Tik is losing its grip on Western Cape teenagers, according to the latest medical research, which shows that use of the drug is most prevalent among people in their early 20s.
But experts have warned that a new drug is likely to take its place. (No idea what it could be)
Figures released this week show that the average age of tik users has been on the increase since 2006. (according to IOL)
Andreas Pluddeman, senior researcher in the council's Drug, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Unit, said the average age of tik users had definitely increased since 2006. "One of the conclusions that could be drawn is that there are slightly fewer teenagers who are initiating tik use."
But he said tik still remained the main problem drug among people seeking help at the city's rehab centres.
Tik use reached a peak in the second half of 2006, with 1 184 patients out of a total 2 798 surveyed reporting it was their primary drug of abuse.
Pluddeman said the findings, tracked from 2002, were "unprecedented" in terms of the sharp increase of users.
"There was a curve, and now it seems to be flattening off," he said.
The FACTS uncovered are more like tik's grip on the Cape reaches a plateau! Either that or it's a matter of fewer tik addicts seek treatment? The rosy "Tik losing grip on the Cape Teens" headline ignores that teens grow older and in the past there was NO tik use amongst teens.
Grant Jardine, of the Cape Town Drug Counselling Centre, said the new figures had been expected, considering their own recent statistics correlated with those of the MRC.
"Drugs work in cycles and each generation has a popular drug."
What a crock of sh*t. Drugs dont work in cycles! Certain drugs certainly decline in popularity over time and are overtaken by others. But Cycles? What bull. Each generation adopts a drug depending on a variety of factors, such as availability, cost, effectiveness and peer pressure. "Experts" indeed! If it really is true that each generation has a popular drug what does that mean for efforts fighting drugs? Is each generation simply bound to lose a percentage to SOME drug? These experts don't seem to be able to engage their brains and realise that some drugs are worse than others. They are so far into the woods that they can't see the wood for the trees.
But experts have warned that a new drug is likely to take its place. (No idea what it could be)
Figures released this week show that the average age of tik users has been on the increase since 2006. (according to IOL)
Andreas Pluddeman, senior researcher in the council's Drug, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Unit, said the average age of tik users had definitely increased since 2006. "One of the conclusions that could be drawn is that there are slightly fewer teenagers who are initiating tik use."
But he said tik still remained the main problem drug among people seeking help at the city's rehab centres.
Tik use reached a peak in the second half of 2006, with 1 184 patients out of a total 2 798 surveyed reporting it was their primary drug of abuse.
Pluddeman said the findings, tracked from 2002, were "unprecedented" in terms of the sharp increase of users.
"There was a curve, and now it seems to be flattening off," he said.
The FACTS uncovered are more like tik's grip on the Cape reaches a plateau! Either that or it's a matter of fewer tik addicts seek treatment? The rosy "Tik losing grip on the Cape Teens" headline ignores that teens grow older and in the past there was NO tik use amongst teens.
Grant Jardine, of the Cape Town Drug Counselling Centre, said the new figures had been expected, considering their own recent statistics correlated with those of the MRC.
"Drugs work in cycles and each generation has a popular drug."
What a crock of sh*t. Drugs dont work in cycles! Certain drugs certainly decline in popularity over time and are overtaken by others. But Cycles? What bull. Each generation adopts a drug depending on a variety of factors, such as availability, cost, effectiveness and peer pressure. "Experts" indeed! If it really is true that each generation has a popular drug what does that mean for efforts fighting drugs? Is each generation simply bound to lose a percentage to SOME drug? These experts don't seem to be able to engage their brains and realise that some drugs are worse than others. They are so far into the woods that they can't see the wood for the trees.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment