------------------------------------------------------------------------
Record: 1
      Title: The love of speed: An analysis of the enduring attraction of
             amphetamine sulphate for British youth.
 Subject(s): AMPHETAMINE abuse -- Great Britain; YOUTH -- Drug use -- Great
             Britain; AMPHETAMINES
     Source: Journal of Drug Issues, Winter98, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p33, 24p
  Author(s): Klee, Hilary
   Abstract: Explores the prevalence of amphetamine sulphate use among
             British youth since the 1960s. Psychoactive effects of
             amphetamine sulphate; International developments in production
             and trafficking of amphetamine sulphate in the market;
             Research projects on drug misuse; Synthesis of amphetamine in
             Germany; Identification of the therapeutic uses of
             amphetamine.
         AN: 487596
       ISSN: 0022-0426
       Note: This title is held by your library. Display All Locations
             Recent issues in Current Periodicals Main;
             Call#: Main (5th) HV5800.J68
             Holdings: v.6-(1976-)
   Database: Academic Search Elite

  THE LOVE OF SPEED: AN ANALYSIS OF THE ENDURING ATTRACTION OF AMPHETAMINE
                         SULPHATE FOR BRITISH YOUTH

Amphetamine sulphate has been a popular drug choice for British youth since
the I960s. The reasons for its persistence are explored in this paper,
highlighting the alluring nature of its psychoactive effects that can
influence social development in the adolescent years. The potential hazards
in using the drug are identified and an attempt made to anticipate future
trends. The 1960s saw the start of a strong association with music that
continues today, and the rave scene has adopted Ecstasy, an amphetamine-type
stimulant, as its drug of choice, yet the use of amphetamine sulphate shows
no sign of decreasing. Recent international developments in production and
trafficking suggest that this is a growing market. The idea that we are
faced with an epidemic that could burn itself out is challenged. Support for
these arguments derives from several research projects on drug misuse
conducted in the northwest of England and the accounts of respondents are
used to illustrate key points.

Historical Context

Early History: Licit and Illicit Use

Following the synthesis of amphetamine in 1887 in Germany, its significance
was not recognized until 1927 when it was suggested by a chemist working in
Los Angeles that it would be a cheap substitute for ephedrine, a substance
isolated from a traditional Chinese herb (McKim 1986). This was used widely
to treat asthma, but there were fears that supplies would soon be exhausted.
Many other therapeutic uses of amphetamine were soon identified: the
treatment of hyperactivity in children, obesity, depression, narcolepsy, and
nasal congestion. Over-the-counter sales of various amphetamine-based
products, particularly nasal inhalers, were marketed extensively in the
United States and Europe. The Second World War sustained its reputation as a
safe and valuable drug when United Kingdom troops, along with most other
nations involved, were supplied with amphetamine to delay fatigue and
enhance alertness. After the war the liberal prescribing of amphetamines
such as Drinamyl (a combination of amphetamine and a barbiturate known on
the streets as 'purple hearts') and Dexedrine (dexamphetamine sulphate), and
the highly lucrative sale of non-prescribed preparations continued. However,
following reports (Connell 1958) of psychotic episodes, they were made
available only on prescription. Not surprisingly in view of the range of
applications and desirable psychoactive effects, amphetamine products were
diverted from legally controlled suppliers. The same pattern occurred
elsewhere in the world during the 1950s and 1960s resulting in a black
market demand that could not be met simply through such diversion. The
economic potential was recognized by criminal entrepreneurs, and clandestine
laboratories were set up to meet local needs. The trend toward international
trafficking soon followed to fill the gaps in the market.

British Youth Culture and the Popular Music Scene

In the United Kingdom, amphetamine consumption assumed epidemic proportions
among the young in the boom time of the 1960s. A generation of young people,
newly liberated from parental economic control, demonstrated their
independence through adopting alternative lifestyles that challenged
established norms. The 'Swinging Sixties' was a period of revolutionary
social change and experimentation with psychoactive drugs.

Counter-culture role models emerged, rebellious teenagers appeared as stars
in plays and films, and 'pop' idols became major formative influences on
British youth. The role models in the United Kingdom were all the more
powerful because they were young and working class, like many of their fans.
Amphetamine was popular among them because it provided the energy to perform
all night and survive periods on tour (see Shapiro 1988). The influence on
their many hundreds of thousands of fans was not only through example,
thinly disguised references to drugs were made in songs and reached
receptive ears every day through BBC radio and the 'pirate' pop music
stations. Despite some attempts at control, this is still typical of the
popular music scene today.

