construction firms have contracted Bracken’s company to develop a solution, as well as estimates of overall cost, for Floridians.
Today he sits in the book-lined conference room of his corporate office, quietly relating difficulties in the Chinese drywall crisis. To Bracken, the issue is to separate legitimate contractors from sharks preying on people’s fears. He stressed the need for uniformity to protect consumers and builders.
“There are highly skilled individuals and then there are people who can turn a mountain into a molehill,” Bracken says. He speaks in the measured tones of an engineer accustomed to precision. “You are going to have an individual that tells consumers there is only one room affected and then there are people that will say the whole home needs removal.”
Sulfur is present in most drywall, according to Bracken. However, Chinese imports have much higher levels of toxic chemicals. In an April 2009 test, the EPA discovered not only elevated sulfur amounts—nearly 14 times the level of domestic brands—but also strontium levels as much as three times that of North American brands. Strontium is an element found frequently in radioactive fallout. Preliminary testing by the Florida Department of Health also discovered elevated levels of sulfur emissions in Chinese drywall over domestic gypsum board.
Bracken is working with the Florida Department of Health and several insurance firms to develop protocols to address Chinese drywall claims. It could ultimately affect thousands of residents forced out of their homes by the smell.
Tom Herman, a former Lennar Homes contractor who has built over 10,000 homes, believes Chinese drywall could eventually cost homeowners between 15 and 20 billion dollars. He now works exclusively with homeowners affected by Chinese drywall. Herman has over 35 years of experience as a general contractor, both with Lennar and US Homes.
“You should have your home inspected now,” Herman says. “Before your builder has difficulties and drywall suppliers and builders go out of business.” Herman and Bracken both see the reluctance of insurance companies to address repairs to effected homes.
“The insurance companies need a game plan to understand exactly where the problem lies,” Bracken says. “They want to know exactly when the drywall gets inside the house.”
That smell in Robert’s home comes from a long list of chemicals, the worst being dihydrogen sulfide, a noxious gas leaching from the walls of his home. In a press release, Beazer estimated at least 18 homes in the Hampton Lakes subdivision contains tainted drywall.
Sitting in the conference room Bracken is dressed in comfortable khaki shorts and a shirt stitched with the “Bracken Engineering” logo over the breast pocket. He apologizes for his casual appearance, explaining that he is preparing for a trip to the Middle East. On the large meeting table sits a folder about two inches thick, brought in by his secretary. The folder overflows with reports from testing laboratories and the Florida Department of Health.
“The smell is not the problem; the problem is corrosive gas. The gas attaches to soft metal, metals that with the most electrical potential, like gold and copper,” says Bracken. He opens the folder and thumbs through the pages.
“It creates a black film on the metal. It seems to like copper the best. You have it in your electrical wiring and air conditioning; you also have precious metals in your computers.”
The caustic gas turns wiring black, disintegrates piping and causing a list of health problems, including headaches and asthma. Most are in homes only four to five years old.
The U. S. Centers for Disease Control, in a September bulletin, listed symptoms of drywall emissions as “irritated and itchy eyes and skin, difficulty breathing, persistent cough, bloody noses, runny noses, recurrent headaches, sinus infection and asthma attacks.”
Tainted drywall has made Lisa Conti a busy woman. As the Director of the Florida Division of Environmental Health, she is responsible five separate bureaus: Environmental Public Health Medicine, Onsite Sewage Programs, Community Environmental Health, Water Programs, Radiation Control and the Office of Environmental Health Informatics and Preparedness. Dr. Conti, in her little spare time, volunteers as a clinical veterinarian.
In her quarterly department update, Conti declared, “our indoor air and toxicology staff at the local and state levels identified the problem.” They have been working energetically to develop an understanding of the degree Chinese drywall will impact Floridians.
“Our environmental epidemiologists are addressing the possibility of excess cancers in several communities,” Conti added.
