DOCSLIB.ORG

COVID and Beyond Dart RC Opioid Abuse

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
COVID and Beyond Dart RC Opioid Abuse Trends within Drug Abuse and Healthcare – COVID and Beyond Richard C. Dart, MD, PhD Director, Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Safety, Denver Health Executive Director, RADARS® System Professor, University of Colorado School of Medicine Competing Interests RADARS® System is the property of The Denver Health and Hospital Authority (DHHA), a political subdivision of the State of Colorado. RADARS® System is supported by subscriptions from pharmaceutical manufacturers, government and nongovernment agencies for surveillance, research, and reporting services. No subscriber participated in the conception, analysis, drafting, or review of this presentation. 2 3 What Caused the US Opioid Crisis - HHS • In the late 1990s, pharmaceutical companies reassured the medical community that patients would not become addicted to opioid pain relievers and health care providers began to prescribe them at greater rates. • Increased prescription of opioid medications led to widespread misuse of both prescription and non-prescription opioids before it came clear that these medications could indeed be highly addictive. • 2017 HHS declared a public health emergency and announced a five point strategy to combat the opioid crisis https://www.hhs.gov/opioids/about-the-epidemic/index.html 4 What Really Happened? • Health care systems and regulation • Fifth vital sign, patient “satisfaction,” etc. • Careless doctors • We knew better, but let convenience win out. • Criminal behavior • Opioid marketing • Aggressive, irresponsible • Increased supply of illicit opioids • Lack of treatment for OUD • Good, but after the fact, insufficient to meet demand • Increased demand? 5 What Happened to Rx Drug Abuse? 10 Years ago… Prescription drug abuse is the Nation's fastest-growing drug problem, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has classified prescription drug abuse as an epidemic. … nearly one-third of people aged 12 and over who used drugs for the first time in 2009 began by using a prescription drug non medically. 6 Real World Evidence and Triangulation RADARS® System Acute Substance Use Health Effects Treatment Drug Population Diversion Survey SUBSTANCE ABUSE Street Price Web Discussion Mortality Lawlor DA, et al. Int J Epidemiology, 2016, 1866–1886 doi: 10.1093/ije/dyw314 7 Opioid Prescribing Decreased Until COVID 70000000 2020 60000000 Rx 50000000 Dispensed Total Opioid Rx 40000000 -36% 30000000 ? 20000000 Total ER Rx -53% 10000000 0 Source: IQVIA™ US-Based Longitudinal Prescription Data 8 RADARS Drug Diversion Program, 2006 - 2020 Diversion of Prescription Drugs 3 2.5 Invest. Opened 2 Per 100,000 1.5 population 1 0.5 0 Combined: oxycodone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, fentanyl, morphine, tramadol 9 9 RADARS Drug Diversion Program, 2006 - 2019 1.2 3 2019 2019 Oxycodone 1 2.5 Fentanyl 2 0.8 Hydrocodone Invest. Opened Hydromorphone 1.5 0.6 Per 100,000 Morphine 1 0.4 population Methadone 0.5 0.2 Tramadol Oxymorphone 0 0 oxycodone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, fentanyl, morphine, tramadol 10 10 Total Drug-Involved Deaths in the US 93,000 11 HOW CAN WE HAVE DECREASING PRESCRIPTION DRUG ABUSE, BUT INCREASING DEATHS? 12 13 Most Deaths are Due to Fentanyl and Heroin (Often Adulterated with Fentanyl or Analogs) Fentanyl is the reason that deaths are increasing while Rx opioids are decreasing 13 Drug Exposure Nicotine - Alcohol – Cannabis – Etc. Risk Factors Risk Factors Family Dysfunction Physical Abuse Emotional Abuse Trauma Isolation Genetics Polysubstance Abuse Opioid Sedative/Hypnotics Antipsychotic GABAergic • Heroin/Fentanyl • Alprazolam • Quetiapine • Pregabalin • Designer opioids • Diazepam • Olanzapine • Gabapentin • Rx analgesics • Designer drugs • Loperamide • Z-Drugs Stimulant Hallucinogen NPS/Synthetic • Cocaine • Ketamine • Mephedrone • Amphetamine • LSD • Cathinones • Methylphenidate • Psilocybin • Synth Cann’oids • Designer drugs 14 Drug Exposure Nicotine - Alcohol – Cannabis – Etc. Risk Factors Risk Factors Family Dysfunction Physical Abuse Emotional Abuse Trauma Isolation Genetics Polysubstance Abuse OpioidDrugs are notSedative/Hypnotics my problem. Antipsychotic GABAergic • Heroin/Fentanyl • Alprazolam • Quetiapine • Pregabalin • DesignerReality opioids is my• Diazepam problem. • Olanzapine • Gabapentin • Rx analgesics • Designer drugs • LoperamideDrugs are my• Z-Drugs solution. Stimulant Hallucinogen NPS/Synthetic • Cocaine • Ketamine • Mephedrone • Amphetamine • LSD • Cathinones • Methylphenidate Russell• Psilocybin Brand • Synth Cann’oids • Designer drugs 15 It’s Not the Drug 16 Deaths of Despair TITLE OF YOUR PRESENTATION HERE 17 Strategy Implications • Supply reduction: “The War on Drugs” • Better law enforcement can reduce the amount of drug available • No drug = no abuse • But efforts have failed for over 50 years • Demand reduction • If people don’t want to abuse drugs (e.g. no market for sale), then there will be no supply. • Community Coalitions • Substance abuse treatment facilities • Harm reduction • Measures to reduce the harm produced by drug abuse (e.g. needle exchange programs, take-home naloxone, etc.) 18 Project Lazarus • Provider Education • Naloxone • Community Education • Pain Patient Support • Public Awareness • Pain Management • Hospital ED Policies • Data & Evaluation • Addiction Treatment • Harm Reduction • Diversion control • Legislation 19 https://www.projectlazarus.org/ Covid and Beyond 20 Treatment Center Programs, 2008 - 2020 1.6 2020 1.4 1.2 Endorse. 1 Per 100,000 0.8 population 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 20081 20084 20093 20102 20111 20114 20123 20132 20141 20144 20153 20162 20171 20174 20183 20192 20201 20204 oxycodone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, morphine, tramadol 21 Treatment Center Programs, 2008 - 2020 1.6 1.2 2020 2020 1.4 1 1.2 Oxycodone 0.8 Hydrocodone Endorse. 1 Hydromorphone Per 100,000 0.8 Morphine population 0.6 Methdaone 0.6 0.4 Buprenorphine 0.4 Tramadol 0.2 0.2 Heroin Oxymorphone 0 0 20081 20084 20093 20102 20111 20114 20123 20132 20141 20144 20153 20162 20171 20174 20183 20192 20201 20204 20081 20084 20093 20102 20111 20114 20123 20132 20141 20144 20153 20162 20171 20174 20183 20192 20201 20204 oxycodone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, morphine, tramadol 22 Changes in Treatment Center Operations Operation Change March 1, 2020 June 1, 2020 October 1, 2020 through May 31, through through December 2020 September31, 2020 31, 2020 Suspended patients from entering 15.3% 3.1% 11.9% treatment Temporarily Closed 6.9% 3.1% 5.1% and Reopened No 76.4% 93.8% 83.1% closure/suspensions 23 Open Ended Text Response Examples • “A decrease in the number of patients seeking MAT services” • “Moved to… two week or monthly take homes.” • “Telehealth counseling; car dosing” • “Staffing shortages have led to decreases in counseling services...” • “Due to court and legal offices not meeting regularly, demand for treatment has decreased.” • “Some clients who are positive for Covid or experience symptoms have been dosed in their cars.” • Several noted increased use of telemedicine for treatment and counseling 24 What Comes Next? 25 Stimulants - Increasing Mortality over Time Mortality related to medical stimulants is rising rapidly alongside illicit substances like cocaine and methamphetamine. Black J, et al. Association of Medical Stimulants With Mortality in the US From 2010 to 2017 26 doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.7850 Interaction of Licit and Illicit Pharmaceuticals Illicit Licit 27 3 Million Adults Have Used Kratom, NMURx, 2018-2019 Estimated prevalence of lifetime Kratom use is 1.3% = 3,353,624 adults 50 45 Kratom (use in past year) 40 Prescription Opioid (non-medical use 35 in past year) Endorsed by 30 User (%) 25 20 15 10 5 0 None (0) Low (1-2) Moderate (3-5) Substantial (6-8) Severe (9-10) DAST-10 Risk Category (Score Range) Schimmel J, et al. Prevalence and description of kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) use in the United States: A 28 cross-sectional study. Addiction. 