DESCRIPTION/OVERVIEW
Today, methamphetamine is second only to alcohol and marijuana as the drug used most frequently in many Western and Midwestern states. Seizures of dangerous laboratory materials have increased dramatically—in some states, fivefold. In response, many special task forces and local and Federal initiatives have been developed to target methamphetamine production and use. Legislation and negotiation with earlier source areas for precursor substances have also reduced the availability of the raw materials needed to make the drug.(1)
Methamphetamine is a highly addictive drug with potent central nervous system stimulant properties. In the 1960s, methamphetamine pharmaceutical products were widely available and extensively diverted and abused. The 1971 placement of methamphetamine into Schedule II of the Controlled Substance Act (CSA) and the removal of methamphetamine injectable formulations from the United States market, combined with a better appreciation for its high abuse potential, led to a drastic reduction in the abuse of this drug. However, a resurgence of methamphetamine abuse occurred in the 1980s and it is currently considered a major drug of abuse. The widespread availability of methamphetamine today is largely fueled by illicit production in large and small clandestine laboratories throughout the United States and illegal production and importation from Mexico. In some areas of the country (especially on the West Coast), methamphetamine abuse has outpaced both heroin and cocaine.(2)
The drug has limited medical uses for the treatment of narcolepsy, attention deficit disorders, and obesity.(3)
| CONTROL STATUS |
Methamphetamine is in Schedule II of the CSA.
| STREET NAMES |
Speed, Meth, Ice, Crystal, Chalk, Crank, Tweak, Uppers, Black Beauties, Glass, Bikers Coffee, Methlies Quick, Poor Man's Cocaine, Chicken Feed, Shabu, Crystal Meth, Stove Top, Trash, Go-Fast, Yaba, and Yellow Bam
| SHORT-TERM EFFECTS |
As a powerful stimulant, methamphetamine, even in small doses, can increase wakefulness and physical activity and decrease appetite. A brief, intense sensation, or rush, is reported by those who smoke or inject methamphetamine. Oral ingestion or snorting produces a long-lasting high instead of a rush, which reportedly can continue for as long as half a day. Both the rush and the high are believed to result from the release of very high levels of the neurotransmitter dopamine into areas of the brain that regulate feelings of pleasure.(4)
Methamphetamine has toxic effects. In animals, a single high dose of the drug has been shown to damage nerve terminals in the dopamine-containing regions of the brain. The large release of dopamine produced by methamphetamine is thought to contribute to the drug’s toxic effects on nerve terminals in the brain. High doses can elevate body temperature to dangerous, sometimes lethal, levels, as well as cause convulsions.(5)
| LONG-TERM EFFECTS |
Long-term methamphetamine abuse results in many damaging effects, including addiction. Addiction is a chronic, relapsing disease, characterized by compulsive drug-seeking and drug use which is accompanied by functional and molecular changes in the brain. In addition to being addicted to methamphetamine, chronic methamphetamine abusers exhibit symptoms that can include violent behavior, anxiety, confusion, and insomnia. They also can display a number of psychotic features, including paranoia, auditory hallucinations, mood disturbances, and delusions (for example, the sensation of insects creeping on the skin, which is called “formication”). The paranoia can result in homicidal as well as suicidal thoughts.(6)
With chronic use, tolerance for methamphetamine can develop. In an effort to intensify the desired effects, users may take higher doses of the drug, take it more frequently, or change their method of drug intake. In some cases, abusers forego food and sleep while indulging in a form of binging known as a “run,” injecting as much as a gram of the drug every 2 to 3 hours over several days until the user runs out of the drug or is too disorganized to continue. Chronic abuse can lead to psychotic behavior, characterized by intense paranoia, visual and auditory hallucinations, and out-of-control rages that can be coupled with extremely violent behavior.(7)
Although there are no physical manifestations of a withdrawal syndrome when methamphetamine use is stopped, there are several symptoms that occur when a chronic user stops taking the drug. These include depression, anxiety, fatigue, paranoia, aggression, and an intense craving for the drug.(8)
In scientific studies examining the consequences of long-term methamphetamine exposure in animals, concern has arisen over its toxic effects on the brain. Researchers have reported that as much as 50 percent of the dopamine-producing cells in the brain can be damaged after prolonged exposure to relatively low levels of methamphetamine. Researchers also have found that serotonin-containing nerve cells may be damaged even more extensively. Whether this toxicity is related to the psychosis seen in some long-term methamphetamine abusers is still an open question.(9)
| TRAFFICKING TRENDS |
Transportation of methamphetamine from Mexico appears to be increasing, as evidenced by increasing seizures along the U.S.-Mexico border. The amount of methamphetamine seized at or between U.S.-Mexico border ports of entry (POEs) increased more than 75 percent overall from 2002 (1,129.8 kg), to 2003 (1,733.1 kg), and 2004 (1,984.6 kg).(10)
The sharp increase in methamphetamine seizures at or between U.S.-Mexico border POEs most likely reflects increased methamphetamine production in Mexico since 2002. Mexican DTOs and criminal groups are the primary transporters of Mexico-produced methamphetamine to the United States. They use POEs primarily in Arizona and southern Texas as entry points to smuggle methamphetamine into the country from Mexico. Previously, California POEs were the primary entry points used by these Drug Trafficking Organizations (DTOs) and criminal groups; however, increasing methamphetamine production in the interior of Mexico has resulted in Mexican DTOs and criminal groups shifting some smuggling routes eastward. Methamphetamine transportation from Mexico to the United States by these DTOs and criminal groups is likely to increase further in the near term as production in Mexico-based methamphetamine laboratories continues to increase in order to offset declines in domestic production.(11)
The trafficking and abuse of methamphetamine--a leading drug threat in western states since the early 1990s--have gradually expanded eastward, reaching the point where the drug now impacts every region of the country, although to a much lesser extent in the Northeast Region. In the early 1990s methamphetamine trafficking was an evident threat to California drug markets such as Fresno, Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Diego, and San Francisco. By the mid-1990s that threat had expanded to other drug markets, including Denver, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Seattle, and Yakima, Washington. By the late 1990s and early 2000s--as methamphetamine production and distribution remained very high in western states--methamphetamine trafficking continued its eastward expansion (see 2006 National Drug Threat Assessment, Appendix A, Map 4), supported by distribution by Mexican criminal groups and high levels of local production.(12)