Engineering firms and contractors are scrambling to meet the growing demands for drywall testing and repair. They have been working with states and federal agencies in developing protocols for the removal of tainted drywall. A “protocol” is a list of approved methods to identify and remove defective products, agreed upon by builders and the insurance industry. It offers all parties involved a checklist for replacement and remediation.
Replacement is only the part of the solution. For Robert and other homeowners, a protocol must include handling of personal possessions spoiled by sulfuric discharge.
“What about my appliances that stopped working,” Robert says. “Or my computers that shorted out? How about the carpeting and furniture? It’s all smells like rotten eggs.”
The rotten egg smell is from the emission of sulfur trioxide. When exposed to water vapor—plentiful in the humid climate of the Gulf Coast—sulfur trioxide quickly converts to sulfuric acid. Preliminary testing by the Florida Department of Health discovered levels of sulfur emissions three times higher in Chinese drywall than domestic gypsum board. Sulfur gas emissions are linked to instances of failure in electrical wiring, air-conditioning tubing and electronic products like computers and home security systems.
When Robert received a letter from Beazer Homes last July, informing him of the reason his home smells, he was shocked. It was just the beginning of the personal nightmare with his polluted home. Nobody foresaw problems with drywall. But like a dragon in a Chinese parade, the crisis has now begun to rear its massive head.
“Beazer wanted me to sign off from suing,” Robert says, “in exchange for replacement of only the drywall and nothing else.”
Soon afterwards, Robert received a letter from American HomeLife, his insurance carrier. They explained his policy would not cover repairs of tainted drywall. The responsibility for remediation falls on the builder.
Robert Morris, like thousands of others, is sitting on a cresting wave of alarm. Homeowners, lawyers, builders and insurance companies look to Florida and Louisiana, as well as the federal government, for leadership. Everyone involved is desperate for a roadmap in handling the thousands of stinking homes, rotting wiring and plumbing failures.
Using Chinese drywall in the Gulf Coast only intensifies the problem. When in contact with the humidity common in the Gulf States, sulfur content in gypsum releases corrosive sulfuric acid gases. Moisture seeps into the wallboard and mixes with drywall components, including sulfur and fly ash.
“If left alone, drywall does not do anything. Unactivated, the chemicals sit dormant. The problem comes in when you introduce moisture,” says Bracken. “When you add the water either in elevated humidity or ‘pre-water’ in the form of droplets, the chemicals react chemically and creates the gas.”
Seen as a health risk and a likely carcinogen by the EPA, fly ash is a common byproduct of coal production. Fly ash is also a component in Chinese gypsum, with levels three times higher than domestic and Canadian drywall.
The housing boom in 2004-2006 rested on a desire for homes to come in “on the cheap.” Builders needed projects completed on time and under budget. Pressured to maximize potential profits, they were hamstringed by mounting shortages of materials.
They began relying on available supplies of inexpensive Chinese drywall to meet scheduling needs. In every step of construction, crews worked to finish projects quickly. The push to maximize profits resulted in the increased use of imported materials.
On the horizon lies a myriad of health troubles and threats of massive lawsuits. Compounding the situation for builders is the potential of a huge financial debacle stemming from replacement costs of the defective products. Legal fees and medical bills follow repair and replacement costs. Owners in Hampton Lakes, lead by Robert Morris, filed a federal class action lawsuit scheduled to be heard January in the Federal District Court in Louisiana.
In July, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission sent Chairperson Inez Tenenbaum to visit the home of Richard and Patricia Kampf of Cape Coral. Florida had become central to the issue, with as many as100,000 homes built with the tainted material. By that time, the CPSC had received over 1300 complaints from homeowners.
Tenenbaum’s visit became the first public display of the Federal government’s acknowledgment of signs of trouble in Gulf Coast, where recovery from Hurricane Katrina produced surges in reconstruction projects.
A growing list of polluted products from China—from toys containing lead to sulfur laden drywall—has prompted lawmakers to act. The federal government is now beginning to pressure China for assistance.
U. S. Senator Bill Nelson (R-FL) recently expressed his concern over the Chinese Government’s response to the drywall crisis. Drywall was on President Obama’s agenda on his recent visit to Mainland China.