The use of amphetamine at this time became associated not only with youth
culture but gangs and more radical anti-establishment behavior. Diverse
subcultures (hippies, mods, rockers, and punks) developed distinct and
recognizable attitudes and fashions. They had different tastes in music and
drugs. It was a watershed in social history that saw the start of a
relationship between music, dancing, youth culture, and the amphetamines
that has persisted ever since.

New legislation (the Drugs, Prevention of Misuse Act) in 1964 was largely an
attempt to control the use of amphetamine (Teff 1975), partly because of the
popularity of Drinamyl by the young and also because of the widely
publicized violent weekend confrontations between mods and rockers at
holiday resorts. The trend was generally regarded as a threat to social
order on the one hand, and the first step on a path into the use of heroin
on the other. In fact these 'pep-pills' were largely used recreationally and
confined to weekend socializing. The aggression and violence, though
shocking to the public at the time, was a phenomenon limited to only a small
proportion of young males.

Through the 1970s there seemed to be a gradual decline in the scale of the
epidemic though there were reports of abuse. Hartnoll and Mitcheson (1973)
found that amphetamine was the most used drug among a sample of British
schoolchildren, apart from cannabis users who disapproved of it. Greaves
(1980) suggested that one reason for the lack of social research at this
time was because of the overemphasis on heroin use, an observation still
true today. Heroin was regarded as a drug with more serious health and
social consequences, and despite its comparatively limited use, it was given
more attention. There may have been a genuine decrease in the use of
amphetamine with the arrival of cheap heroin on the market in the 1980s.

Another factor that could have contributed to a decline in youthful users
was its redundancy as an appropriate icon of the age. Illicit drug use had
been a feature of youth empowerment in the 1960s; it would have lost some of
its symbolic value when that generation was replaced. It is difficult to
know the extent of any decline in the use of amphetamine and whether it
became hidden rather than absent. Because the media had turned to heroin as
a cause celebre it was perhaps inevitable that other drugs were pushed into
the shadows.

Changing Priorities

The early 1980s was a time of preoccupation with heroin (Hartnoll et al.
1984; MacGregor 1989; Pearson 1987) by the media and government. Along with
heroin there was a new scare from increasingly dramatic publicity about the
American crack-cocaine scene. Alarming predictions were made by U.S. police
and researchers (Kleber 1988; Stutman 1989) that it was only a matter of
time before British cities would see organized crime and crack-related
violence, too. Despite attempts by the Drugs Branch Inspectorate of the Home
Office (1987) and others (e.g., Pearson et al. 1985) to draw attention to
the persisting and growing problem of amphetamine sulphate, it was largely
ignored by policy makers (Klee 1997a).

The decade ended with an even more compelling need to establish new
priorities in chug misuse strategies as drug workers and the government
struggled to come to terms with the potentially disastrous consequences of
the AIDS epidemic. The deterioration in control over illicit drug use, the
large number of young people using stimulants recreationally, and reports of
the increasing popularity of injecting, threatened to provide a fertile
breeding ground for the AIDS virus. A monitoring exercise of the clientele
of the needle-exchanges (Stimson et al. 1988) that were set up at this time
revealed large numbers who were injecting amphetamine sulphate, confirming
the suspicions of drug workers in many regions of the United Kingdom that
this practice had been growing while attention had been focused on the
opiates. Social research (Klee and Ruben 1993) subsequently provided
evidence of high levels of HIV-related risk behavior among amphetamine
injectors.

It was methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDMA) and crack-cocaine that dominated the
headlines, however. Davies and Ditton (1990) speculated on whether the 1990s
would be the decade of the stimulants, noting the high-profile role of the
media in stimulating interest in certain drugs. This was frequently at odds
with data from established sources of information, for example, drug
seizures made by police and officials of H.M. Customs and Excise. Cannabis
has been first in the Fist for some time, but amphetamine sulphate is second
and rising (Parker et al. 1995) - the number of seizures has quadrupled
since 1989 (Home Office Statistical Bulletin 1996). Surveys of drug use
indicate a similar order of preference among young people (e.g., Mort and
Mirless-Black 1995). The increasing use of amphetamine-type stimulants has
now assumed global importance (Pietschmann 1996, 1997; Yoshida 1997):
attracting the attention of the United Nations Drug Control Programme
(UNDCP) (1995a, 1995b); and precipitating government action and research in
Australia; and research programs in the United States (Miller and Kozel
1991). The World Health Organization has convened expert meetings to discuss
the consequences for health and how to deal with them. The signs are that
many other nations may be entering a phase of drug history in which these
stimulants become the main concern of parents and governments.