The eastward expansion of the drug took a particular toll on central states such as Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Increased methamphetamine trafficking in these states (see 2006 National Drug Threat Assessment, Appendix C, Chart 2), often in rural areas, is evidenced by a 126 percent increase (1,601 to 3,620) in reported methamphetamine laboratory seizures and an 87 percent increase (10,145 to 18,951) in methamphetamine-related treatment admissions from 1999 through 2003. Since 2003 methamphetamine trafficking has expanded farther east to areas such as southern Michigan, Ohio, and western Pennsylvania. The eastward expansion of methamphetamine trafficking and abuse has recently slowed because increasing regulation of the sale and use of chemicals used in methamphetamine production, particularly pseudoephedrine and ephedrine, has substantially decreased domestic production. However, Mexican DTOs and criminal groups have supplanted decreases in domestic production with methamphetamine that they are producing in Mexico. If they are successful, methamphetamine trafficking will spread farther eastward to encompass the entire United States.(13)
Methamphetamine laboratories also contaminate surrounding property. It is estimated that 1 pound of methamphetamine produced in a clandestine lab yields 5 to 6 pounds of hazardous waste. The resultant environmental damage to property, water supplies, farmland, and vegetation where labs have operated costs local jurisdictions thousands of dollars in clean up and makes some areas unusable for extended periods of time. Damage to some areas is extensive. For example, U.S. Forest Service officers have encountered tree “kills” in areas surrounding small toxic labs (STLs), and ranchers in Arizona have reported suspicious cattle deaths in areas downstream from labs.(14)
| USE/USER POPULATION |
According to the 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, approximately 11.7 million Americans ages 12 and older reported trying methamphetamine at least once during their lifetimes, representing 4.9% of the population ages 12 and older. Approximately 1.4 million (0.6%) reported past year methamphetamine use and 583,000 (0.2%) reported past month methamphetamine use.(15)
Among students surveyed as part of the 2005 Monitoring the Future study, 3.1% of eighth graders, 4.1% of tenth graders, and 4.5% of twelfth graders reported lifetime use of methamphetamine. In 2004, these percentages were 2.5%, 5.3%, and 6.2%, respectively.(16)
The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance (YRBS) study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) surveys high school students on several risk factors including drug and alcohol use. Results of the 2005 survey indicate that 6.2% of high school students reported using methamphetamine at some point in their lifetimes. This is down from 7.6% in 2003 and 9.8% in 2001.(17)
Available data on typical methamphetamine users reveal that most are white, are in their 20’s or 30’s, have a high school education or better, and are employed full- or part-time. Methamphetamine is used by housewives, students, club-goers, truckers, and a growing number of others. Almost as many women as men use methamphetamine (55 percent male, 45 percent female.)(18)
| ARRESTS/SENTENCING |
Between October 1, 2004 and January 11, 2005, there were 1,136 Federal offenders sentenced for methamphetamine-related charges in U.S. Courts. Approximately 95.9% of these methamphetamine cases involved a trafficking offense. Between January 12, 2005 and September 30, 2005, there were 3,703 Federal offenders sentenced for methamphetamine-related charges in U.S. Courts. Approximately 97.5% of the cases involved trafficking.(19)
| DEA DRUG SEIZURES |
In 2005, the DEA seized 2,148.6 kgs of methamphetamine. For prior years, click here.
| LEGISLATION |
Methamphetamine is a Schedule II narcotic under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970. The chemicals that are used to produce methamphetamine are also controlled under the Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996 (MCA). This legislation broadened the controls on listed chemicals used in the production of methamphetamine, increased penalties for the trafficking and manufacturing of methamphetamine and listed chemicals, and expanded the controls of products containing the licit chemicals ephedrine, pseudoephedrine and phenylpropanolamine (PPA).(20)
Signed in October 2000, the Children's Health Act of 2000 includes provisions dealing with methamphetamine prevention, production, enforcement, treatment and abuse.(21)
In December 2005, the House of Representatives passed the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005, the first step in enacting a nationwide measure to require drugs containing ephedrine, pseudoepedrine, and phenylpropanolamine to be kept behind pharmacy counters and purchased only after identification and sign in of buyer, as well as limit purchases to no more than 9 grams per 30-day period. The legislation also adds further restrictions on the impact on meth precursor chemicals through increased accountability to Federal regulators at all points of distribution, and enhances penalties for persons manufacturing meth in areas where children reside.(22)
On March 9, 2006, President Bush signed the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005, which includes provisions to strengthen Federal, state, and local efforts to combat the spread of methamphetamine.(23)
Unlike imported drugs such as heroin or cocaine, methamphetamine is easy to produce domestically. It is synthesized from precursor chemicals using relatively easy production methods that are commonly available on the Internet or in underground publications; anyone with high school chemistry experience can “cook” methamphetamine. Many of the base chemicals are household or farm products that are not feasible to regulate. However, other elements (ephedrine and pseudoephedrine products, and anhydrous ammonia) have come under serious scrutiny, and Federal and State legislation now monitors their sale and limits their availability.(24)
| TREATMENT RESOURCES |
Treatment Publications and Research | Treatment and Patient Education | Treatment Facility Locator
| PHOTOS |
Click here to see high resolution photos of methamphetamine>>
| RELATED NEWS RELEASES |
Click here to read DEA news releases involving methamphetamine>>
| USEFUL LINKS |
| SOURCES |
1. Hunt, D., S. Kuck, and L. Truitt, Methamphetamine Use: Lessons Learned, final report to the National Institute of Justice, February 2006 (NCJ 209730), available at www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/209730.pdf.
2. Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control, www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/drugs_concern/meth.htm
3. National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Report - Methamphetamine Abuse and Addiction, www.drugabuse.gov/ResearchReports/methamph/methamph.html
4-9. Ibid.
10. National Drug Intelligence Center, National Drug Threat Assessment 2006.
11-13. Ibid.
14. Hunt, D., S. Kuck, and L. Truitt, Methamphetamine Use: Lessons Learned, final report to the National Institute of Justice, February 2006 (NCJ 209730), available at www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/209730.pdf.
15. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Results from the 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National Findings, September 2005
16. National Institute on Drug Abuse and University of Michigan, Monitoring the Future 2005 Data From In-School Surveys of 8th-, 10th-, and 12th-Grade Students, December 2005
17. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance—United States, 2005, June 2006
18. National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Journal No. 254 • July 2006, Methamphetamine Abuse: Challenges for Law Enforcement and Communities
19. United States Sentencing Commission, 2005 Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics, June 2006
20. Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control, Provisions of the Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996
21. Government Printing Office, Public Law 106-310, October 2000
22. Hunt, D., S. Kuck, and L. Truitt, Methamphetamine Use: Lessons Learned, final report to the National Institute of Justice, February 2006 (NCJ 209730), available at www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/209730.pdf.
23. Government Printing Office, USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-177), March 2006
24. National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Journal No. 254 • July 2006, Methamphetamine Abuse: Challenges for Law Enforcement and Communities. Tennessee, for example, found legislation placing over-the-counter cold medications containing ephedrine/pseudoephedrine behind the pharmacy counter reduced the number of “Mom-and-Pop” or small local labs seized from more than 1,500 in 2004 to 955 in 2005, with the most dramatic reductions seen in rural counties. (Data presented by Thomas Scollon, Tennessee Office of Criminal Justice Programs, Nashville, Tennessee, at the Evaluation of Task Forces Cluster Meeting held at the National Institute of Justice in Washington, DC, in January 2006.)
Three arrested for meth-related crimes involving children
In the second bedroom, where Erika Morales had been sleeping, agents again found hallowed out pen tubes and baggie corners scattered in the room, all of which had meth residue.
| Full Text (521 words) |
May 5--WORTHINGTON -- Three people accused of metham-phetamine possession and meth related crimes around a child were released from jail Friday -- two on their own recognizance and one on a $1,000 bond.
The complaints against Tony James Kruger, 24, Priscilla Marie Morales, 27, and Erika Delcarmen Morales, 29, all of Worthing-ton, state the three were arrested April 30 after a search warrant was executed at their house on Sherwood Street. They each face one count of fifth-degree con-trolled substance possession and one count of a meth related crime involving children, both felonies.
Agents of the Buffalo Ridge Drug Task Force knocked on the door of the rental unit and announced their pur-pose, but no one answered the door. The agents gained entry to the unit and found one man and two women inside. The women were sleeping in separate bed-rooms in the unit.
In the first bedroom they searched, agents found a glass pipe containing meth residue on a night stand by the bed. Scattered through-out the room they found hallowed out pen tubes and baggie corners, all contain-ing meth residue. On the door of the room was letters cut out of colored paper that spelled out the name Priscilla.
In the second bedroom, where Erika Morales had been sleeping, agents again found hallowed out pen tubes and baggie corners scattered in the room, all of which had meth residue.
Inside the bathroom was another pen tube with meth residue.
While the agents were searching, Kruger arrived and said he lived there and wanted to know what was happening. When told a search warrant was being executed, Kruger said he wanted to remove some property from Priscilla's room.
He agreed to give a re-corded statement, and told authorities he had lived at the residence for the past three months and stayed in Priscilla's room. He allegedly admitted he and Pricilla used and sold meth, along with Erika.
Kruger went on to say he has visitation rights with his 3-year-old son, and when the child would stay at the resi-dence, he would stay in Priscilla's room. Toys, dia-pers and a child's clothing were found in the room.
Priscilla also gave a state-ment, in which she allegedly admitted that the pipes and pen tubes scattered through-out the bedroom belonged to her, and were used to smoke meth.
She allegedly admitted to giving meth to a number of people and that several people came to her house to smoke meth. She stated that Kruger's son does stay in her room during visits and that she babysits for three other children at the house.
Both women were released on their own recognizance; Kruger had bail set at $1,000.
Kruger has a previous conviction from 2004 of falsely reporting a crime in Redwood County. Priscilla has faced several driving after revocation charges, along with various traffic regulation citations. Erika has had several charges of driving without a valid license.
Maximum combined sen-tence on the two charges is 10 years incarceration and/or $20,000 in fines. All three have a next court appearance on May 12 at the Prairie Justice Center.