“This is a disaster just like a hurricane, people are having to move out of their houses but, at the end of the day, you've got to find a responsible party that will make these homeowners whole and that's the government of China,” Nelson said. “Because it's the Chinese government that allowed defective Chinese toys years ago to come in and they're allowing this defective Chinese drywall.”
On November 17, U. S. Representative Charles Melancon (D-LA) introduced House Bill 4094, titled the “Drywall Victims Insurance Protection Act of 2009.” The bill will “prohibit insurers from canceling or refusing to renew homeowner’s insurance policies because of the presence of certain types of drywall in the home.” Intended to support people like Robert Morris, it will assist those caught in the grip of the “silent hurricane.”
This is not the first time Florida has been at the forefront of trouble. It has been a magnet for problems for much of the past century.
Waves of retirees, ne’er-do-wells and deal seekers have always made their way south to the Sunshine State. Most were looking for a new life, or to escape their old ones.
Florida has long been a haven for those wanting to make a quick buck. Charles Ponzi, infamous for the pyramid schemes that bear his name, attempted land swindles in Jacksonville as far back as 1925. He sold parcels of land in Columbia County later found to be under water. Ponzi would have loved today’s Florida.
Flush with cash from profits in hugely inflated home markets of the North and Midwest, Northerners swarmed to Florida hoping for a fresh start. They yearned to take advantage of the balmy sunshine, pristine beaches and cheap land.
One can imagine waves of new Floridians, clad in traditional vacation garb—plaid shorts mismatched with Hawaiian shirts, pale legs and sandals—looking to the Sunshine State as if the real estate market was a neighborhood garage sale. Bargain hunters rooting around for the best buys in Tampa, Fort Meyers, Cape Coral and spots all along the Gulf Coast.
The migrants of the recent past had given rise to mass-market homebuilders such as Beazer, Lennar and KB Homes, all currently struggling with the Chinese drywall morass. To feed insatiable appetites for housing, these behemoths realized massive profits while squeezing every penny in the vastly competitive market.
Constantly striving to lower costs and maximize the bottom line, mega-builders began to pressure sub-contractors. To keep their jobs intact, the sub-contractors turned to the readily available and cheaper imported goods. It was one way to shave a few dollars off the selling price and beat the competition for regular work.
Both Lennar and KB Homes has publically lay blame on independent sub-contractors. In a January 2009 press release, Lennar division president Darin McMurray stated the homes effected “were built between November 2005 and November 2006, and the Chinese drywall was installed by independent contractors,” McMurray said. “Lennar did not know the Chinese drywall was installed until months later.”
Nevertheless, each company saw huge earnings in Florida’s housing boom, especially after the destructiveness of hurricanes Wilma and Katrina. Lennar and KB Homes’ combined 2006 profits totaled nearly $1 billion. It would be the last profitable year for either company. Beazer Homes lost over $950 million dollars in 2008. The number of homebuilders left standing is dwindling, which means fewer builders to take the brunt of the Chinese drywall crisis.
The foot-dragging while everyone decides whom to blame does not sit well with Robert. For him, the only bright spot is that Beazer Homes is still solvent. For now.
The frustrated homeowner, like a growing number of Floridians, sits in the purgatory of his beautiful new home. It is a home where he cannot stay, but also cannot leave. A place making him poor and sick from “that new home smell.”
“I’m going broke waiting,” Robert sighs. “We’re screwed.”
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Over the river, and through the wood,
to Grandfather's house we go;
the horse knows the way
to carry the sleigh
through the white and drifted snow.
Over the river, and through the wood,
to Grandfather's house away!
We would not stop for doll or top,
for 'tis Thanksgiving Day.
Over the river, and through the wood-
oh, how the wind does blow!
It stings the toes
and bites the nose,
as over the ground we go.
Over the river, and through the wood
and straight through the barnyard gate.
We seem to go extremely slow-
it is so hard to wait!
