Our Views

A recent news item tells the story of a wrongful death suit filed by the family of a man who died while undergoing rapid detox. He started taking painkillers when prescribed them by his doctor after surgery and then became addicted. To handle his addiction he chose a procedure known as rapid detox rather than one of the safer drug detox  alternatives.

The family filed a wrongful death suit on the doctor who performed the procedure and they were awarded $35.4 million. In this case, the doctor was negligent – the patient had a history of allergies to anesthetics which the doctor did not investigate. The man died when he failed to get enough oxygen while under general anesthetic, suffered brain damage, and died.

However, the rapid detox procedure can be dangerous under any circumstances. If you or someone you care about is considering alcohol or drug detox, make sure you’re fully educated on all methods of drug detox before you make your choice.

Popularity: 19% [?]

I read an article today in the New York Times about a proposed smoking ban in New York outpatient alcohol and drug treatment centers. That’s a story in itself of course, but other things about the article also caught my attention. First, the article said there are 1100 treatment centers in New York, two thirds of which are outpatient facilities. The outpatient treatment model does not have a high success rate – the best rehab facilities are long-term inpatient models. Yet the state’s Department of Health is going to spend $8 million on getting alcoholics and drug addicts to quit smoking instead of investing it creating more successful drug detox and rehab programs.

Don’t get me wrong, I know smoking is dangerous and I agree that people should quit. But to dilute the already strained financial and personnel resources, personnel who are trained in handling alcoholics and drug addicts, is not going to improve the addiction epidemic.
 
Here’s another problem with the smoking ban - $4 million of that $8 million is going to be spent on nicotine replacement devices – including drugs. That means that drug and alcohol detox and rehab centers that already use ‘drug replacement therapy’ as a way of handling addiction – in other words, put the person on methadone instead of heroin, and usually park them there for years – may now be sending someone off to start their new ‘drug-free’ life on two replacement drugs, one for the alcohol or drug addiction they came into treatment to handle, and the other for smoking.

Resolving the problem of alcohol and drug addiction is already an overwhelming problem in the U.S. – there aren’t enough treatment centers, and most of them have pretty low success rates. Why not put those resources into creating more successful alcohol and drug detox and rehab programs so we can get better handle on that problem?

Popularity: 10% [?]

Expsensive alcohol abuse warning ads are ignored. How about putting the money into alcohol detox? 

The effect of alcohol advertising has been the focus of many recent news headlines, especially the ‘drink responsibly’ part of the ads. Researchers found that these warnings are barely perceived by teenagers and, based on the alarming statistics regarding alcohol abuse by adults, the parents aren’t paying attention either. This is proof positive that you get what you pay for - $4.9 billion is spent on making alcohol look good and $104 million is focused on the downside. Alcohol manufacturers allegedly spend that $104 million to curb alcohol abuse, but you might as well hire Castro to defend your civil rights. Anyone really sincere about ending alcohol abuse would put the money into alcohol detox and rehab.

The National Alcohol Beverages Association of Kenya (Nabak) and the Kenyan government have also come up with a good idea. According to a story in The Standard, they’ve agreed that alcohol cannot be advertised until 8:30 p.m. on TV, and only after 1:00 a.m. on the radio. The ads also cannot contain cartoon or fairy tale characters that would appeal to kids, and alcohol manufacturers can’t sponsor children’s events.

A similar program in the U.S. would definitely reduce the exposure for the kids. Now we just have to work on the adults. I wonder how many people could get through a successful alcohol detox and rehab with $104 million. It could go a long way.

Popularity: 17% [?]

Almost 10 percent of full time workers in the U.S. have drug or alcohol abuse problems serious enough to require drug or alcohol detox and, possibly, rehab, according to an article in the Atlanta Journal Constitution. This percentage represents over 10 million people.

The article goes on to say that food service employees, construction workers, and people who worked in mining and similar jobs are at the top of the list, but nearly 8 percent of corporate CEO’s also said they are alcohol dependent.

