You are viewing:

  1. » Home
  2. » BTL Blog
  3. » More of the same


Jump down to: content, section menu, site menu or site info sections.


More of the same

no illict drugs

By tronica

The Rudd government announced another advertising campaign to ‘confront illicit drug use’ last night. Their media release states that:

Too many young Australians don’t understand the very real and dangerous impacts of taking or using illegal drugs

Their ‘new’ campaign will tackle this perceived lack of knowledge by using graphic images that emphasise the damaging effects drugs have. Young people need to ‘face facts’ about the risks involved in drug use.

I have numerous problems with this announcement.

  1. This is not a new campaign. Howard’s Tough on Drugs campaign has been on the go for many years with the same concepts and ideas.
  2. Social marketing campaigns like this are not informed by credible evidence. The National Drug Research Institute’s Prevention Monograph, a report commissioned by the Department of Health and Ageing themselves, found limited evidence to support the effectiveness of social marketing campaigns in reducing or preventing drug use and associated harms. Some studies even find such campaigns may lead to increased drug use through curiosity or reactance. Their most likely outcome is to have little influence on drug use decisions.
  3. These campaigns seem to be designed more for showing the general voting public that the government is ‘doing something’ about drug use. It seems no accident that this announcement and action comes in an election year.
  4. Assuming that young Australians don’t understand the dangers of drug use is unfair. This assumption should be tested. Research suggests that young people do understand and acknowledge the risks they are taking, yet they still choose to use drugs. Until the government can accept that choosing to use drugs can be a logical, informed decision, they will miss their mark in trying to engage young drug users.
  5. The Department of Health and Ageing needs to learn how to interpret statistics accurately!

Two prevalence estimates are compared across time by the Department to support their action in ‘tackling illicit drug use’. They appear to be drawn from the National Drug Strategy Household Survey series. The first read:

The proportion of recent regular ecstasy users who use weekly or more often has risen from 0.8 per cent in 1998 to 17.3 per cent in 2007.

I traced these figures back to their sources in the NDSHS reports and found that these figures refer to teenagers aged 14 to 19, and that the 1998 estimate was based on such small numbers that the estimate should be used with caution. The second reads:

There is also a disturbing trend in the increased ecstasy use by young females aged between 14-19 which is up from 4.7 per cent in 2004 to 6 per cent in 2007.

The table this comparison is taken from in the NDSHS 2007 report shows the increase is not statistically significant. That is, there is no disturbing trend. It is, in fact, hard to find ‘disturbing trends’ in the NDSHS series. Most drug use estimates are decreasing or steady. Whoever was charged with finding these disturbing trends to fit this media release has capitalised on the fact that most people who read it won’t know its source and how to access and interpret the original data.

I recall the Rudd government talking about its plans to use evidence-based policies on drugs and health issues more generally. This campaign is just more of the same. I guess drug policy misses out again when it comes to evidence-based policy.

 

Monica Barratt is completing her PhD thesis at the National Drug Research Institute at Curtin University of Technology. She also works as a research fellow at Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre. Opinions expressed in tronica's blog posts are her own and do not necessarily reflect the views of her affiliated institutions.

 

Republished with permission from Drugs, Internet, Society

Jump to top

2 Comments

Jess

almost 2 years ago

It's a shame that the Rudd goverment has chosen to resort to social marketing when there is no credible evidence for its effectiveness in reducing drug use. I wish the money spent on these advertisements could be spent on some evidence- based prevention strategies. Thanks Monica for bringing this to light.

Polite Society

almost 2 years ago

This is exactly the sort of reason why so much anti drug literature is viewed so skeptically by people. Perhaps if they kept to the facts some people might actually be able to use them for informed choice, and might actually not be doing some of the drugs they are doing at the moment. Scare tactics do nothing but glorify drugs to people who want to break the rules, and stigmatize them to people who wouldn't have taken them anyway.

Email this page

The following message will be sent to your friend:

<Your name> thought you might be interested in this page:
http://www.betweenthelines.net.au/blog/more-of-the-same

They said:

Personal note
You can add a personal note to the end of your email

Not a member?
Join Between the Lines to access a range of great member features.

Forgot your password?

Browse by tags

  1. acid
  2. addiction
  3. addictive personality
  4. adhd
  5. advertising
  6. AFL
  7. alcohol
  8. amphetemines
  9. amy winhouse
  10. anorexia
  11. anti-drug
  12. anxiety
  13. big day out
  14. binge drinking
  15. bisexual
  16. blood alcohol limit
  17. bongs
  18. boundaries
  19. brett stewart
  20. brittany murphy
  21. caffeine
  22. cannabis
  23. celebrity
  24. censorship
  25. co-morbidity
  26. cocaine
  27. coke
  28. community
  29. crime
  30. crystal Meth
  31. culture
  32. dance party
  33. depression
  34. disclosure
  35. DMT
  36. drink spiking
  37. drinking age
  38. driver testing
  39. driving
  40. drug education
  41. drug testing
  42. drug trends
  43. drugs
  44. ecstasy
  45. effect
  46. effects
  47. energy drinks
  48. environment
  49. ethics
  50. experimentation
  51. fbi
  52. febfast
  53. festivals
  54. friends
  55. future music festival
  56. gateway
  57. gay
  58. GHB
  59. government
  60. hallucinogens
  61. harm minimisation
  62. harm reduction
  63. health
  64. Hep C
  65. hepatitis
  66. heroin
  67. hipsters
  68. ice
  69. income
  70. injecting
  71. international drug laws
  72. internet
  73. interviews
  74. junk food
  75. KAVA
  76. ketamine
  77. know your limits
  78. law
  79. legal highs
  80. legalisation
  81. lesbian
  82. LSD
  83. marijuana
  84. matthew stokes
  85. media
  86. medicinal
  87. mental health
  88. meow
  89. mephedrone
  90. methamphetamine
  91. MGMT
  92. music
  93. music festivals
  94. nature
  95. news
  96. nurture
  97. overdose
  98. parties
  99. peer education
  100. personal
  101. personal stories
  102. pills
  103. police
  104. police search
  105. policy
  106. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
  107. pot
  108. poverty
  109. pre and post loading
  110. psychedelics
  111. punishment
  112. queer
  113. radio
  114. recruit
  115. reformed
  116. regular drug use
  117. rehab
  118. research
  119. rights
  120. risk
  121. ritalin
  122. role model
  123. rugby league
  124. safe partying
  125. schoolies
  126. schools
  127. sharing equipment
  128. sideways
  129. sleep
  130. smart drugs
  131. sms
  132. sniffer dogs
  133. speed
  134. sponsorship
  135. sport
  136. sports
  137. subculture
  138. survey
  139. the streets
  140. therapeutic
  141. transgender
  142. trends
  143. trips
  144. video
  145. war on drugs
  146. wasted
  147. wealth
  148. wellbeing
  149. what is in drugs
  150. zero-tolerance