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/add.15082. Nonmedical Use of Loperamide (Immodium) in UK and US, NMURx, 2017 Why? 100 80 UK 60 US 40 20 0 Tx Med Condit Get High Come Down Withdraw Other Webb NE, et al. Non-medical use of loperamide in the UK and USA. QJM. 2020 DOI: 10.1093/qjmed/hcz215 29 Increasing Diversion of Nonscheduled Psychoactive Prescription Medications Rx Opioids Flexeril Quetiapine Trazodone Kurtz SP, et al. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Safety, 2019 30 Summary • Opioid deaths are still rising • Deaths mainly due to synthetic opioid analog • It’s Not Just The Drug • Most patients misuse more than one drug • Most deaths involve more than one drug • Treatment needs to address the underlying causes of opioid use • Abuse of other drugs is skyrocketing • Societal mirror? 31 Questions? www.RADARS.org Is [email protected] Oxycodone Surging? 32 32.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Policy Perspective on the Global Use of Smokeless Tobacco
    Curr Addict Rep DOI 10.1007/s40429-017-0166-7 TOBACCO (AH WEINBERGER, SECTION EDITOR) A Policy Perspective on the Global Use of Smokeless Tobacco Kamran Siddiqi1 & Aishwarya Lakshmi Vidyasagaran1 & Anne Readshaw1 & Ray Croucher2 # The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication Abstract Keywords Smokeless tobacco . Snus . Tobacco control . Background Globally, over 300 million people consume di- Global health verse smokeless tobacco (ST) products. They are addictive, cause cancer, increased cardiovascular mortality risks and poor pregnancy outcomes. Introduction Purpose of Review To identify gaps in implementing key ST demand-reduction measures, focused literature reviews were “Smokeless tobacco” (ST) comprises tobacco products that do conducted and findings synthesized according to relevant not involve a combustion process, such as chewing, nasal and WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) oral tobacco [1•]. Globally, over 300 million people consume Articles. ST [1•], yet ST has been largely neglected in research and Recent Findings The literature supports implementation of policy arenas because it is generally regarded as less harmful ST demand-reduction measures. For taxation, labelling and than cigarettes. It is also seen as a regional rather than a global packaging, most administrations have weaker policies for ST problem, and too diverse and complex to control. than cigarettes. Capacity to regulate ST contents and offer ST use is reported in at least 116 countries worldwide, cessation support is lacking. There is poor compliance with including countries in Africa, Asia, Europe and the bans on ST advertising, promotion and sponsorship. Americas [2•]. Smokeless tobacco consumption is therefore Summary The literature on implementation of WHO a global public health issue.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report
    United States Department of State Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs International Narcotics Control Strategy Report Volume I Drug and Chemical Control March 2020 INCSR 2020 Volume 1 Table of Contents Table of Contents Common Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................................... iii International Agreements.................................................................................................................................... v INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Legislative Basis for the INCSR ......................................................................................................................... 2 Presidential Determination ................................................................................................................................. 7 Policy and Program Developments .................................................................................................... 12 Overview ......................................................................................................................................................... 13 Methodology for U.S. Government Estimates of Illegal Drug Production .......................................................... 18 Parties to UN Conventions ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Finland Country Drug Report 2017
