[AUS] Ecstasy research - EDRS (formerly PDI) 2007

MattD

Greenlighter
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
11
Hi all,

Each year, researchers around Australia interview ecstasy users as part of the Ecstasy and Related Drugs Reporting System, or EDRS (formerly the Party Drug Initiative or PDI). The EDRS is funded solely by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing.

The EDRS is a national and annual monitoring system designed to track emerging trends in drug use and harm, with the intention of reducing harms related to drug use in Australia.

We thought we’d post a few results from last year’s survey just so you have an idea of the types of things we find.

What does out sample look like?

Almost two-thirds were male and the average age was 25 years. Most came from an English-speaking background and the majority identified as heterosexual. More than two-fifths had obtained a post-secondary qualification, 37% were employed full-time and 22% were full-time students. Only a small number of people reported that they were currently in drug treatment or had a prison history.

Drug use

Ecstasy was rarely used on its own – 93% reported typically using other drugs with ecstasy, mostly alcohol, cannabis and stimulants, and 80% typically used other drugs when coming down from ecstasy, mostly cannabis, tobacco and alcohol.

Alcohol, cannabis and tobacco were the drugs most likely to have been used in the 6 months before interview. Participants had used a range of other drugs in the 6 months before interview:

* 64% had used speed

* 49% had used crystal

* 37% had used cocaine

* 34% had used base

* 29% had used LSD (‘acid’, ‘trips’)

* 14% had used ketamine (‘special K’)

* 8% had used GHB (‘fantasy’, ‘liquid E’)

* 7% had used MDA (a stimulant hallucinogen which has effects similar to ecstasy)

* 20% had ever injected a drug in their lives, and of those, 69% had injected in the 6 months before the interview.

Laws about traffiking

This year, we asked ecstasy users what they knew about the laws on drug trafficking (“dealing”). Specifically, we asked people whether they knew how many ecstasy pills people needed to have on them to be charged with supply.

Two thirds of the people we spoke to did not know - most users overestimated the number of pills that satisfied the law’s limits for “drug supply”.

This means that some of you or your friends may be taking bigger risks than you think you are taking.

Here’s what else you told us:

* On average, people buy 8 pills at a time.

* On average, people thought that 9 pills or more was the legal limit for drug supply (some people thought it was 100 pills). This is not correct. For details about the laws in your state you should consult a previous post which has links to these laws listed.

* Most people buy for friends as well as themselves, often because buying in bulk is cheaper.

* Half of the people interviewed thought that the law did not consider holding drugs for mates as “supply”. This is not correct. The law considers having drugs for friends as drug supply.

* There is no distinction between a person having ecstasy for their best friends, or if they plan to sell the pills to people unknown to them. If you tell police that you “have drugs for your friends”, this may result in immediate police charges of drug trafficking.

Alcohol use

On average, those who drank alcohol did so twice a week, although one in ten reported daily drinking. Just over half were consuming alcohol at levels considered to be hazardous, harmful, and potentially indicating dependence by the World Health Organization guidelines.

It's happening again

The EDRS is recruiting in all states and territories again this year. If you are interested in participating, the contact details for your capital city are below.

* If you're in Adelaide contact Nancy at Drug and Alcohol Services SA on 08 8274 3316 or email [email protected]

* If you're in Canberra contact Gab at UNSW by email [email protected], or call 02 9385 0286 or SMS 0406 887 183

*If you're in Darwin contact Gab at UNSW by email [email protected], or call 02 9385 0286 or SMS 0406 887 183

* If you're in Perth contact Tanja at the National Drug Research Institute at Curtin University on 08 9266 1636 or email T.L'[email protected]

* If you're in Brisbane or the Gold Coast call Ana at the Queensland Alcohol and Drug Research and Education Centre (QADREC) on 07 3346 4849, or 0434 606 981, or email [email protected]

* If you're in Sydney contact Matt at the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre (NDARC) on 02 9385 0167, or SMS 0421 457 868 or email [email protected]

*If you're in Melbourne contact the research team at Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre on 03 8413 8515 or email [email protected]

*If you're in Hobart call one of the research team on 03 6226 7696 or call/SMS 0409 803 813 or email [email protected]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The participants have probably taken MDA more than they think - they just don't know its effects from MDMA.
 