The Data

This paper will outline the attractions of amphetamine sulphate for the
young in Britain, drawing on research into the users of the drug and their
lifestyles (Klee and Faugier 1990; Klee and Ruben 1993; Klee et al. 1993;
Klee and Reid 1995; Klee et al. 1996). Semi-structured interviews were used
on all research projects, yielding rich data that were recorded on
audio-tape. Data were analyzed using quantitative statistical tests and also
thematic qualitative analyses. The observations will be illustrated here
through verbatim accounts by the respondents themselves. All data are
associated with young people between 15 and 21 years of age living in the
northwest of England. Sampling sites ranged from deprived inner-city areas
and suburban public-sector housing estates to more middle-class towns and
rural areas. The most cohesive networks of amphetamine users were found in
those areas of high youth unemployment, low social and geographical
mobility, and poor youth-oriented facilities.

The Attractions

If amphetamine was marketed legally and aimed at the young, it would need
little promotion, it has a range of effects and positive attributes that
make it particularly alluring to young people.

Joining the Club

Adolescence is a time of transition to the adult world where new rules have
to be learned, identities defined, and social roles established. Acceptance
by peers is essential to psychological well-being and social adaptation.
Possible rejection is a motivating force of such power that some young
people participate in particular acts for no other reason than wanting
desperately to belong to a desirable reference group. This is an uncertain
and sometimes stressful business. A cheap drug that facilitates social
encounters and interpersonal behavior by increasing confidence and social
disinhibition is useful.

It really is a big confidence boost ... if I haven't had it I don't really
want to talk to anybody ... if I go and have a couple of drinks I'm as
pissed as a fart. But if I do a bit of whizz I can drink more and like I go
round telling loads of jokes ... being dead cocky ... that sort of thing.

Interactions within many amphetamine using networks in our research were
governed by strong norms of mutual support and the sharing of resources
(Klee and Reid 1995). This included drags:

We all try and work out how to get enough together. There's always someone
who's got money and we use their money. Then when the time comes we help
each other so we can get out and do things.

Patterns of interaction had developed, particularly in areas of high youth
unemployment and low social and geographical mobility where the day was
spent visiting friends in a more or less continuous round of activity. In
the injecting networks this usually involved communal injecting, sometimes
performed at a rush just before going out. It was at such times that the
potential for sharing injecting equipment was high and the attention paid to
hygiene low. In groups of young males this appeared to act as a show of
solidarity and mutual support between friends as well as incorporating a
degree of bravado (Klee and Ruben 1993; Klee and Morris 1997).

Energy and the 'Buzz'

The energy and sociability induced by amphetamine were consistently
mentioned by respondents in all projects when they were asked why they used
it. In a gathering of users the whole group would be buzzing, setting up a
dynamic atmosphere that was contagious. Some said that this was a 'turn on'
in itself. A common phrase was a desire to be 'on the same wavelength' with
the others, which implies a need to avoid exclusion. Research workers found
the homes to be noisy and busy places, with multiple concurrent interactions
that were sometimes fairly chaotic.

The energy and motivation, which were sustained over several hours, were
regarded as highly functional in a variety of settings; for work and
leisure. High activity was claimed by some to be a feature of their own
personalities and, therefore, in tune with the effects of amphetamine:

I like to be active. I like to be on the go ... I hate sitting down and
watching telly ... bored. No matter what it is, I like to keep busy.

For others the activity levels seemed to be increased by disinhibition that
was a result of their confidence and better mood:

It gives me a lot of energy ... it makes me a lot happier ... I can get out
and do things, meet people, things like that. And you don't let anything get
to you. You're on top of the world.