Credit: The Daily Globe, Worthington, Minn.
| Subjects: | Search warrants |
| Author(s): | Justine Wettschreck |
| Document types: | News |
| Publication title: | McClatchy - Tribune Business News. Washington: May 5, 2009. |
| Source type: | Wire Feed |
| ProQuest document ID: | 1698591281 |
| Text Word Count | 521 |
| Document URL: | http://proquest |
Cocaine
DESCRIPTION/OVERVIEW
Cocaine is a powerfully addictive stimulant that directly affects the brain. Cocaine is not a new drug. In fact, it is one of the oldest known drugs. The pure chemical, cocaine hydrochloride, has been an abused substance for more than 100 years, and coca leaves, the source of cocaine, have been ingested for thousands of years.(1)
Pure cocaine was first extracted from the leaf of the Erythroxylon coca bush, which grows primarily in Peru and Bolivia, in the mid-19th century. In the early 1900s, it became the main stimulant drug used in most of the tonics/elixirs that were developed to treat a wide variety of illnesses.(2)
Cocaine abuse has a long history and is rooted into the drug culture in the U.S. It is an intense euphoric drug with strong addictive potential. With the increase in purity, the advent of the free-base form of the cocaine ("crack"), and its easy availability on the street, cocaine continues to burden both the law enforcement and health care systems in America.(3)
The powdered, hydrochloride salt form of cocaine can be snorted or dissolved in water and injected. Crack is cocaine that has not been neutralized by an acid to make the hydrochloride salt. This form of cocaine comes in a rock crystal that can be heated and its vapors smoked. The term “crack” refers to the crackling sound heard when it is heated.(4)
| CONTROL STATUS |
Today, cocaine is a Schedule II drug under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, meaning that it has high potential for abuse, but can be administered by a doctor for legitimate medical uses, such as local anesthesia for some eye, ear, and throat surgeries.
| STREET NAMES |
Blow, nose candy, snowball, tornado, wicky stick, Perico (Spanish) (5)
| SHORT-TERM EFFECTS |
Cocaine’s effects appear almost immediately after a single dose, and disappear within a few minutes or hours. Taken in small amounts (up to 100 mg), cocaine usually makes the user feel euphoric, energetic, talkative, and mentally alert, especially to the sensations of sight, sound, and touch. It can also temporarily decrease the need for food and sleep. Some users find that the drug helps them perform simple physical and intellectual tasks more quickly, while others experience the opposite effect.(6)
The duration of cocaine’s immediate euphoric effects depends upon the route of administration. The faster the absorption, the more intense the high. Also, the faster the absorption, the shorter the duration of action. The high from snorting is relatively slow in onset, and may last 15 to 30 minutes, while that from smoking may last 5 to 10 minutes.(7)
The short-term physiological effects of cocaine include constricted blood vessels; dilated pupils; and increased temperature, heart rate, and blood pressure. Large amounts (several hundred milligrams or more) intensify the user’s high, but may also lead to bizarre, erratic, and violent behavior. These users may experience tremors, vertigo, muscle twitches, paranoia, or, with repeated doses, a toxic reaction closely resembling amphetamine poisoning. Some users of cocaine report feelings of restlessness, irritability, and anxiety. In rare instances, sudden death can occur on the first use of cocaine or unexpectedly thereafter. Cocaine-related deaths are often a result of cardiac arrest or seizures followed by respiratory arrest.(8)
| LONG-TERM EFFECTS |
Cocaine is a powerfully addictive drug. Thus, an individual may have difficulty predicting or controlling the extent to which he or she will continue to want or use the drug. Cocaine’s stimulant and addictive effects are thought to be primarily a result of its ability to inhibit the reabsorption of dopamine by nerve cells. Dopamine is released as part of the brain’s reward system, and is either directly or indirectly involved in the addictive properties of every major drug of abuse.(9)
An appreciable tolerance to cocaine’s high may develop, with many addicts reporting that they seek but fail to achieve as much pleasure as they did from their first experience. Some users will frequently increase their doses to intensify and prolong the euphoric effects. While tolerance to the high can occur, users can also become more sensitive (sensitization) to cocaine’s anesthetic and convulsant effects, without increasing the dose taken. This increased sensitivity may explain some deaths occurring after apparently low doses of cocaine.(10)
Use of cocaine in a binge, during which the drug is taken repeatedly and at increasingly high doses, leads to a state of increasing irritability, restlessness, and paranoia. This may result in a full-blown paranoid psychosis, in which the individual loses touch with reality and experiences auditory hallucinations.(11)
| TRAFFICKING TRENDS |
The amount of cocaine available in domestic drug markets appears to meet user demand in most markets, without observable shortfall. However, recent ONDCP analysis of data from February through September 2005 shows that the purity of available cocaine could be diminishing at the retail level--reflecting decreases in potential worldwide cocaine production and significant increases in cocaine interdiction.(12)
Mexican DTOs and criminal groups control most wholesale cocaine distribution in the United States, and their control is increasing. According to federal, state, and local law enforcement reporting, Mexican DTOs and criminal groups are the predominant wholesale cocaine distributors in the Great Lakes, Pacific, Southeast, Southwest, and West Central Regions, and although Colombian and Dominican criminal groups control most wholesale distribution in the Northeast and Florida/Caribbean Regions, wholesale distribution by Mexican DTOs and criminal groups is increasing. For example, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) New York Field Division reported in 2005 that in some areas of New York City, Mexican criminal groups have supplanted Colombian criminal groups as the primary source of multikilogram-quantities of cocaine. Similarly, the Central Florida High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) recently reported that in some areas of central Florida, Mexican DTOs and criminal groups have supplanted Colombian and Dominican criminal groups as the predominant wholesale cocaine distributors and are establishing new distribution networks.(13)
