METH CHALLENGE UNLIKE ANY OTHER DRUG CRISIS

In each decade, one or two illicit drugs seem to capture the headlines. In
the 1960s, LSD and heroin drew national attention. In the '70s and '80s,
cocaine took their place. In the '90s, MDMA, commonly known as "ecstasy,"
gained the spotlight.

But if we were to name the most serious drug challenge of the past 10
years, especially in Oregon, it would have to be methamphetamine.

It seems like a meth-related story is in the news every week. An elderly
woman is beaten in a robbery. A meth lab makes a home unlivable with
carcinogenic by-products. An infant dies at the hands of an addicted adult.

Facts back up these reports. According to government figures, more than 10
percent of all products containing ephedrine or pseudephredrine (the active
ingredient in many over-the-counter decongestants) are used to manufacture
meth.

Additionally, the number of people treated for meth addiction grew fivefold
nationally from 1992 to 2002, from 10 to 52 people per 100,000 population.
In Oregon, the figures topped 300 - more than six times the national average.

It's not surprising the problem has reached this level. Methamphetamine is
relatively inexpensive, and it is very powerful. The drug releases a flood
of dopamine into the brain, creating a feeling of high energy, euphoria and
even omnipotence.

At the same time, the body's reaction to coming down from the drug is as
unpleasant as the high is pleasurable. Users experience lethargy, severe
depression, hopelessness, anxiety, painful body aches and thoughts of
suicide. Overwhelming cravings are common.

Given this combination, dependency on methamphetamine is one of the most
difficult addictions to treat. Currently, there are no drugs comparable to
Buprenorphine (used to ease heroin withdrawal) available for treating the
addiction. Cravings can return for years, and long-term depression can
result. Permanent brain damage is also a risk.

The sad reality is that many of these men and women are simply not going to
put their lives back together or even feel good about life for a long time.

All this means that treatment success requires extended inpatient stays and
highly structured environments after hospitalization. These add expense at
a time when our society wants to pay less, not more, to treat this kind of
illness.

I know we're concerned by the images of the havoc wreaked by meth users.
Maybe we're returning to the idea that addiction is a moral failing, not an
illness. We are definitely worried about health care costs. In such an
environment, additional investment in treatment seems unimaginable.

I see this point of view in many employers. Increasingly impatient, and
under heavy pressure to cut costs, they'd rather just write the employee off.

This is unfortunate, because if we've learned anything from treating other
drug dependencies, we know that society - and business - will bear the
costs one way or another. Methamphetamine is no exception.

Over time, though, I'm convinced we will come to understand better the
realities of this highly dangerous drug and its true costs to all of us.
Societal pressure will make using this drug less acceptable. Innovative
legislation (such as the new laws restricting sale of decongestants) will
help, but they won't eliminate the problem.

The combination of new treatment techniques and a deeper understanding of
the unique challenge meth presents will make a difference. We will,
ultimately, turn the tide.

The opinions expressed in this column are those of the writer. As Serenity
Lane's statewide coordinator of employer services, Jerry Gjesvold helps
companies across Oregon create and manage their drug-free workplace
policies and programs. More information is available on the Serenity Lane
Web site at www.serenitylane.org.