This post is the previous announcement about ERDS results re trafficking.

Great feedback! Shall be most interesting to read the reports, regarding some of the other issues addressed in the survey, like sniffer dogs and drug driving.
 
Hey Matt D

I was intrested in taking part in the study but was curious about something. Do they still pay to take part? I ask this because I was thinking that maybe me and some of the other bluelighters might be intrested in not getting paid any cash and instead having any cash accumilated sent to enlighten harm reduction. If this is cool id like to encourage as many bluelighters as possiable to take part. It would be a chance to give back to the community with out haveing to loose anything other them time. Im not sure how well the government would feel about sending money to a HR group but I feel that not only would it be good for all users of drugs but would also help move the spotlight move to a degree of drug users from dirty fucking criminals to charatiable everyday people.

Im willing to partake for free either way, just something I thought up then :)
 
Kiwi 2 cents worth: From a New Zealand perspective, it certainly looks like Australia is a cool place to go visit, other than the legal risk. Looks like it might be an idea to re-think the laws on dealing given with the decentralised nature of how people are obtaining drugs for friends, a different supply trend to the old model of big bag drug dealers. It would be difficult to show intent for instance if people don't believe they have broken the law! The same would go for a lot of countries, but I'm sure the laws on supply weren't meant to catch consumers.

NZD$0.02
 
static_mind - GREAT idea!

Best way to do it? (and probably the only way) - Take the money, and donate it to Enlighten yourself. It's a little harder, and more tempting to spend it, but it has the same effect. :)

In my time conducting paid research interviews for various organisations, there has always been the odd person who hasn't wanted to take the cash. I've explained to them that it is up to them what they do with it. They can donate it to their favourite cause if they choose. Even those people are happy to take it then. Although the cash acts as an incentive to some people who participate, many seem to be simply interested in helping out and contributing to research.

Starboy... I agree, but I doubt that the prospect of increased tourism of recreational drug users will be much of an incentive for our govts to change these laws! These research results show pretty clearly the disconnection between the laws and what is actually happening. In Australia, supply is assumed if you are over these limits, no need to prove people's intent to supply. Which is just inaccurate in my opinion, when the bar is set so low in some cases (eg. 2 pills!).
 
Australians needed for study and research.

[EDIT: Threads merged. hoptis]

Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre (Melbourne) researchers are conducting a study to examine trends in ecstasy and related drug (e.g., speed, crystal meth, cocaine, ketamine and GHB) use.
(It is a nationwide study so if you are not from Melbroune and wish to participate we can direct you to the relevant agency.)

The study involves an interview that will take about 45-60 minutes to complete. Interviews are strictly confidential and anonymous. Participants will be reimbursed for their time and expenses.

Please phone 8413 8515 or email [email protected] for further information or to see if you are eligible for the study.

NB. Click here for Drug Trends by State/Territory for previous years of this study
http://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/ndarc.n...ite/IDRS.state
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with Tronica. I've worked at a uni doing paid research and it's difficult (as the researcher) to do anything with the money other than what they told their ethics committee that they were going to do with it. Most times, money is given to reimburse for travel expenses or any other expense that the participant is out of pocket for participating in the interview.

I think it's a great idea donating it, but it might be putting the research in a bind to ask *them* to donate it on your behalf.

BTW the post by Mazdan about the research in Melbourne is for this study....maybe combine threads? (just a thought).
 
Please Fix Wa Research E-mail Contact

This is the correct e-mail address:

T.L'[email protected]


The current State and Federal government drug policies revolve around ideologies such as "Drugs Are Bad" and "People Who Use Drugs Are Bad".