    Finland Country Drug Report 2017 Contents: At a glance | National drug strategy and coordination (p. 2) | Public expenditure (p. 3) | Drug laws and drug law offences (p. 4) | Drug use (p. 5) | Drug harms (p. 8) | Prevention (p. 10) | Harm reduction (p. 11) | Treatment (p. 12) | Drug use and responses in prison (p. 14) | Quality assurance (p. 15) | Drug-related research (p. 15) | Drug markets (p. 16) | Key drug statistics for Finland (p. 18) | EU Dashboard (p. 20) THE DRUG PROBLEM IN FINLAND AT A GLANCE Drug use Treatment entrants Overdose deaths Drug law offences in young adults (15-34 years) by primary drug in the last year 250 Cannabis 200 23 478 166 150 13.5 % Top 5 drugs seized 100 ranked according to quantities Cannabis, 21% 50 measured in kilograms Amphetamines, 15 % Cocaine, 0 % 0 1. Amphetamine 2011 2012 2013 2015 2014 Opioids, 52 % 2010 2007 2008 2006 9 % 17.9 % 2009 Other, 12 % 2. Herbal cannabis Other drugs Opioid substitution HIV diagnoses 3. Cannabis resin MDMA 2.5 % treatment clients attributed to injecting 4. Cocaine Amphetamines 2.4 % 14 5. Heroin Cocaine 1 % 12 3 000 10 Population 8 (15-64 years) 6 7 High-risk opioid users Syringes distributeddistributed 4 through specialised 2 3 483 757 programmes 0 13 836 2011 2012 2013 2015 2014 2010 2007 2008 2006 2009 Source: EUROSTAT (12 700 - 15 090) 5 301 000 Source: ECDC Extracted on: 26/03/2017 NB: Data presented here are either national estimates (prevalence of use, opioid drug users) or reported numbers through the EMCDDA indicators (treatment clients, syringes, deaths and HIV diagnosis, drug law offences and seizures).
    [Show full text]
  • DEMAND REDUCTION a Glossary of Terms
    UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. E.00.XI.9 ISBN: 92-1-148129-5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document was prepared by the: United Nations International Drug Control Programme (UNDCP), Vienna, Austria, in consultation with the Commonwealth of Health and Aged Care, Australia, and the informal international reference group. ii Contents Page Foreword . xi Demand reduction: A glossary of terms . 1 Abstinence . 1 Abuse . 1 Abuse liability . 2 Action research . 2 Addiction, addict . 2 Administration (method of) . 3 Adverse drug reaction . 4 Advice services . 4 Advocacy . 4 Agonist . 4 AIDS . 5 Al-Anon . 5 Alcohol . 5 Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) . 6 Alternatives to drug use . 6 Amfetamine . 6 Amotivational syndrome . 6 Amphetamine . 6 Amyl nitrate . 8 Analgesic . 8 iii Page Antagonist . 8 Anti-anxiety drug . 8 Antidepressant . 8 Backloading . 9 Bad trip . 9 Barbiturate . 9 Benzodiazepine . 10 Blood-borne virus . 10 Brief intervention . 11 Buprenorphine . 11 Caffeine . 12 Cannabis . 12 Chasing . 13 Cocaine . 13 Coca leaves . 14 Coca paste . 14 Cold turkey . 14 Community empowerment . 15 Co-morbidity . 15 Comprehensive Multidisciplinary Outline of Future Activities in Drug Abuse Control (CMO) . 15 Controlled substance . 15 Counselling and psychotherapy . 16 Court diversion . 16 Crash . 16 Cross-dependence . 17 Cross-tolerance . 17 Custody diversion . 17 Dance drug . 18 Decriminalization or depenalization . 18 Demand . 18 iv Page Demand reduction . 19 Dependence, dependence syndrome . 19 Dependence liability . 20 Depressant . 20 Designer drug . 20 Detoxification . 20 Diacetylmorphine/Diamorphine . 21 Diuretic . 21 Drug . 21 Drug abuse . 22 Drug abuse-related harm . 22 Drug abuse-related problem . 22 Drug policy . 23 Drug seeking . 23 Drug substitution . 23 Drug testing . 24 Drug use .