Control over wholesale cocaine distribution by Mexican DTOs and criminal groups has been increasing for several years and is likely to continue to increase in the near term. Cocaine transportation data indicate that most cocaine available in U.S. drug markets is smuggled into the country via the U.S.-Mexico border. As Mexican DTOs and criminal groups control an increasing percentage of the cocaine smuggled into the country, their influence over wholesale distribution will rise even in areas previously controlled by other groups, including areas of the Northeast and Florida/Caribbean Regions.(14)
Cocaine is distributed in nearly every large and midsize city; however, analysis of cocaine seizure data indicates that several specific cities serve as national-level cocaine distribution centers through which most domestic cocaine flows (see National Drug Threat Assessment Appendix A, Map 6). Midlevel and retail-level distribution of the drug in these and most other cities is controlled primarily by organized gangs; however, in smaller cities and rural communities retail distribution typically is controlled by local independent dealers.(15)
| USE/USER POPULATION |
2005 rates of cocaine use were relatively high, and overall, use appears to be stable. According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), the rate of past year use for cocaine (powder and crack combined) among individuals aged 12 and older (2.4%) has remained stable since 2002; it is much lower than that for marijuana (10.6%), but is higher than that for methamphetamine (0.6%) or heroin (0.2%). Among adults, NSDUH data show that rates of past year use for cocaine (powder and crack combined) among young adults (aged 18 to 25) are stable but remain the highest among all age groups (see National Drug Threat Assessment, Appendix B, Table 1). Monitoring the Future (MTF) and NSDUH also indicate stable rates of adolescent cocaine use (see National Drug Threat Assessment, Appendix B, Table 2). The number of treatment admissions to publicly funded treatment facilities for cocaine has decreased since the mid-1990s despite increased access to drug treatment. Cocaine is the only major drug of abuse for which treatment admissions have decreased (see National Drug Threat Assessment, Appendix C, Chart 1).(16)
Among students surveyed as part of the 2005 Monitoring the Future study, 3.7% of eighth graders, 5.2% of tenth graders, and 8.0% of twelfth graders reported lifetime(17) use of cocaine. In 2004, these percentages were 3.4%, 5.4%, and 8.1%, respectively.(18)
According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH, 2004), 34.15 million Americans ages 12 and older (14.7% of this age group) had used cocaine once in their lifetime and 2.0 million were current users of cocaine in 2004. The new initiates of cocaine abuse were about 1 million in 2004. According to the Monitoring the Future Study (MTF, 2005), the percentages of eighth, tenth and twelfth graders reported using cocaine once in their life time were 3.7, 5.2 and 8.0, respectively, while the corresponding numbers for the current cocaine users (used in the past month) were 1.0, 1.5 and 2.3, respectively. Cocaine abuse occurs in both genders and among all ethnic groups of the U.S.(19)
| ARRESTS/SENTENCING |
Between October 1, 2004 and January 11, 2005, there were 1,314 Federal offenders sentenced for powder cocaine-related charges and 1,205 sentenced for crack cocaine charges in U.S. Courts. Approximately 98.2% of the powder cocaine cases and 95.2% of the crack cocaine cases involved trafficking. Between January 12, 2005 and September 30, 2005, there were 4,242 Federal offenders sentenced for powder cocaine-related charges and 4,077 sentenced for crack cocaine charges in U.S. Courts. Approximately 98.4% of the powder cocaine cases and 95.3% of the crack cocaine cases involved trafficking.(20)
| DEA DRUG SEIZURES |
In 2005, the DEA seized 118,270 kgs of cocaine. For prior years, click here.
| LEGISLATION |
Cocaine was first federally regulated in December 1914, with the passage of the Harrison Act. The Harrison Act banned non-medical use of cocaine; prohibited its importation; imposed the same criminal penalties for cocaine users that were levied against users of opium, morphine, and heroin; and required a strict accounting of medical prescriptions for cocaine. As a consequence of the Harrison Act -- and the emergence in the 1930s of cheaper, legal, and readily available drugs like amphetamines -- cocaine became scarce in the United States. By the 1950s it was no longer considered a problem worthy of law enforcement attention.(21)
Cocaine use began to rise again in the 1960s, prompting Congress, in 1970, to classify it as a Schedule II controlled substance, meaning it was potentially susceptible to abuse and could produce dependency but had legitimate medicinal uses.(22) However, it was still not considered by many in the medical profession to be a serious health threat.(23) Even as late as 1980, influential scientific writings reflected the prevailing non-critical assessment of the dangers of cocaine: The 1980 edition of the Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry asserted that cocaine posed no serious problem, if use was limited to two or three times a week. Like the cocaine epidemic that occurred at the turn of the century, cocaine once again was embraced by the social elite. The deleterious effects of cocaine that were discovered merely 60 years earlier appeared inexplicably to have been forgotten. However, by the early 1980s, the nation's attitude toward cocaine had changed and various law enforcement and public health efforts intended to control its use were underway.(24)
| TREATMENT RESOURCES |
Treatment Publications and Research | Treatment and Patient Education | Treatment Facility Locator
| PHOTOS |
Click here to see high resolution photos of cocaine>>
| RELATED NEWS RELEASES |
Click here to read DEA news releases involving cocaine>>
| USEFUL LINKS |
 | Cocaine Price/Purity Analysis |
| SOURCES |
1-2. National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Report - Cocaine Abuse and Addiction, www.nida.nih.gov/researchreports/cocaine/cocaine.html.
3. Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control, www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/drugs_concern/cocaine/cocaine.htm.
4. National Institute on Drug Abuse, InfoFacts: Crack and Cocaine, www.drugabuse.gov/Infofacts/cocaine.html. Snorting is the process of inhaling cocaine powder through the nose, where it is absorbed into the bloodstream through the nasal tissues. Injecting is the use of a needle to release the drug directly into the bloodstream; any needle use increases a user’s risk of contracting HIV and other blood-borne infections. Smoking involves inhaling cocaine vapor or smoke into the lungs, where absorption into the bloodstream is as rapid as by injection.
5. Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), Cocaine Street Terms
6-11. National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Report - Cocaine Abuse and Addiction, www.nida.nih.gov/researchreports/cocaine/cocaine.html.