If attitudes towards recreational drug use are to change, this must happen from the ground up. This is why we are on Bluelight - to reduce drug-related harm. Enough with the whining from "parent-support groups" - it's time to get vocal.

Now here is your chance to be part of building a long-term solution....

This party drugs survey (I knew it in its previous incarnation as the Party Drugs Initiative) needs as much REAL input from REAL drug consumers as possible! It is completely confidential and you get paid in cash for your time (about 45 minutes).

This is an annual survey that has been running for many years. The results go into a national report (broken down by state) and is used by State and Federal policy makers across governments.

.pdf versions of the all the National and State Party Drugs Initiative reports are available from the NDARC website:

http://notes.med.unsw.edu.au/NDARCWeb.nsf/page/Reports


Use your browser's FIND tool to search for reports on your state and on the national findings.

Many statistics are lifted from this report and go straight to parliament - so the more accurate it is, the more it proves how false the "war on drugs" really is. The politicians say that drug users are part of an ongoing problem - it's time to show them that the scaremongering does nothing to change the statistics.

Many people consume drugs responsibly and continue to be upstanding citizens making worth contributions to society.

Some politicians and decision-makers (including most at Federal level) still cling to the "JUST SAY NO" ideologies which as we all know, do NOT work. This is because they are not seeing truthful representations of people who use recreational drugs.
A bit of light reading about "JUST SAY NO"

100 YEARS OF "JUST SAY NO" VERSUS "JUST SAY KNOW": Reevaluating Drug Education Goals for the Coming Century
by Jerome E. Beck, Dr. P.H.
Center for Educational Research and Development
http://www.druglibrary.org/think/~jnr/Beck1.html


The purpose of the survey is to build a profile of people who use party drugs - in other words, you can't stereotype a drug user. Also, its important to show that recreational drug use does NOT necessarily lead to crime, declines in family values, aggression, ditching school/work, etc.

If you know that you're a FUNCTIONING member of society, and you also consume recreational drugs, then this is the chance for you to show the rest of Australia that recreational drugs (and their consumers) do NOT need to be overgeneralised into the same category as heroin addiction and alcohol abuse.

Once again, this survey is totally anonymous and I encourage as many people to participate as possible, and to spread the word. It is also really important to hear from people who live outside the Perth metropolitan area - even if you only come to Perth to party.

Every little piece of information helps. Only with the power of many of can we bring about the change we want to see in the world.

You can make a difference. Viva la Bluelight!
 
Thanks Miss Flea, I've updated the Perth address in the original post. :)
 
Good call to arms, Miss Flea!

This study is definitely often used to illustrate how the sample is generally not in trouble with the law, and most are studying and/or working. Even though all of the sample use ecstasy, and most use methamphetamine. Yes, the same stuff 'ice' is made of. And most of them aren't psychotic criminals on the street. Hard for some people to believe!

The EDRS/PDI does a great job at what it does, but it isn't designed to represent people who don't fit its criteria (those people that use less regularly, or are recreational drug users not currently into ecstasy, or who don't live in capital cities). One study can't do everything! These representation issues are something I'm addressing in the research I'm putting together, so - stay tuned :)
 
^ That was something I mentioned to Matt when I was doing my survey. I missed out last year because the criteria didn't count me as a 'regular' user. However, I've been using various substances for six years now, on what's probably best classed as a semi-regular basis. Many of my friends are like this too. Research that captures the experience of users such as this is definitely needed. I look forward to hearing about your work Tronica :)
 
I'm glad that you are interested, katmeow. Of those issues mentioned in the "what do you want researched" thread, this was at least one of them I could address by being more inclusive in my sample. The reason this is easy for me is because all my data collection is online and I am not able to pay anyone for participating. So I can easily make that decision to be more inclusive without it blowing out project budgets. On top of that, I know heaps of people that are - as you describe - semi-regular recreational drug users. Surely that pattern of use is worthy looking more closely at :)

In other news, NDARC's 2006 EDRS reports are available online as of yesterday. Click on the massive link in Miss Flea's post above. You'll see all the state/territory and national reports there. The same results Matt has posted in his original post are available in detail... once I get round to reading, i'll post which bits I found most interesting!

