Drug and Substance Abuse
Introduction
Drug abuse is the ingestion specific chemical substances for the sole purpose of inducing pleasurable effects on the brain. Drug abuse eventually leads to increased risk problem coupled with the inability to control the chemical substance, hence addiction. Addiction is the dependence on these chemical substances, which results from brain disease. Individuals suffering from drug addiction experience wild, and an overwhelming craving for the chemical substance abused. The most common drugs and substance abuse among adults are prescriptions, over-the-counter medications, and alcohol. Other substance abuses prevalent with this generation include nicotine and sleeping pills. Teenagers and the youth, in general, tend to abuse alcohol and marijuana.
Drug abuse in the United States is kept in check by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). It is an agency under Nation Health Institutes whose mandate is to guide the nation in the necessary steps to combat drug abuse and substance addiction by using science and conducting and funding researches. Over the past years, NIDA has placed more emphasis on the analyses concerning drug use and its health hazards. Some of the government institutes and bodies that NIDA has collaborated with in eradicating substance abuse include the Department of Veteran Affairs. NIDA researched how widespread drug abuse was among war veterans and retirees. However, this does not mean that the agency has neglected and delegated all its efforts on military activities; it has vetoed on all populations ranging from children to elderly adults.
The overall population who use and abuse of substances in the United States is kept under survey by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). According to a study they conducted in 2013, an estimate of 25 million Americans aged from 13 years and older had abused drugs illicit drugs. The population percentage stood at 9.4% up from the previous 8.3% in 2002 (Nationwide Trends, 2015). Over the next years summing up to date, SAMHSA has recorded a ballooning trend in substance abuse from the younger generation, especially the use of hard drugs such as marijuana. At over 6% of the population between twelve and twenty-five, the youth in America made up triple the number of daily smokers for the current population above twenty-five. Alcohol was the most abused substance across all generations, which made up approximately 5.4% of the total population. Several citizens took the initiative of acquiring treatment for the addiction, but only four million individuals received the treatment, which only translates to a bare 20% of the patients. In the United States, there are more than 15,000 specialized drug abuse treatment facilities. They offer an array of care options which range from counseling to medication and other forms of care (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2018). Full recovery of patients is hampered by relapse rate, which currently stands at 40 and 60 percent. The rate is on par with other prevalent diseases such as asthma. However, addiction has a higher rate of cure as compared to asthma with a success rate of recovery. Nearly 10 percent of former adult addicts admitted having had a full recovery from alcohol and substance abuse (Ney York State Office et al., 2018).
Cons of cutting the Federal budget
The 2025 budget reading came as a surprise after the federal government decided to underfund NIDA. The budget cuts came to a surprise since the agency was making strides in its mandate to eradicate drug abuse among the younger generation in the United States. The cut proposal could not come at the worst time when the country is currently facing an opioid crisis with the combination of unknown consequences of the recent marijuana legalization debacle.
The federal government has left the impression that it is fighting against the agency and giving room for alcohol and the use of hard drugs which is contrary to the president’s ambition of expanding infrastructure and innovation across the country. The only way to achieve a sober and development-oriented population is to increase funding for NIDA and the NIH in general.
NIDA has made strides in the harmonization in HIV research (Chandler R. et al., 2015). Recently the agency came close to establishing a cure for HIV, which has seen the twenty-year search for the control of the virus almost bear fruits. Some of the treatment procedures as advanced by the researches done by NIDA include the elimination of the T-cell reservoirs that are infected with HIV. The process dubbed remission seeks to reduce the number of infected cells in the body to the point of no detection. Currently, there is significant strides made in inventing the cure for the viral infection, which is under trial tests. It is crucial that the agency receives the previous budget funding for this operation to be completed since underfunding could see years of hard work thrown out the window.
It is also important to indicate that NIDA is not just about the ambition to find a cure for the absurdity of drug addiction and other consequential diseases. The money earned through the research goes to the small economies since nearly all the research is conducted at University Laboratories across different states. Denying or underfunding the agency is not only affecting the agency but hampering the revenue earned and the ability of the students to learn and get experienced about research at these local universities.
According to statistics conducted by SAMHSA in 2017, there was an estimate of about 20.7 million people who sought treatment for the drug and substance abuse. Among this population were a relatively larger group of teenagers and youth who comprised 70% of the total addict population. NIDA has only been able to improve the number of the people who get access to the treatment by a 4% margin to see the total number of people who gained access to the treatment and care to about 23%, up from the previous record of 19%. NIDA was on a decade mission to ensure that it established rehabilitation centers in each state not less than a thousand to make it easier to access these canters and to fight against the relapse rate which is a massive setback for the efforts of the agency. Budget cuts could not come at a worse time when the workload in ensuring this is carried out to the latter is gaining momentum.