Even chores were tackled with a degree of enthusiasm and boasted about
later, although some chores were preferred to others:

When you've had the whizz it makes you want to do things. I painted the
kitchen the other week and she (partner) said 'that cupboard's supposed to
be painted' and she gets me some whizz. I knew I was supposed to do the
kitchen. I knew I was obligated to do something.before I had the whizz I
thought 'yeah, I'll have the whizz, get my act together and paint that
cupboard' but once I'd had the whizz I thought 'fuck the cupboards and the
door, I'll do my bike.

These were comments by young males. There were some interesting and
significant gender differences in what was considered the main attractions
of amphetamine sulphate (Klee and Ruben 1993). For example, males tended to
nominate the euphoric effect (the high), females were more likely to
identify the extra energy, the worry-free state, and the avoidance of
depression. The energizing effects of amphetamine were frequently described
as if they were irresistible and induced involuntary activity, an imperative
to action that could be unfocused if a specific task could not be found or
plans had not been made:

You've got to do something like, I always end up on a mad clean and sticking
the music on loud.

Energy was often linked to domestic chores, particularly by young mothers,
and a desire to combine effective home management with partying and music:

It's a bit different from the night time when I'm dancing and listening to
loud music, you know, and rockin' with everybody else. It's a bit different
in the daytime.

How?

It just makes you do things dead quick and you'll do a lot more things than
you would usually do in the day. Well, I've got two young kids you see ...
when I have it in the day I'm great with them ... go with them everywhere.

The use of the drug when alone was fairly rare in this age group, it was
more common later when the use of amphetamine had increased, sometimes to
problem levels and the lifestyle was not so frenetic. The desire to talk and
have other people around was strong in young users:

I've done it on my own because I've thought it will give me a bit of energy
to get the house clean ... but it's never worked out me doing that, I'd
rather be with someone.

Weekends tended to be a time when extra resources were needed if all-night
clubbing was planned. Bingeing at weekends was very common when several
bands were playing at different venues or if there were parties:

It's when there's a lot going on you know, when there are parties and I want
to go places, I don't want to miss out so if I'm a bit fired and if I didn't
take it I wouldn't last ... I'd be sat in a comer while everybody else was
dancing ... I don't like missing out on things.

The lifestyles of these respondents were generally characterized by high
levels of interaction with peers, but this was particularly pronounced if
the network largely comprised unemployed individuals with time on their
hands. On some housing estates not only were there high levels of
unemployment, but the history of friendships went back several years to
primary school days. Informal self-employment was common, brief spells of
laboring, driving, mending bikes or cars, painting and decorating, and so on
for men, cleaning and child-minding for women. The average proportion of
employed primary amphetamine users in these research projects was 25%.

The Paradoxes Induced by Frequent Use

Social integration appears to be fundamental to psychological health and
fear of isolation is thus a major motivating force. The respondents valued
the effects of amphetamine on their social interactions, and for some it was
the main reason they used it. if the effects start to change as a result of
frequent use or high doses, this can be disconcerting and certainly
unwelcome:

Paranoia is the main thing ... I've lost all my friends basically, every
single one.

Irritability and/or aggression is common when 'coming down' off the drug,
when using heavily, and when combined with alcohol:

I get really violent when I come down and he (partner) hates me like that
... he can't handle me like that.

If you drink while you're whizzing, you get to the point where you're
shouting at people and causing trouble and the amphetamine gives you the
energy to do it ... which is a problem. That's how I ended up in court.

Paranoia can lead to isolation. This can be precipitated by peer rejection
or is a voluntary withdrawal. The more experienced users make allowances and
wait for the state to subside. However there do seem to be more permanent
changes in some cases:

I just stay in the house (rather than go to a club). One of my mates used to
pick me up and I'd go out then but I couldn't face going into the club. I
enjoyed that ... driving around in the car with the music on. Where there's
music ... that's it ... it doesn't really have to be in the club.

The marked changes in social competence caused conflict in some of the more
reflective people. The state could be illusory, like any state of
inebriation, and personal identity and self-presentation to others was then
questioned:

When I was up I felt great about myself you know. That's what it does ...
gives you confidence, you feel great. You think you're quite an interesting,
witty person. And when you come down you think 'what did I say to them
people?' And then you think 'Oh, God, I'm shit' and then you get the
opposite ...a really bad self-image.

One young woman who was an early starter into drugs and had been using
amphetamine for several years said:

I'm on drugs that often I don't know what my personality is any more. That
sounds terrible me saying that, but it's true.