Over the river,
and through the wood-
when Grandmother sees us come,
She will say, "o, dear, the children are here,
bring a pie for every one."
Over the river,
and through the wood-
now Grandmothers cap I spy!
Hurrah for the fun!
Is the pudding done?
Hurrah for the pumpkin pie!
Lydia Maria Child - 1844
Monday, October 19, 2009
Friday, October 16, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
A Call for Consistency
“ We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a shaker of cocaine and a whole galaxy of multicolored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers... Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of Budweiser, a pint of raw ether, and two dozen amyls... But the only thing that worried me was the ether. There is nothing more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...”
- Hunter S. Thompson “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas”
How can you argue with that?
Was Dr. Thompson describing the allure of drug use or does he parody the excesses of our drug culture? Does he give permission to a generation jaded by the disillusions of Watergate and the Vietnam war for consumption in excess? Or is he shocking us by using hyperbole to warn of the madness resulting from over use of psychoactive substances? A generation who came of age reading the hilarious screeds of “Gonzo Journalism” now control the current drug policy in America. Our leaders come from a position focusing on a menacing mix of old myths and fears of rampant drug use by people gone mad by unfettered experimentation. It is not a new phenomenon, these misunderstandings have persisted for centuries, incorporating generational, racial and cultural fears. The essential concern comes from the new technologies, such as widespread involuntary drug testing, which incorporate fears of a society overrun by drug crazed lunatics. They take paranoia into the new millennium. With the ability to drug test citizens in an increasingly casual manner, the distrust of the masses by those in power ushers in an era of progressive weakening of personal freedoms. It is this fear that has fueled policies that have nearly Draconian overtones.
Our current drug policies are giving the Federal government an increasingly paternal interest in our citizenry. We all become children of the state, and are treated as such. “By prejudging the value of the individual's desires and ends, paternalism imposes a conformity that limits human possibilities.”i Personal freedom begins to take a back seat to the desires for power. By referring to any policy as drug control, it is suggested that our neighbors who partake in drugs, or any form of medical or non-medical psychoactive substances (including tobacco and alcohol), need to be controlled and cannot be responsible for their actions. No matter what the circumstance, individuals become vilified, even when behavior is moderate and responsible. According to the Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSDA) the number Americans in 2007 who reported illicit substance use at least once in their lifetime was 114,275,000ii. That represents 1 in 3 Americans. To those charged with developing America's drug policies, the degree between the experimental user and compulsive drug abuser is shrinking, and not worthy of substantial examination, even though it encompasses a large section of the population. But to some policymakers, a drug user is a drug user, no matter what the motive or reasons.
Control policy based on exaggerated fears result in losses of individuality, a blandness of personality which emerges when individuals strive to conform. Individuality is the ideal America has always seen as a source of pride. When we consent to be controlled, either overtly by voting for those who advocate such policies, or implicitly by silent inaction, we are allowing our leaders to drag the stereotypes, along with classic fears – many of which have a tenuous link to reality - into our modern age.
A common theme in the 2008 National Drug Control Strategy is the continuing use of involuntary drug testing. Involuntary testing, most primarily by urinalysis, has become increasingly pervasive in our society. The notion of this practice starts with schoolchildren, where “random testing gives students a powerful incentive to abstain from drug use,” making the adaptation of programs of involuntary drug testing a condition for Federal funds.iii What is troubling is the use of the term “powerful incentive.” It denotes a degree of fear which can be instilled into children at an early age, creating an environment that can inhibit self-expression and individualism and retard performance. The presumption of guilt by the involuntary testing of children has serious consequences. It fosters the belief that this kind of control is acceptable, and demonstrates a level of fear promoted by those in charge as the way things should be. The use of these tactics creates an implied acceptance of behavior by government that could lead to the creation of a “nanny state,” where personal responsibility is replaced with a government taking a paternal role. By developing an environment of fear and mistrust, the responsibility of parents and family is assigned to bureaucrats. It also creates a fertile ground for resentment and other forms of rebellion, one of the most common is increased psychoactive substance use.