Lobbying for the continued budgeting for NIDA
The year 2025 has rather been a successful year for the agency on their decade journey to establish the cure for venereal disease/HIV that is highly associated with drug abuse. The test drug is currently under human testing, which requires more funds and support from the federal government especially after reports of a similar drug under development from rival nations surfaced (Barber, J., 2001). NIDA’s ambition to being the inventors of the drug and treatment procedure would see it patent the discovery and increase the marginal returns that the country requires the purpose of budgeting. The pride in development for this drug will go a long way in highlighting the achievement of the involved universities in doing the research, which translates to a higher ranking for the schools in the United States.
The opioid crisis which has rocked the country hard and seen a considerable population sample of the majority being the young generation has been considered as a national crisis. The opioid epidemic will not abate anytime soon, and neither the federal government nor the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) has come up with the solution to deal with the same. It is my pleasure to inform the Congress that NIDA, has made strides in expanding its current treatment procedures and the new and effective treatment procedure under incubation was scheduled for launch later this year. The treatment has proved to be 100% effective with the beta test results for the process available on the agency website. 2025 is the year the agency require funding and support from the federal government to launch the treatment campaign which was submitted to the Feds concerning the same. Unprecedented budget cut proposal threw the agency off its feet and has disrupted the calendar scheduled for the year. An analysis of the listed medication by Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) which are currently under development has registered that 24 out of the 28 drugs under test are presently effective. Vocci, head of the firm, is quoted to have said,
“…Of the 28 medications listed as under development, 24 of these medications are the result of direct government funding that developed the science base of the active pharmaceutical ingredient, partial funding for the development project, or direct collaboration with NIDA or NIAAA.”
Following the full legalization of marijuana in many states, the federal government had not established the relative effects of the stimulant substance that tetrahydrocannabinol had on the human body. Nearly 80% of all marijuana users have reported the impact of mental illness and depression symptoms that resulted from form the prolonged abuse of the substance. NIDA began a rehabilitation program last year that could see the treatment of the same. Cutting funding would also hamper this field significantly and deny the country a chance at treatment. We do not want to go down as the government that forwent the opportunity of curing its citizens at the expense of development, which would benefit a few sober minds.
Material evidence of the Strides NIDA has made
The following is a list of medication drugs under development for the treatment of drug addiction and substance abuse. Majority of the medicines curated for the treatment of anxiety disorders that result from the misuse of hard substances.
2025 Medication Drugs under Development to combat side effects of withdrawals from drugs
Definition of Key Words.
Phase I – The proposed drug is under test on a small group of individuals which comprises of 20 and 100 healthy volunteer adults. This phase aims to evaluate the safety and tolerability of the drug to establish safe dosage amounts for people.
Phase II – the size of volunteer patients is increased to a range of 100 and 500 volunteers to determine the optimal dose.
Phase III- the proposed medication is prescribed to a larger sample size of diverse characteristics with range of 1000 and 5000 volunteers. The aim of this population is to study the effect the drug has on various diversities.
The image below indicates the strides the agency has made on the cure and treatment of HIV/AIDS since the inception of the plan in 2001. It follows a list of the successful treatment procedures that have tried and tested on patients with the disease.
References
Barber, J. P., Luborsky, L., Gallop, R., Crits-Christoph, P., Frank, A., Weiss, R. D., & Siqueland, L. (2001). Therapeutic alliance as a predictor of outcome and retention in the National Institute on Drug Abuse Collaborative Cocaine Treatment Study. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 69(1), 119.
Chandler, R. K., Kahana, S. Y., Fletcher, B., Jones, D., Finger, M. S., Aklin, W. M., … & Webb, C. (2015). Data collection and harmonisation in HIV research: the seek, test, treat, and retain initiative at the National Institute on Drug Abuse. American journal of public health, 105(12), 2416-2422
National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2018). Drug Addiction Treatment in the United States.
Nationwide Trends. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/nationwide-trends
New York State Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services. (2012). Survey: Ten Percent of American Adults Report Being in Recovery from Substance Abuse or Addiction.
Sarvet, A. L., Wall, M. M., Fink, D. S., Greene, E., Le, A., Boustead, A. E., & Hasin, D. S. (2018). Medical marijuana laws and adolescent marijuana use in the United States: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Addiction, 113(6), 1003-1016.
Barber, J. P., Luborsky, L., Gallop, R., Crits-Christoph, P., Frank, A., Weiss, R. D., … & Siqueland, L. (2001). Therapeutic alliance as a predictor of outcome and retention in the National Institute on Drug Abuse Collaborative Cocaine Treatment Study. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 69(1), 119.