Effects can emerge after sustained use (described by Morgan and Beck 1997,
as paradoxical) that are alarming when first encountered. They are
anti-social and therefore the antithesis of the effects that have tended to
motivate the use of the drug. The effects are also common symptoms of mental
disturbance and, hence, highly stigmatized in most societies. Analyses of
the reasons why amphetamine users contemplated treatment (Klee and Morris
1994b) revealed that the most common precipitating factors tended to be
aspects of psychological dysfunction and behavioral abnormalities that were
likely to cause rejection by peers. Early data from a current longitudinal
study of primary amphetamine users in treatment (Klee et al. 1996) has
supported these observations. Paranoid delusions, aggression, and acute
depression were the most frequent symptoms prior to presenting to services.
These were tolerated by partners and friends for some time, but eventually
threatened important relationships.

Although social facilitation may be an essential part of the attraction of
amphetamine for young people, developing personal identity and social roles
while under its influence may be a poor foundation on which to build. On the
other hand, it could be argued that for some adolescents amphetamine
provides an opportunity to 'test the water' and find that their fears of
rejection are largely unfounded. If this is a valid distinction it has
implications in terms of identifying particular vulnerabilities among young
adolescents and why some become psychologically dependent on amphetamine
while others do not.

The Bonuses

A variety of other psychoactive effects add value, for example the euphoric
'high' when injecting, acute perception (some claiming telepathic powers),
and sexual performance.

Sexual performance is reputed to improve when amphetamine is used, which
could be important to adolescent males, some of whom 'spiked' the drinks of
young women, believing it would increase their receptivity to their
advances. However, although increased energy was reported by over half the
sample of men and women in one study (Klee 1992), leading to extended
periods of intercourse, and 39% of men said their performance was improved
by delaying ejaculation, nearly as many (33%) had experienced a failure to
get an erection. Its unpredictable nature made amphetamine a mixed blessing
for males:

Girls get horny but boys don't ... well, they do but they can't do anything
about it.

The women were significantly more likely to report disinhibition:

It makes it a helluva lot better ... I've done more things on speed than
I've ever dreamt of doing.

Thus, male respondents tended to be less predictably enthusiastic than women
about the effects of amphetamine on their sex lives. Although amphetamine
had the reputation as an aphrodisiac, it was also interesting that it was
more valued with increasing age for both sexes. Presumably the young did not
need an artificial aid.

Sex gets boring now and then, have a bit of speed and it's brilliant.

There are non-psychoactive aspects that contribute to the attractiveness of
the drug and some are important for those for whom detection would have
particularly serious consequences, young people living at home and women
with children. Amphetamine is less detectable than opiates unless symptoms
are excessive, such as non-stop talking. It induces socially acceptable
forms of behavior and so for the user it has less of a stigma than others
drugs. For many women, not only is it easier to conceal (in fact
contributing to an image 'that includes hard work and a good mood), there is
less danger of their children being identified as 'at risk.' There is also
the added benefit of weight control. Many of our female respondents
recognized the benefits, some suggesting that amphetamine was 'a woman's
drug.'

In summary, using amphetamine sulphate improves a young person's confidence
and self-esteem more or less on demand, apparently with little risk. It is
an antidote for fears of rejection and isolation and, unless it gets out of
control, it is functional. Not only is amphetamine easy to buy, it is often
offered by friends, partly because it is so cheap at about 10 a gram
(cheaper if bought in bulk and shared). This is a major advantage to the
young unemployed living on social-security payments.

The array of obvious benefits make the allure of amphetamine compelling to
inexperienced youth. Even experienced users find it hard to believe that it
can get out of control. One 21 year old male college student commented:

People are so casual about it nowadays. You know, a bit of speed's nothing
and then all of a sudden it creeps up on you.

This was a sentiment expressed in different ways by many respondents, the
negative effects always seemed to come as a surprise even if they were known
to exist.

Temporal and Geographical Patterns of Use

In emphasizing the vulnerability of the teen years it would be fair to
comment 't'were ever thus.' The transitional state between child and adult
has always been a source of stress. If this is a major and consistent
motivating factor that induces them to use a stimulant, why are there
fluctuations in the popularity of amphetamine among young people and why is
the drug used more in some regions and not in others? Existing patterns of
drug use may be well established and resist the adoption of other drugs, but
the illicit market is generally fluid, comprehensive, and sensitive to
changing demands. Presumably other factors contribute to demand.

