• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

Ecstasy research in Australia - some results

M

MattD

Greenlighter
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
11
Hi all,

Each year, researchers around Australia interview regular ecstasy users as part of the Party Drugs Initiative, or PDI. The aim of the PDI is to monitor the use of ecstasy and related drugs such as speed, ice, cocaine, ketamine and GHB. The PDI interviews regular ecstasy users, and you may have seen the advert on the front page advertising this year’s study. 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.

* 59% of the sample was male, with an average age of 24 years; half had a university degree of some kind. Over half of the sample was employed full time or were full time students.

Drug Use

Alcohol, tobacco and cannabis were the drugs that were most likely used in the 6 months and 12 months before the interview took place.

Most (93%) of the sample used other drugs when they used ecstasy (commonly alcohol, tobacco, cannabis and methamphetamine), and 83% used other drugs with ecstasy to come down (most commonly cannabis, tobacco and alcohol).

* 74% had used speed in the 6 months before the interviews.

* 38% had used crystal in the 6 months before the interviews.

* 41% had used cocaine in the 6 months before the interviews.

* 21% had used ketamine (‘special K’) in the 6 months before the interviews.

* 9% had used GHB (‘fantasy’, ‘liquid E’) in the 6 months before the interviews.

* 32% had used LSD (‘acid’, ‘trips’) in the 6 months before the interviews.

* 9% had used MDA (a stimulant hallucinogen which has effects similar to ecstasy) in the 6 months before the interviews.

* 19% had ever injected a drug in their lives, and of those, 63% had injected in the 6 months before the interviews.

Problems Relating to Drug Use


* 11% reported that they had overdosed (passing out or falling into a coma) on a drug in the 6 months before the interviews. The main drug involved was alcohol, followed by ecstasy.

* 18% had accessed either a medical or health service in the 6 months before the interviews. The majority of these people saw their GP and others saw a counsellor. For those who saw their GP, the main drug involved was ecstasy, followed by speed; the main issue people sought help for was dependence.

* 42% reported that they had experienced work or study problems that they would attribute to their drug use. 38% reported relationship or social problems related to their drug use; 36% reported financial problems related to their drug use. 5% reported legal or police problems related to their drug use.

It’s Happening Again

The PDI is recruiting in all states and territories again this year. If you are interested in participating, then have a look on the Pillreports webpage to find the details for your capital city.

Thanks for reading, and we hope you found it interesting! :)
 
Just a big up to the pdi reasearchers. I took part in the study and was very pleased with the way in which it was conducted. The girl who asked me the questions was so open minded and pleasent, and was actually pro moderated mdma use. What these researchers are doing is SO important and I encourage any bluelighters to participate.
 
i wonder how many of those statistics were just people who took them in pills thinking it was just MDxx etc, not knowing about the other shit untill after taking them.
and i wonder how many people have only done pills and haven't realised they have taken a lot more chemicals than just MDxx

Im surprised that those results pretty much say that 1 in 5 ecstacy users, have injected drugs before. Seeems a little odd to me, but maybe that's more the older generations of e users
 
Really I didn't know that>all i was told was that its paid for by the federal government>Plus the results shown here don't reflect the attitude of the person administering the survey, said person was all for pushing (finding out about) more positive information on mdma:)
 
Flex i think you might have the NDLERF mixed up with the NDARC (National drug and alcohol research centre.)
 
No he hasn't. NDLERF did used to fund the PDI, and there was some rumours that they sat on the results because they didn't like them. I'n not exactly sure but I think NDLERF is no longer funding it.

NDARC, however, have always been involved in organising the PDI.
 
Hi all :)

Just to clear up about the PDI funding.

In 2005 the PDI was funded by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing and the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy as a project under the cost-shared funding arrangement, and it is coordinated by the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre (NDARC).

Thanks!