    [Show full text]
  • Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) Is the First Treaty Negotiated Under the Auspices of the World Health Organization
    World Health Organization Geneva, Switzerland WHO FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON TOBACCO CONTROL World Health Organization WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. 1.Tobacco - supply and distribution 2.Tobacco industry - legislation 3.Tobacco smoke pollution - prevention and control 4.Tobacco use cessation 5.Treaties I.World Health Organization. ISBN 92 4 159101 3 (LC/NLM classification: HD 9130.6) © World Health Organization 2003, updated reprint 2004, 2005 All rights reserved. Publications of the World Health Organization can be obtained from WHO Press, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland (tel: +41 22 791 2476; fax: +41 22 791 4857; email: [email protected]). Requests for permission to reproduce or translate WHO publications – whether for sale or for noncommercial distribution – should be addressed to WHO Press, at the above address (fax: +41 22 791 4806; email: [email protected]). The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Society Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe, 2019
    Correlation Correlation European DATA REPORT Eropean Harm Reduction R C Network C Network CIVIL SOCIETY MONITORING OF HARM REDUCTION IN EUROPE, 2019 DATA REPORT 1 CIVIL SOCIETY MONITORING OF HARM REDUCTION IN EUROPE, 2019 ® Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network, 2019. This publication of Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network is protected by copyright. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Recommended citation: Tammi, T., Rigoni, R., Matičič, M., Schäffer, D., van der Gouwe, D., Schiffer, K., Perez Gayo, R., Schatz, E. (2020): Civil Society Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe, 2019. Data Report. Correlation European Harm Reduction Network, Amsterdam. Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network c/o Foundation De REGENBOOG GROEP Droogbak 1d 1013 GE Amsterdam The Netherlands www.correlation-net.org This project has been supported by the European Commission. Correlation - European Harm Reduction Network is co-funded by the European Union 2 Correlation European DATA REPORT Harm Reduction C Network CIVIL SOCIETY MONITORING OF HARM REDUCTION IN EUROPE, 2019 DATA REPORT 3 CIVIL SOCIETY MONITORING OF HARM REDUCTION IN EUROPE, 2019 CONTRIBUTORS Editor: The data network: Graham Shaw Albania: Genci Mucollari, Aksion Plus Austria: Alexandra Karden & Barbara Siokola, Scientific expert group: Suchthilfe Wien Tuukka Tammi (THL), Dagmar Hedrich (EMCDDA), Belgium: Peter Blanckaert & Tessa Windelinckx, Sam Shirley-Beavan (HRI), Perrine Roux (INSERM). Free Clinic Bosnia and Herzegovina: Samir Ibisevic, PROI
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Drug Policy on Women
    THE IMPACT OF DRUG POLICY ON WOMEN Kasia Malinowska-Sempruch & Olga Rychkova As member states of the United Nations take stock of the 02 INTRODUCTION drug control system, a number of debates have emerged among governments about how to balance international 03 WHAT THE UN AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL BODIES SAY drug laws with human rights, public health, alternatives to incarceration, and experimentation with regulation. 07 ISSUES RELEVANT TO UNGASS DEBATES This series intends to provide a primer on why governments 18 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS must not turn a blind eye to pressing human rights and public health impacts of current drug policies. 01 THE IMPACT OF DRUG POLICY ON WOMEN WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF DRUG POLICY ON WOMEN? “Who ever heard of a female drug lord? As the terms ‘kingpin’ and ‘drug lord’ denote, men are almost always at the head of major drug operations, and yet the rate of imprisonment of women for drug crimes has far outpaced that of men. Families and children suffer—but why?” –American Civil Liberties Union et al., Caught in the Net, 2005 1 1 American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Breaking the Chains and Brennan Center for Justice. Caught in the net: the impact of drug policies on women and families. New York, 2005. At: https://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform/caught-net-impact-drug-policies-women-and-families. 02 THE IMPACT OF DRUG POLICY ON WOMEN INTRODUCTION In the public mind, the “war on drugs” probably conjures up a male image. In most countries, official statistics would show that men, indeed, are the majority of people who use drugs recreationally, who have problematic use, and who sell drugs.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Synthetic Opioid Testing Within the Department of Defense