With the 2009 budget for national drug control estimated at $14.1 billioniv the justification should be clear that random drug testing would be a useful tool in controlling drug use. But that is not the case. In a 2007 study conducted by the Oregon Health and Science University, published in The Journal Of Adolescent Health, the effectiveness of random drug testing of student athletes was anything but clear. The study suggests that other factors for later substance abuse, such as a well developed mistrust of authority, actually increased as a result.
Student-athletes from intervention and control schools did not differ in past 1-month use of illicit drug or a combination of drug and alcohol use at any of the four follow-up periods. At the final assessment, DAT (Drug Alcohol Testing) athletes believed less in testing benefits (p < .05) and less that testing was a reason not to use drugs (p < .01). No DAT deterrent effects were evident for past month use during any of four follow-up periods. Prior-year drug use was reduced in two of four follow-up self-reports, and a combination of drug and alcohol use was reduced at two assessments as well. Overall, drug testing was accompanied by an increase in some risk factors for future substance use. More research is needed before DAT is considered an effective deterrent for school-based athletes.v
The most fundamental problem with urine drug testing methods is that what is tested is not drugs but the presence of metabolites, the byproducts of substance use. The metabolites of the substances most commonly tested for; alcohol, cocaine, methamphetamines and heroin – psychoactive substances which have the most effect on individual productivity – pass through the body within 24-48 hours, leaving no metabolites to test for.vi This leaves testing ineffective to a large degree, and the door is wide open for inaccurate results. The only truly compelling part of drug testing is the fear of the test itself.
Is controlling children, limiting freedoms and living with the presumption of guilt the price society will pay for a statistically small drop in student drug use? The following is from the SAMHDA 2007 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (National Findings):vii
Substance Dependence or Abuse in the Past Year among Persons Aged 12 or Older: 2002-2007
Past Month Use of Selected Illicit Drugs among Persons Aged 12 or Older: 2002-2007
With huge annual budgets given towards the “War on Drugs,” tallied at $13.66 billion in 2008viii the return on our investment after five years should be expected to be higher than 0.3%. Even with these poor returns, Federal school funds are being increasingly attached to programs such as random drug testingix. What is the overall message presented to students when legal prescription use is widespread, $217 billion in 2007 and projected to reach $515 billion by 2017.x Legal consumption of alcohol, caffeine and tobacco is permitted at a “proper age,” and are seen in our culture as a rite of passage. Is substance use bad, and users should be feared, just because authorities say they are?
If we are to live in a country which celebrates the freedom of youth, and encourages youngsters to live to their full creative potential, setting them off in a shroud of fear and a cloud of misinformation is a bad start. The double standard for substances such as alcohol and nicotine gives children the idea that it is acceptable to say one thing for certain activities, but do something different for others. Drug usage is prohibited, but when it is sanctioned by doctors, as in prescription medication, it is encouraged. It is allowable to drink alcohol but marijuana, which is arguably more harmful, is decried as a scourge.
It is this environment of hypocrisy that gives motive to antisocial behavior, mistrust of authority and heightened curiosity in experimentation of the banned substances. Without rational responsibility towards our children, how can we expect them to grow up any different? To raise a thoughtful generation, we must act that way ourselves.
In developing a nation becoming accustomed with the idea that they can be tested for psychoactive substances at any time, from school to the workplace, none can be more disturbing than the idea that health care providers are the “key to increasing awareness” of drug use. The sacrosanct confidentiality between doctor and patient appears to be ancillary to the government's goals in controlling the drug using population. The National Drug Control Policy offers an ominous suggestion:
It is estimated that 180 million Americans age 18 or older see a health care provider at least once a year. These visits provide a very valuable opportunity for drug and alcohol screening. With a few carefully worded questions using an evidence-based questionnaire, health-care providers can learn a great deal about whether a patient is at risk for problems related to substance abuse... It can be incorporated into routine practice in medical settings.xi
The success of any medical professional is the relationship established with their patients. We see a doctor to help, and their mission is to bring us to health. Honest exchange is essential for any health care professional to be effective. The chance of a doctor undermining trust for the sake of drug control goals set by the Federal government would have a devastating effect on the health care industry. People would lose faith in doctors en masse, fueled by the idea that moral judgments would cloud medical decisions . The overtones of our drug control policy and the “opportunity” health care providers are presented is truly frightening to anyone concerned with personal liberties.