[cheers to NDARC for making these reports available online in full - a great way to give back to participants and others who want more than just the media version!]
 
gher said:
The participants have probably taken MDA more than they think - they just don't know its effects from MDMA.

When I went in for the interview and was asked "Have you taken MDA?" I replied that I had in pills. The interviewer said she said MDA was generally sold in powder or in capsules. After I accuratly described the effects as to MDMA I was marked as yes.

I felt sorry for the interviewer, came down to the goldcoast from brisbane just to interview me and head back to brisbane. So if your on the coast please keep your appointments :)
 
static_mind: when I was interviewing for this, we were instructed to include all pills that were sold as 'ecstasy' in the ecstasy section, and if a drug was bought knowingly as MDA, it went in MDA. It's difficult because in some circles, 'ecstasy' is a catch all term for MDxx. Yet some people distinctly use MDA. It's as tricky as sorting out what type of methamphetamine people use!

I have now read the national 2006 report . I find a lot of quite interesting, but have just chosen a few paragraphs to quote... for discussion here.

Ecstasy related attitudes
These are taken from the table on p. 168. People were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the following statements:

Logo believed to be a good indication of what pill is like (% )

Agree 32%
Neutral 12%
Disagree 56%

Don’t care about content as long as I have a good time (% )

Agree 40%
Neutral 17%
Disagree 35%

Using ecstasy should be legal (% )

Agree 32%
Neutral 24%
Disagree 44%

Selling ecstasy should be legal (% )

Agree 21%
Neutral 23%
Disagree 57%

I know the content of the pills I take (% )

Agree 22%
Neutral 18%
Disagree 60%

Driving risk behaviour

This quote is from p. 178

Three-quarters (77% ) of those that had driven in the previous six months had driven soon (within one hour) after taking an illicit drug (Table 68 ), occurring on a median of five occasions in the preceding six months (range 1-180). Ecstasy (78% ), cannabis (59% ), speed (34% ) and crystal (26% ) were the drugs most frequently nominated as having been consumed within one hour of driving a car in the preceding six months

Perceptions of drug driving impairment

This quote is from p. 179

Participants who had driven under the influence of drugs in the past six months were asked to indicate how impaired they felt their driving was the last time they drove under the influence of drugs. Half (50% ) of the sample reported that the last time they drove under the influence they did not feel their driving ability was at all impaired; two-fifths (38% ) reported they felt their driving ability had been ‘slightly impaired’; 9% reported their ability had been ‘moderately impaired’, 3% reported it had been ‘substantially impaired’ and 1% reported it had been ‘totally impaired’

Experiences with drug detection ‘sniffer’ dogs

This new section was an interesting addition to the survey. I would be interested to see the results by state/territory, as I'm sure there would be massive differences given the different sniffer dog laws/strategies. This is from p. 189.

For the first time in 2006 participants were asked about their experience with drug detection ‘sniffer’ dogs. Two-fifths (40% ) of participants had seen detection dogs on an average two times (range 1-24 times) in the past six months.

Of those who had seen sniffer dogs in the preceding six months, 96% reported taking at least one precaution if they were aware that sniffer dogs would be at an event they were to attend. Of those who took precautions, 43% reported hiding their drugs better, 25% reported not taking the drugs to an event, 6% reported purchasing the drugs from a known dealer, and 2% reported purchasing from an unknown dealer.

More than half (57% ) of those who had seen sniffer dogs reported having drugs on them when they had seen dogs at an event. Small proportions (14% ) reported taking their drugs, 2% disposed of their drugs, and 1% reported being caught by police. Respondents reported a range of other reactions, such as ‘walking away’ or ‘acting normal’.

Some food for thought!
 
Top