12-16. National Drug Intelligence Center, National Drug Threat Assessment 2006.
17. “Lifetime” refers to use at least once during a respondent’s lifetime.
18. Office of National Drug Control Policy, Drug Facts, Cocaine, www.ondcp.gov/drugfact/cocaine/index.html.
19. Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control, www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/drugs_concern/cocaine/cocaine.htm.
20. United States Sentencing Commission, 2005 Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics, June 2006.
21. USDOJ/OIG Special Report, THE CIA-CONTRA-CRACK COCAINE CONTROVERSY: A REVIEW OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S INVESTIGATIONS AND PROSECUTIONS (December, 1997), www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/9712/.
22. The Controlled Substances Act of 1970.
23. Dr. Peter G. Bourne, a drug expert who would later become President Carter's Special Assistant to the President on Health Issues, wrote in 1974: "Cocaine ... is probably the most benign of illicit drugs currently in widespread use .... Short acting -- about 15 minutes -- not physically addicting, and acutely pleasurable, cocaine has found increasing favor at all socioeconomic levels in the last year." Peter G. Bourne, "The Great Cocaine Myth," Drugs and Drug Abuse Education Newsletter 5: 5 (1974). See also, F.H. Gawin and H.D. Kleber, "Evolving Conceptualizations of Cocaine Dependence," Yale Journal of Biological Medicine 61: 123-136 (1988).
24. USDOJ/OIG Special Report, THE CIA-CONTRA-CRACK COCAINE CONTROVERSY: A REVIEW OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S INVESTIGATIONS AND PROSECUTIONS (December, 1997), www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/9712/.
Mother, son face multiple felony drug charges
Outside the house, officers found 638 grams of cocaine in 22 small bags inside a black plastic bag in the bed of a pickup truck registered to Washington and parked under a car port next to the house, Young said.
| Full Text (437 words) |
May 5--DECATUR -- Geraldine Washington, 45, and her son, Juan L. Britton, 24, face long prison terms if convicted under drug trafficking charges filed Monday in Macon County Circuit Court.
They were arrested Thursday by Decatur police officers who served two search warrants on their residence in the 1100 block of East Leafland Avenue at the culmination of a wide-ranging narcotics trafficking investigation that involved police in Northern, Central and Southern Illinois.
Washington is charged with unlawful possession with two counts of intent to deliver 400 to 900 grams of cocaine with a prior conviction for the same offense and unlawful possession of marijuana with a prior unlawful possession of cocaine with intent to deliver conviction. The counts involving 400 to 900 grams of cocaine carry a prison term up to 80 years upon conviction.
Britton is charged with the Class X felony of unlawful possession of 400 to 900 grams of cocaine with intent to deliver, which carries a prison term of 12 to 50 years upon conviction, and unlawful possession of 400 to 900 grams of cocaine, a Class 1 felony punishable by a prison term of eight to 40 years upon conviction. He also is charged with unlawful possession of marijuana.
Mother and son are charged with unlawful possession of 30 to 500 grams of marijuana with intent to deliver.
Washington is jailed in lieu of $25,000 cash bail and Britton in lieu of $50,000 cash bail. Arraignment on the charges is scheduled for Friday.
In a sworn statement filed in court, Decatur police detective Steve Young said Britton was found in the kitchen of the house when officers entered on Thursday and his mother was nearby. He said officers found $2,000 in Britton's pants pocket, $2,920 in a bedroom dresser drawer and $16,840 in a closet.
Also in the closet were 54 bags of marijuana packaged for street sale and weighing 152 grams, Young said.
Outside the house, officers found 638 grams of cocaine in 22 small bags inside a black plastic bag in the bed of a pickup truck registered to Washington and parked under a car port next to the house, Young said. On the ground by the rear driver's side wheel, officers found a plastic bag with 56 grams of cocaine in it, he said.
Sgt. Rick McElroy said all together, officers seized 720 grams of cocaine, 152 grams of high grade marijuana and more than $24,000. He said the drug trafficking investigation involved the Macon County Sheriff's Office, Illinois State Police and police in Taylorville, Mount Vernon, DeKalb, Jacksonville and East Alton.
ringram@herald-review.com|421-7973
Credit: Herald & Review, Decatur, Ill.
| Subjects: | Marijuana, Criminal investigations, Drug trafficking |
| Author(s): | Ron Ingram |
| Document types: | News |
| Publication title: | McClatchy - Tribune Business News. Washington: May 5, 2009. |
| Source type: | Wire Feed |
| ProQuest document ID: | 1698867071 |
| Text Word Count | 437 |
| Document URL: | http://proquest |
MARIJUANA
DESCRIPTION/OVERVIEW
Marijuana is the most commonly abused illicit drug in the United States. A dry, shredded green/brown mix of flowers, stems, seeds, and leaves of the plant Cannabis sativa, it usually is smoked as a cigarette (joint, nail), or in a pipe (bong). It also is smoked in blunts, which are cigars that have been emptied of tobacco and refilled with marijuana, often in combination with another drug. It might also be mixed in food or brewed as a tea. As a more concentrated, resinous form it is called hashish and, as a sticky black liquid, hash oil. Marijuana smoke has a pungent and distinctive, usually sweet-and-sour odor.(1)
The main active chemical in marijuana is THC (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol). The membranes of certain nerve cells in the brain contain protein receptors that bind to THC. Once securely in place, THC kicks off a series of cellular reactions that ultimately lead to the high that users experience when they smoke marijuana.(2)
| CONTROL STATUS |
Marijuana is a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Schedule I drugs are classified as having a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.