The increasing reliance on involuntary drug testing, especially on schoolchildren, is the most blatant example of the worrisome direction of our society. The willingness to arbitrarily punish certain behaviors makes moral judgments relative and subjective. It has the effect of confusion and an overall weakening of respect for society. Behavior such as alcohol and tobacco use is not illegal, and only becomes restricted when it begins to effect others, such as driving drunk or second hand smoke. They continue to be activities governed by a degree of personal responsibility, where the individual makes the decision to use alcohol and tobacco. We Americans allow a somewhat libertarian view of these activities, but selectively prohibit others (with prejudice).
Again, there are many acts which, being directly injurious only to the agents themselves, ought not to be legally interdicted, but which, if done publicly, are a violation of good manners, and coming thus within the category of offences against others, may rightfully be prohibited. Of this kind are offences against decency; on which it is unnecessary to dwell, the rather as they are only connected indirectly with our subject, the objection to publicity being equally strong in the case of many actions not in themselves condemnable, nor supposed to be so.xii
John Stuart Mill, one of the founders of Libertarian thought, understood the need for prohibitions for the public good, but not at the expense of the most valuable asset of the state, the individual. “(A) State, which dwarfs its men, in order that they may be more docile instruments in its hands even for beneficial purposes, will find that with small men no great thing can really be accomplished...”xiii Prohibitions are necessary only when they negatively impact others, especially if violence is involved, but not when they effect an individual's own activities.
The Federal government is willing to spend billions on restricting behavior of drug users that ultimately impact the active users represented by statistically small segment of the population. The number of active drug users are holding steady at approximately 8%, in spite of the increased efforts to prohibitxiv. Many experiment, but the majority never continue to use these substances. The government uses restrictions and the promotion of fear by creating a presumption of guilt for more people than illicit drugs will ever effect. The loss of freedom advocated by policymakers, and to those who consent to these restrictions, to some degree affects everyone in America. Once liberties are gone, it is very difficult to get them back.
This reliance on double standards, and the willingness to use fear as an incentive to inhibit drug usage is the wrong message to citizens, especially our next generation – who will eventually be in charge. We want them to be rational, and need them to use reason in solving our common problems. By allowing a huge variance in responses to modern challenges, from substance use to economics to the fears of terrorist attack , we are working against the kind of measured reflection that creates real solutions to the world's problems.
The individual is the most affected by drug usage. But we are all harmed by drug usage policies. Pushing away from the moralistic slant of current attempts to control requires nothing less than an entire paradigm shift. Primarily, the notion of control to address the prevalence of psychoactive substances is wrong. Individual freedom is a cornerstone of any activity of the state, and that is counter to the environment of fear promoted by random testing. Consistency is the key. We must teach our children the value of respect for the individual in all aspects of life. That begins when we all act in a responsible manner, and focus on reason and thoughtful reflection.
“(T)eenagers' moderate patronage of soft drugs in Western nations appears to be a generally healthy reaction to the alarming damage they see hard-drug abuse causing among adults around them.”xv
The budget assigned to control supply must be scaled back, with Federal funds reinvested in public awareness of health issues, including education and training of public health care workers. This includes establishment of a common medical standard, along with minimum level of health care, created with the purpose of maintaining a degree of wellness consistent for all Americans. It is a goal that is not only reasonable but achievable. Decriminalization of drugs and a consistency in attitude towards all non-medical substance use will benefit the entire social structure by promoting equality and increased productivity by maintaining a healthy workforce. Create tolerance for those who choose to indulge in “harder” psychoactive substances by an environment of inclusion, treatment and support. It will set a social standard that celebrates diversity and fairness and becomes the example for the world. It will also lessen the need for experimentation and rebellion that fosters increased drug experimentation and continued use.