Matt
 
Thanks to MattD for posting up some results. I'll definitely be posting up a link when the 2005 full reports are made available on the NDARC website - they should be ready any time soon! (That is, for those who want a more detailed look at the results)

Re PDI funding. To my knowledge, NDLERF have not delayed publication of PDI results before. They have certainly delayed publication of other research projects, notably one I was involved in which was a bit controversial on the impact of cannabis law reforms. NDLERF funded the project as a trial in 2003 and 2004. When 2005 came around, we were wondering whether the project would continue - luckily the commonwealth is now funding it. (Commonwealth department of health and ageing, I believe).

I don't think the PDI has ever tried to say anything that would cause it to be suppressed :) It's quantitative, it counts how much, how many, how often, how long - but it doesn't get too far into the whys and hows of drug use. Still useful info for sure, especially to see trends over time ... but it's not going to come up with relevations the federal government would need to suppress.

I've been a PDI interviewer (Research assistant) for a few years now - we are usually non-judgemental and have a harm reduction approach to drugs. I think most people that do the interview have a positive experience :)

My criticism is that the study is not really set up to get the points of view of drug users, or to delve more deeply into what is happening. Hopefully us researchers can come up with some ways to achieve that, to complement the PDI exercise.
 
Although i find this study interesting every year i read it i can't help but feel all the results are pointing to the negatives of drug taking. i.e 42% have had troubles with study or work because of drugs, 11% have overdosed. How about question like how many people have been using drugs and it has only enhanced there lives. I guess a study like that would never get government funding now would it??
 
Depends on how you read the findings. Eg. 58% of drug users in PDI perceive that they are not experiencing work/study problems, and almost all (89 % ) did not overdose.

Glass half empty or half full? :)

(but yes i agree, would be good to get more funded research in areas that do not pathologise drug use automatically)
 
^this is an interesting result - seems like a high degree of harm. I would compare this to the Hack phone-in on synthetic drug use - one caller said sure there's a comedown from having a pill - but is that any worse than a hangover from alcohol?

The high percentage of reported injecting drug use may be a clue to the high degree of reported harm. How are survey participants recruited? Sure - some might come via this website, or through pillreports. But some are recruited via state drug user organisations, which are more injecting-friendly. Given the 'snowball' recruiting method, the sample surveyed may not be all that representative.

I am a bit dubious of the value of PDI. To explain why, I need to talk about her sister survey, the IDRS.

The IDRS has been running for about ten years, also organised by NDARC, and focuses on injecting drug users.

There are clear indicators that results from the IDRS have been used in a punitive fashion against injecting drug users - particularly in terms of access to pharmacotherapies like methadone and buprenorphine.

The methadone program in Tasmania was all but shut down, partly in response to evidence of methadone injecting highlighted in the IDRS. Evidence of buprenorphine injecting is also surely a motivation for the phasing out of Subutex, and its replacement with Suboxone across Australia.

At the same time, the IDRS has highlighted that sharing of injecting equipment still goes on - unfortunately, there has not been much movement in the way of increasing service hours for needle exchanges. Vending machines are slowly spreading across the country - but still not in Victoria (or Tassie?).

So basically, IDRS provides a lot of information, that is widely available. There are some clear examples of this information being used in a punitive fashion against drug users, but a less clear link to positive initiatives.

Similarly for the PDI - who gets this information and how will it be used? I wouldn't be holding your breath for pill testing, and at the same time we see a senate inquiry into toughening drug laws.

If you really want that $30, don't let my rant stop you - the shittiness will probably still happen either way. BUT a smarter way forward might be to initiate some small scale action research ourselves - create our own data, that we control....
 
I completely agree with you Ayjay. Especially the part about creating our own research. It is clear that the people who are actually affected by these policies are not involved in determining the research process: things like,
- what questions will be asked / what issues addressed
- how will the info be presented (take my example earlier of glass empty/full)
- how it will be used (not fully under the control of the researcher - but the researchers can decide whether to reveal findings if they are concerned about possible repercussions).

I do have some plans in my head about how we could achieve this. They are still only half-formed - but basically involve using a model of participatory action research among drug users who collaborate online... a group of interested people could be formed and we could discuss the possiblities. I can devote a hell of a lot of time, since this could form my phd research :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top