Drugs And Society

In the late 1930s, the movie Reefer Madness dramatized the effects of marijuana abuse (watch the entire video here). In the 1970s, it was ridiculed as hysteria and propaganda.

In light of this, and without trivializing meth addiction (which I understand to be devastating... but where does my information come from?), what do we think of these anti-meth PSAs from the Montana Meth Project? (You can also find television commercials there to go with these print ads.)



Hat tip to copyranter for bringing my attention to this ad campaign.

Posted by Lisa Sunday, April 13, 2008 at 1:47 AM Labels: , , , , ,  

9 comments:

  Anonymous

April 13, 2008 at 9:20 AM

This is very disturbing. I watched one episode of Oprah about the dangers of Meth. It's really surprising how this drug can make someone's personality turn 360 degrees.

  Anonymous

April 13, 2008 at 10:53 AM

"15 bucks for sex isn't normal"
so how much is?

strangely worded, i think

  Gwen

April 13, 2008 at 4:41 PM

The first image is interesting--I wonder if the fact that he's have sex with her from behind (and so it's possibly anal sex) is supposed to be part of the awfulness of it.

  Anonymous

April 13, 2008 at 7:00 PM

it's weird that some of these images -- the jail cell one and the one about how doing meth won't make it easier for you to hook up, for example -- are easily believable and similar to many other ads, whereas other ads -- like the one about making his girlfriend sell her body or having sex for $15 -- might happen in the meth community, but they take a huge stretch of imagination to assume that that's what will happen to you if you do meth.

  Anonymous

April 13, 2008 at 7:46 PM

I really doubt the ad company did any research on the effects of meth before designing this campaign. It looks as if they got the contract by making the most horrific ads possible.

  Apoidea

April 13, 2008 at 8:02 PM

The top one reminds me of Cindy Sherman

  the unbeatable kid

April 13, 2008 at 9:33 PM

i think that it would be interesting to compare images and campaigns targeting meth addiction with crack addiction. first, I would guess that these drugs are racialized. second, they probably differ in there urban vs. rural orientation.

was there ever an anti-crack drug campaign? seems like there must have been seeing as there was a "drug war" and all.

  Anonymous

April 14, 2008 at 6:33 AM

The only thing I've never seen or heard about "meth" is a rational discussion. Facts are usually lacking, such as the nature of its toxicology. That is, it's not very toxic at all, in fact caffeine is harder on our bodies and has more side effects than methamphetamines.

But once that is said, the shocked gasps and shouting denials begin and the rest of the facts can't be heard, which are important. Such as:

1) Pharmaceutical-grade meth, made in clean labs with pharmaceutical-grade reagents is less toxic and has fewer side effects than caffeine. It is sometimes issued to Air Force pilots for long missions (the "Go pill").

2) Street meth is made with non-pharmaceutical grade reagents and solvents (usually by non-chemists), and the well-over 100 recipes in use differ regionally, as do symptoms of street meth abuse (i.e. more paranoid psychosis in the midwest where it's often made with anhydrous ammonia, which is a fertilizer ingredient stolen from rail cars).

3) Users also almost always induce de facto overdoses. A euphoric rush or maintaining intense focus for days on end are initial symptoms of overdosing, similar to the spectrum of buzzed to jittery to full-blown psychosis also seen with increasing doses of caffeine. Appetite is also greatly suppressed by high doses.

When combined, these factors account for all the "faces of meth" reality behind the propaganda.

We end up with a situation where people are consuming an impure product contaminated with heavy metals and unreacted toxic reagents due to unskilled and inaccurate synthesis, they are chronically overdosing on this contaminated substance, and they are not getting adequate nutrition or sleep on top of everything else.

Oh, and it's been circulating in the US since the early 1950's, was first used by the German Army in WWII as a food substitute on the front lines (easily transported, non-perishable, keeps the troops awake for days on end- making them paranoid and aggressive to boot- it's perfect!), and since amphetamines in general are still increasing in popularity they (and meth) are here to stay, though most prefer their amphetamines in mixed-salt, low dose pharmaceutical form, such as Adderall.

"Meth" is just one kind of amphetamine, currently prescribed under the brand-name Desoxyn. It's prescribed when other amphetamines cause too many side effects, which is interesting, though it induces more euphoria than other amphetamine salts and so has a higher abuse potential.

This all points to the possibility that the prohibition of methamphetamine causes more side effects than the molecule itself, since if available in pure form over-the-counter at least there would not be heavy metal and toxic solvent poisonings along with the likely-inevitable overdoses. Then again, overdoses would also probably decrease as knowledge and accurate information became available instead of fear-mongering propaganda.

I don't anticipate significant changes to this problem in the foreseeable future; there are too many vested interests profiting greatly from the status-quo. It's too bad, a lot of people are suffering needlessly.

  Anonymous

April 19, 2008 at 1:24 PM

Apparently meth abuse has dropped in Montana since the introduction of this campaign.

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)