This social shift requires a substantial reevaluation of current drug laws with the understanding that a large section of the world's economy is reliant on drug consumption by Americans. The current black market economy created by the drug trade can be tapped for additional revenue by decriminalization and financially support the changes enacted by legalization. Taxation would be established, similar to the taxation on tobacco and alcohol, but not to a level where consumers would again establish a black market for affordable product, as is the case with pharmaceuticals. The usage, quality and dosage of psychoactive substances set by scientific experts should be left to those who are best equipped to handle distribution - trained health professionals. Any increase in usage levels would be addressed by the properly trained experts in a modernized health care system. The availability of the decriminalized substances would be regulated, as is alcohol.
Those imprisoned for non-violent drug violations would be released with the associated funds reinvested into health care and education. The Federal and State budgets set for the control of supply would be funneled back into society, effecting the greatest amount of people with a focus personal responsibilities for activities impacting others and the society. Law-enforcement resources would be freed to focus on the safety and security of the community.
The importance of health, and the focus on wellness, is a more effective tool than fear in reduction of substance use. It begins with the encouragement and realization of individual potential instead of conformity. It starts by addressing some of the feeling of self-worth that is the core for the need to use drugs. An awareness of how a healthy lifestyle is essential to becoming a valued part of community is necessary, impacted in part by avoidance of non-medical psychoactive substances. A rate of attrition will offset any increase in experimentation as a result of decriminalization. Natural recovery from drug use is achieved by setting positive examples in society, along with a more compassionate and less fearful environment.
The reduction of tobacco use, primarily in cigarette smoking by 12 to 17 year olds, demonstrates a more substantial decline than the reduction in illicit drug usage.xvi This has been achieved in part by an increased awareness on personal health, and has been a major factor in the establishment of various smoking bans throughout America. Many of these laws are beginning to cast the same shadow of a nanny state as random drug testing, and should be monitored just as well. But it demonstrates an attempt at rational understanding of the health benefits of both legal and illegal substance use. It seems to be a better deterrent than a random and unequal prohibition of other drugs. This would replace the current method of user trial and error.
The problems associated by drug use is complex, and there are no easy answers. But a shift in America is needed, a shift towards a more rational and consistent approach to substance use. The best path is developing a sensible approach to drug usage that is not in dismay or imposing archaic stereotypes such as those parodied in “Fear and Loathing.” It can start by addressing some of the inequities in health care and to address feelings of individual worthlessness which lies as the core of much of the drug usage. By creating a reality that respects every member in a society free of fear, we can begin losing the need to alter reality by drugs.
ii(http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/nsduh/2k7nsduh/AppG.htm#TabG-1)
iiiNational Drug Control Strategy, 2008 (pg. 7)
ivNational Drug Control Strategy, 2008 (pg. 71)
vLinn Goldberg, Diane L Elliot, David P MacKinnon, Esther Moe, Kerry S Kuehl, Liva Nohre, Chondra M Lockwood
Journal of Adolescent Health, January 2008 (Vol. 32, Issue 1, Pages 16-25)
vi(http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/testing/10842res20021021.html)
vii(http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/nsduh/2k7nsduh/2k7Results.cfm)
viiiNational Drug Control Strategy, 2008 (pg. 71)
ix(http://www.randomstudentdrugtesting.org/costs_funding.html)
xPrescription Drug Trends Fact Sheet, Kaiser Family Foundation, Sept. 2008
xi National Drug Control Strategy, 2008, (pg. 23)
xiiJohn Stuart Mill, On Liberty, Chapter 5.
xiiiJohn Stuart Mill, On Liberty, Chapter 5.
xiv(http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/nsduh/2k7nsduh/Alts.htm#Fig2-2)
xvMike Males, Russ Kick (ed.) Everything You Know is Wrong, 2002 (pg. 123)
xvi(http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/nsduh/2k6nsduh/Alts.htm#Fig4-2)