    SUMMARY OF SYNTHETIC OPIOID TESTING WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Tom Martin, Ph.D. Liaison to Director, DoD Drug Testing and Program Policy PERSONNEL AND READINESS PERSONNEL AND READINESS Drug Demand Reduction Program Mission and Scope Mission: Enable operational readiness, safety, and security of the Total Force by deterring illicit and prescription drug abuse through robust and dynamic drug testing; emerging drug threat surveillance; prevention, education, and outreach efforts; and development of new testing procedures. Scope: All DoD components and DoD civilians in testing designated positions (TDPs) Policies: DODI 1010.01 “Military Personnel Drug Abuse Testing Program (MPDATP)” DODI 1010.09 “DoD Civilian Employee Drug-Free Workplace Program” DODI 1010.16 “Technical Procedures for the Military Personnel Drug Abuse Testing Program (MPDATP)” PERSONNEL AND READINESS DDRP Driving Factors • Drug abuse in the general U.S. 18-25 year old male group is estimated to be 17-20%– the population from which the Service recruits their enlisted personnel • Before DoD instituted drug testing among Service personnel, drug use was a significant recurring problem – Vietnam (estimated over 5% of returning service members addicted to heroin) – 1981 CVN Nimitz aviation mishap – 14 killed, 48 injured, 7 aircraft destroyed, 11 aircraft damaged, $150M in damages, six deceased with detectable levels of marijuana • Notable increase in abuse/misuse of prescription pain medications • Personnel abusing illicit drugs or prescription medications are a safety hazard
    [Show full text]
  • Supply, Demand & Harm Reduction
    Supply, demand & harm reduction Injecting drug use is on the rise throughout the world. Research suggests between 10 and 15 million “Basically when people want drugs people in 135 countries inject drugs. Globally, 5 to they will find a way to get them” 10 per cent of HIV infections come from injecting drugs but in some countries the rate is more than Basically, when people want drugs (demand) they 50 per cent. The traditional approach to controlling will find a way to get them (supply) whether it drug use is to focus on law enforcement to reduce means finding a new supplier or changing to a new the supply of drugs reaching the community. This is drug. Supply and demand reduction strategies do coupled with other strategies to reduce the demand not stop this from happening. for drugs. Research shows that when the demand for drugs is high, reducing the supply is largely Supply reduction might work if all countries worked ineffective. together to get rid of illicit drugs. But countries which are significant cultivators and/or “Harm reduction can co-exist with manufacturers of illicit drugs, such as Russia, supply and demand reduction…” Afghanistan, Myanmar and Colombia, have chronic political instability, poverty and corruption which inhibits any chance of supply reduction. Introducing The emergence of HIV/AIDS, and its rapid spread effective supply reduction is prohibitively expensive among injecting drug users (IDUs), meant that and requires massive human and technical effective strategies had to be developed and resources. Some drug seizures are large and law adopted – these effective strategies form the harm enforcement agencies and governments publicise reduction approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Drug Abuse, NDPS Act 1985 & Drug Demand Reduction
    IOSR Journal Of Pharmacy And Biological Sciences (IOSR-JPBS) e-ISSN:2278-3008, p-ISSN:2319-7676. Volume 15, Issue 5 Ser. IV (Sep. –Oct. 2020), PP 39-43 www.Iosrjournals.Org Drug Abuse, NDPS Act 1985 & Drug Demand Reduction: An Update Tapan Kumar Mahato Department of Pharmaceutical Analysis, B.Pharmacy College Rampura, Godhra, District Panchmahal, Gujarat, India Abstract NDPS Act i.e. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act came into existence on 14 November 1985 and it is applicable all over India. The act was made with the purpose to control the cultivation, manufacture, transport, distribution, export, import and use of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. In common sense, Narcotic drugs induces sleep while Psychotropic substances have the ability to alter the mind of an individual, hence these are called drugs of abuse and because of these effects a person becomes habitual of these drugs called drug addiction. Although, as these kinds of drugs have their importance in treatment of various diseases that is why these drugs are available in pharmacies and can be obtained only on the prescription of registered medical practitioner. If someone found in violation of this law, provision of punishment is there which includes rigorous imprisonment or fine or both. The present study is based on understanding drug abuse, NDPS act and drug demand reduction and how a pharmacist can play his role in overcoming the serious problem of drug abuse in our country because drug abuse is not only a individual’s problem but it is a psycho-socio-economic problem. Key word: Drug abuse; NDPS Act; NDPS Act 1985; Drug demand reduction, Narcotic drugs; Psychotropic substances ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Date of Submission: 30-09-2020 Date of Acceptance: 13-10-2020 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- I.
    [Show full text]
  • Trends and Developments Trends
    EN ISSN 2314-9086 EUROPEAN DRUG REPORT 2016 EUROPEAN DRUG REPORT Trends and Developments Trends European Drug Report Trends and Developments 2016 European Drug Report Trends and Developments 2016 I Legal notice This publication of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) is protected by copyright. The EMCDDA accepts no responsibility or liability for any consequences arising from the use of the data contained in this document. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the official opinions of the EMCDDA’s partners, any EU Member State or any agency or institution of the European Union. Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu). This report is available in Bulgarian, Spanish, Czech, Danish, German, Estonian, Greek, English, French, Croatian, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Hungarian, Dutch, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak, Slovenian, Finnish, Swedish, Turkish and Norwegian. All translations were made by the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016 ISBN: 978-92-9168-890-6 doi:10.2810/04312 © European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, 2016 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Recommended citation: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (2016), European Drug Report 2016: Trends and Developments, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
    [Show full text]
  • LEGALIZATION of DRUGS: the WRONG ANSWER TOA Ie COMPLEX PROBLEM ~ ~ I F ~( ~ T ~ I I ~ L ~ .~ I I
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. LEGALIZATION OF DRUGS: THE WRONG ANSWER TOA Ie COMPLEX PROBLEM ~ ~ I f ~( ~ t ~ I i ~ l ~ .~ I i United states Attorney's Office Northern District of Ohio November, 1991 149448 U.S. Department of Justice • National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating It. Points of view or opi nlons stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been granted by • U.S. States Attorney's Offlce for the Northern Dist. of Ohio to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permission of the copyright owner. '. LEGALIZATION OF DRUGS: THE WR.ONG ANSWER TOA • COMPLEX PROBLEM United states Attorney's Office Northern District of Ohio • November, 1991 PREFACE This document was prepared to respond to some of the confusing colloquy being advanced by the proponents of the legalization of drugs and to provide factual data to refute the legalization position. While every possible argument cannot be included, this document does address the majority of those arguments made by the proponents of • legalization and it suggests a number of practical premises for rejecting the legalization of drugs. Advocates for the legalization of drugs make arguments which initially appear to be sound. However, as the pages that follow will show, under close analysis, each argument will fail.
    [Show full text]