| STREET NAMES |
Grass, pot, weed, bud, Mary Jane, dope, indo, hydro(3)
| SHORT-TERM EFFECTS |
When marijuana is smoked, its effects begin immediately after the drug enters the brain and last from 1 to 3 hours. If marijuana is consumed in food or drink, the short-term effects begin more slowly, usually in 1/2 to 1 hour, and last longer, for as long as 4 hours. Smoking marijuana deposits several times more THC into the blood than does eating or drinking the drug.(4)
Within a few minutes after inhaling marijuana smoke, an individual’s heart begins beating more rapidly, the bronchial passages relax and become enlarged, and blood vessels in the eyes expand, making the eyes look red. The heart rate, normally 70 to 80 beats per minute, may increase by 20 to 50 beats per minute or, in some cases, even double. This effect can be greater if other drugs are taken with marijuana.(5)
As THC enters the brain, it causes a user to feel euphoric— or “high”—by acting in the brain’s reward system, areas of the brain that respond to stimuli such as food and drink as well as most drugs of abuse. THC activates the reward system in the same way that nearly all drugs of abuse do, by stimulating brain cells to release the chemical dopamine.(6)
A marijuana user may experience pleasant sensations, colors and sounds may seem more intense, and time appears to pass very slowly. The user’s mouth feels dry, and he or she may suddenly become very hungry and thirsty. His or her hands may tremble and grow cold. The euphoria passes after awhile, and then the user may feel sleepy or depressed. Occasionally, marijuana use produces anxiety, fear, distrust, or panic.(7)
| LONG-TERM EFFECTS |
Someone who smokes marijuana regularly may have many of the same respiratory problems that tobacco smokers do, such as daily cough and phlegm production, more frequent acute chest illnesses, a heightened risk of lung infections, and a greater tendency toward obstructed airways. Cancer of the respiratory tract and lungs may also be promoted by marijuana smoke. Marijuana has the potential to promote cancer of the lungs and other parts of the respiratory tract because marijuana smoke contains 50 percent to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke.(8)
Marijuana's damage to short-term memory seems to occur because THC alters the way in which information is processed by the hippocampus, a brain area responsible for memory formation. In one study, researchers compared marijuana smoking and nonsmoking 12th-graders' scores on standardized tests of verbal and mathematical skills. Although all of the students had scored equally well in 4th grade, those who were heavy marijuana smokers, i.e., those who used marijuana seven or more times per week, scored significantly lower in 12th grade than nonsmokers. Another study of 129 college students found that among heavy users of marijuana critical skills related to attention, memory, and learning were significantly impaired, even after they had not used the drug for at least 24 hours.(9)
| TRAFFICKING TRENDS |
Overall marijuana production in Mexico--the principal source of foreign-produced marijuana to U.S. drug markets appears to be increasing. Mexico marijuana production estimates indicate that production in Mexico was relatively low from 2000 through 2002 during a period of drought, increased sharply in 2003 as weather improved, and receded slightly in 2004 (see 2006 National Drug Threat Assessment, Table 5). Moreover, anecdotal reporting and cannabis eradication and marijuana seizure data all indicate that marijuana production in Canada has recently increased, perhaps significantly. Domestic marijuana production also appears to be increasing, according to law enforcement reporting that reveals a significant increase in eradication of domestic marijuana grow sites in 2005. Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program (DCE/SP) data indicate that domestic cannabis eradication--occurring primarily in California, Kentucky, Tennessee, Hawaii, and Washington, often on public lands including Forest Service lands (see 2006 National Drug Threat Assessment, Figure 2)--increased steadily from 2000 through 2003, decreased in 2004, and increased sharply to its highest recorded level in 2005. (See 2006 National Drug Threat Assessment, Table 6.)(10)
Most of the foreign-produced marijuana available in the United States is smuggled into the country from Mexico via the U.S.-Mexico border by Mexican DTOs and criminal groups; however, a sharp rise in marijuana smuggling from Canada via the U.S.-Canada border by Asian criminal groups has increased the domestic availability of marijuana produced in Canada.(11)
Mexican criminal groups control most wholesale marijuana distribution throughout the United States; however, Asian criminal groups appear to be increasing their position as wholesale distributors of Canada-produced marijuana. According to law enforcement reporting, Mexican DTOs and criminal groups control most wholesale marijuana distribution in the Great Lakes, Pacific, Southeast, Southwest, and West Central Regions and control much of the wholesale marijuana distribution in the Northeast Region. Although Asian criminal groups are not the predominant wholesale marijuana distributors in any region, these groups, particularly Chinese and Vietnamese groups, now are widely identified in law enforcement reporting as the principal suppliers of high potency, Canada-produced marijuana throughout the country.(12)
The influence of Asian criminal groups in high potency marijuana distribution is likely to increase in the near term. Law enforcement reporting indicates that these groups are increasingly gaining control over much of the high potency marijuana production and distribution in Canada and now appear to be extending their influence in the United States. In fact, law enforcement reporting indicates that the influence of Asian organizations in drug trafficking--particularly the trafficking of high potency marijuana--in the United States is now more significant than that of Russian-Israeli, Jamaican, or Puerto Rican criminal groups (see 2006 National Drug Threat Assessment, Appendix A, Map 3).(13)
Marijuana distribution is widespread throughout the country, as evidenced by the presence of 14 principal distribution centers for the drug, one or more of which are located in nearly every region of the country (see 2006 National Drug Threat Assessment, Appendix A, Map 6). Much of the midlevel and retail distribution of marijuana in these and other cities is controlled by African American, Asian, and Hispanic street gangs; however, independent dealers control most midlevel and retail marijuana distribution in smaller communities and rural areas. In fact, independent dealers are likely to retain control of distribution in smaller communities because they often distribute locally produced marijuana rather than foreign-produced marijuana.(14)
| USE/USER POPULATION |
Among students surveyed as part of the 2005 Monitoring the Future study, 16.5% of eighth graders, 34.1% of tenth graders, and 44.8% of twelfth graders reported lifetime use of marijuana. In 2004, these percentages were 16.3%, 35.1%, and 45.7%, respectively.(15)
Approximately 74% of eighth graders, 65.5% of tenth graders, and 58% of twelfth graders surveyed in 2005 reported that smoking marijuana regularly was a "great risk."(16)
The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance (YRBS) study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) surveys high school students on several risk factors including drug and alcohol use. Results of the 2005 survey indicate that 38.4% of high school students reported using marijuana at some point in their lifetimes. Additional YRBS results indicate that 20.2% of students surveyed in 2005 reported current (past month) use of marijuana.(17)
Between 2001 and 2005, marijuana use dropped in all three categories: lifetime (13%), past year (15%) and 30-day use (19%). Current marijuana use decreased 28% among 8th graders (from 9.2% to 6.6%), and 23% among 10th graders (from 19.8% to 15.2%).(18)
| ARRESTS/SENTENCING |
Between October 1, 2004 and January 11, 2005, there were 1,777 Federal offenders sentenced for marijuana-related charges in U.S. Courts. Approximately 94.9% of the cases involved marijuana trafficking. Between January 12, 2005 and September 30, 2005, there were 4,396 Federal offenders sentenced for marijuana-related charges in U.S. Courts. Approximately 95.8% of the cases involved trafficking.(19)
| DEA DRUG SEIZURES |
In 2005, the DEA seized 282,139 kgs of marijuana. For prior years, click here.