The study, conducted by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration, also showed that employers who utilize drug testing are less likely to have problems.

As a former addict, I can say that drug testing certainly would have deterred me. I may have lost some jobs, but I like to think that I would have stayed away from drugs rather than being fired.

Getting an employee through a drug or alcohol detox program can cost far less than the lost productivity that inevitably comes with the territory, especially since these programs are often covered by insurance. But you have to ensure the employee does a program that doesn’t substitute one drug for another, or put the person on a drug rather than alcohol.

Although it might be necessary for the person to take a drug to alleviate withdrawal symptoms, they should definitely not be taking that drug when they leave.

If you are, or have, an employee with a drug or alcohol abuse problem, getting them into a successful drug and alcohol detox program will increase your productivity, and save their lives.

Popularity: 26% [?]

Alcohol abuse and dependency report shows that 30 percent of Americans have met the criteria, yet only a fraction receive treatment

A new report from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) found that more than 30 percent of Americans, at some time in their lives, have met the criteria for alcohol abuse or dependence. Most of these people never received any treatment, and those who did often didn’t get treatment for 10 years or more – 10 years of alcoholism that could have been avoided with early and effective alcohol detox and rehab.

These report refers to data from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC), which surveyed 43,000 U.S. adults. The researchers found that only 24 percent of those who met the criteria for alcohol dependence received any type of treatment, and just 7 percent of those who met the criteria for alcohol abuse received treatment. That’s a very disheartening statistic. And just as bad or even worse is the fact that most of those people surveyed developed alcohol problems in their early 20s but didn’t get treatment until their early 30s, if at all. Think of the damage caused by that lost decade – lost families, lost jobs, lost lives – all for the lack of a few weeks or months of alcohol detox and rehab.

The survey had no answer for why so few people received treatment, or why it took so long for many of them to get it. However, other studies indicate that both those who provide treatment and those who receive it may have low expectations when it comes to results. Bridget Grant, Ph.D., the principal investigator in the NESARC, said statistics prove that treatment can significantly and substantially increase the likelihood of recovery, and that both professionals and the general public need to be educated on the signs of alcohol abuse and dependence.

If you or someone you care about has a problem with alcohol, don’t wait for 10 years to get help. A successful alcohol detox program followed by alcohol rehab if needed could prevent a lot of damage.

Popularity: 10% [?]

Too bad we don’t have as much money to spend as the advertisers

Georgetown University’s Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth (CAMY) recently conducted a study on alcohol advertising. They unearthed some remarkable data: between 2001 and 2005 alcohol companies spent $4.9 billion on TV advertising and only $104 million on what is known as ‘responsibility’ ads – ads that discourage alcohol abuse and addiction.

Adonis Hoffman, Senior VP and counsel for the American Association of Advertising Agencies, said he felt the CAMY study was slanted. “These ads, when combined with messages from parents, schools, churches, coaches, and peers, reinforce the notion that responsible consumption is everybody’s business.”

Yes, it is everybody’s business. But those parents, schools, churches, coaches and peers don’t have $4.9 billion to invest in counteracting the effects of the advertising. And, quite frankly, when you’re talking about 14 million Americans who drink enough to meet the criteria for ‘alcohol abuse’, that might be what it takes. It certainly will take more than the $58 million taxpayers already spend to fight it.

Selling alcohol must be an interesting occupation. Really, how does it feel to make a living selling something that could cause another driver, who consumed your product, kill your kid or family the next time you go for a Sunday drive. How does it feel to know that you’re at least partially responsible for helping 14 million Americans overcome life’s barriers with something that causes brain damage?

From where I’m sitting, selling alcohol is a form of alcohol abuse in itself. Perhaps we’d start getting a handle on the problem if the manufacturers and advertisers were first in line for alcohol detox.

Popularity: 18% [?]