| LEGISLATION |
The campaign to legitimize what is called "medical" marijuana is based on two propositions: that science views marijuana as medicine, and that DEA targets sick and dying people using the drug. Neither proposition is true. Smoked marijuana has not withstood the rigors of science – it is not medicine and it is not safe. DEA targets criminals engaged in cultivation and trafficking, not the sick and dying. No state has legalized the trafficking of marijuana, including the twelve states that have decriminalized certain marijuana use.(20)
In the case of United States v. Oakland Cannabis Club the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that marijuana has no medical value as determined by Congress. The opinion of the court stated that: "In the case of the Controlled Substances Act, the statute reflects a determination that marijuana has no medical benefits worthy of an exception outside the confines of a government-approved research project."(21) The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court after the federal government sought an injunction in 1998 against the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and five other marijuana distributors in California.(22)
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a ruling on May 24, 2002, upholding DEA's determination that marijuana must remain a schedule I controlled substance. The Court of Appeals rejected an appeal that contended that marijuana does not meet the legal criteria for classification in schedule I, the most restrictive schedule under the Controlled Substances Act.(23)
| TREATMENT RESOURCES |
Treatment Publications and Research | Treatment and Patient Education | Treatment Facility Locator
| PHOTOS |
Click here to see high resolution photos of marijuana>>
| RELATED NEWS RELEASES |
Click here to read DEA news releases involving marijuana>>
| OTHER USEFUL LINKS |
Publication: What Americans Need to Know About Marijuana
Exposing the Myth of Smoked Medical Marijuana
"Medical" Marijuana - The Facts
| SOURCES |
1-2. National Institute on Drug Abuse, InfoFacts: Marijuana, April 2006
3. Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), Marijuana Street Terms
4-7. National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Report Series—Marijuana Abuse, July 2005
8-9. National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Report Series—Marijuana Abuse, October 2001.
10-14. National Drug Intelligence Center, National Drug Threat Assessment 2006.
15-16. National Institute on Drug Abuse and University of Michigan, Monitoring the Future 2005 Data From In-School Surveys of 8th-, 10th-, and 12th-Grade Students, December 2005
17. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance—United States, 2005, June 2006
18. Monitoring the Future, 2005. Supplemented by information from the Office of National Drug Control Policy press release on the 2005 MTF Survey, December 19, 2005
19. United States Sentencing Commission, 2005 Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics, June 2006
20. The DEA Position on Marijuana. As of April 2006, the eleven states that have decriminalized certain marijuana use are Arizona, Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. In addition, Maryland has enacted legislation that recognizes a "medical marijuana" defense
21. Supreme Court of The United States, Syllabus: United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative Et Al. (PDF), May 2001.
22. Join Together Online, Supreme Court Rules against Medical Marijuana, May 15, 2001
23. Drug Enforcement Administration, High Court Upholds Marijuana as Dangerous Drug, June 6, 2002
An Urban School Based Comparative Study of Experiences and Perceptions Differentiating Public Health Insurance Eligible Immigrant Families with and without Coverage for their Children
Introduction We explore why some low income immigrant families enroll in government financed health insurance plans for their children, while others also eligible do not enroll. Methods Our team conducted and analyzed audiotaped semi-structured interviews with families of 8 insured and 10 uninsured children focused on knowledge of and experience with seeking health insurance coverage. Results Common among families not enrolled in government sponsored plans were misperceptions about the insurance system, including a suspicion of the government monitoring them and/or lack of familiarity with the concept of insurance itself. Among families that did enroll, the predominant theme was the essential role of their sponsor, other kin or community in educating and assisting them with the application process. Conclusions Prior research has identified external obstacles to enrollment. Our findings indicate the additional importance of facilitating social support, particularly from sponsors in mentoring new arrivals through the process of seeking insurance coverage.
| Author(s): | Yoona Rhee, Frank Belmonte, Saul J Weiner |
| Publication title: | Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health. New York: Jun 2009. Vol. 11, Iss. 3; pg. 222, 7 pgs |
| Source type: | Periodical |
| ISSN: | 15571912 |
| ProQuest document ID: | 1695682101 |
| Text Word Count | 4314 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10903-008-9132-8 |
| Document URL: | http://proquest |
0 comments:
Post a Comment