The typical answer to a question about the epidemiology of amphetamine use
is that it reflects a cycle of discovery by the those who are naive to its
ill-effects, followed by a period of expansion to other groups in society,
the ultimate appearance of unwanted symptoms with frequent use, and a
subsequent decline. Left behind are a few loyal 'die-bards' who, having
maintained control over the drug and so still reaping its benefits, can pass
the word on later to a new generation, the criminal opportunists then detect
the embryonic market and supplies increase again (Miller and Kozel 1991;
Suwaki 1991). The reality is rather more complicated. It seems that some
areas and some groups are more likely to respond more readily, so what makes
the ground fertile?

Unemployment and Poverty

An enterprise culture with emphasis on personal achievement and upward
social mobility characterizes the world in which the young seek a place.
Young people in Britain become aware of the restricted nature of the
opportunities on offer in the United Kingdom as they reach the end of their
school years. The aspiration to achieve in the adult world of work may start
out strong, but success can seem to be beyond the control of the individual.
There are, thus, many non-achievers seeking to fill their lives with
activities that will preserve self-esteem, ward off depression, and increase
their security by an assured place within a supportive group of people who
are similarly affected. Surrounded by the trappings of wealth, the
appearance of the antithesis to the pursuit of material gain and its
requirement for aggressive competition and selfishness was perhaps
inevitable and can be seen in a variety of forms. Just as 'flower
power'--the passive, tolerant and non-violent approach of the hippies--was a
characteristic of the 1960s, there are many who want the 1990s to be a
'caring society.' One British sociologist (Redhead 1990) describes this as a
trend toward 'pop humanism' in the young in the United Kingdom, one that is
associated with the use of MDMA. This trend is understandable in those who
are giving up hope of finding work. To restore self-esteem and establish an
acceptable identity, one strategy is to deny that material success matters.
An alternative strategy is to induce a psychoactive state that offers the
user an ephemeral self-image of success and well-being. This is easy to
achieve with amphetamine. Unfortunately it is an illusion that does not
persist.

The corollary to a belief that material success goes to the undeserving --
the hardfaced unscrupulous manipulators of money -- is that they can be
relieved of their wealth without feeling too concerned. In particular, the
faceless companies that reap large profits are fair game, and one would
expect a rise in property crime and, for the more angry and aggressive, of
violent crime too. After 2 years of an apparent decline, 1996 saw a sudden
increase in the rate of violent crime (Home Office Statistical Bulletin
1996). Shoplifting is now accepted as inevitable by shops and stores.
Intolerance, racism, and ethnocentrism are characteristic of groups aware of
their power to make an impact on the rest of the world. British football is
associated with heavy drinking, vandalism and pitched battles. This is a
sharp contrast to the youth groups that are part of the rave scene. Although
there are accusations of infiltration of the dance culture by drinkers and
users of 'hard' drugs like heroin and crackcocaine, the majority are still
oriented toward the traditional welcoming ambience of dance parties.

I think that drinking beer is pretty violent. Every time I've gone for a
beer there's been trouble. It pisses you off ... when you can go out and
have a gram of speed, get into the music and have a brilliant night.

The contemporary rave culture now appears to be more influential than any
previous cults such as punks, roods, rockers, hippies, and so on.

The young are said to resent the label of 'no-hopers' a judgment made
(perhaps in a sympathetic and well-meaning way) by an older generation
concerned for their future. There seems to be disagreement about how cynical
and pessimistic British youth is: whether the judgment of political apathy
is an appropriate label or whether it is loaded with the values of a past
generation; or whether the detachment of youth from an establishment focused
on an economic meritocracy is a consequence of their disempowerment or
whether the young have simply developed an agenda that is very different
from that of their parents. Regardless of these speculations, drugs--MDMA
(Ecstasy), amphetamines, and LSD--seem an essential part of the scene and
music a major preoccupation.

Lifestyle Differences: Ravers, Drinkers and Grafters

Ravers

There is great variety in the lifestyles of young people with a preference
for amphetamine. Contrasting needs and interests combine to produce
subcultural groups with different patterns of drug-use behavior. Some that
are primarily found among the young have been identified (Klee 1997a;
1997b). The most visible are ravers (a term used here to cover the dance
scene because raves in their earlier form have largely disappeared),
drinkers, and grafters (criminals).

The Ecstasy-rave phenomenon is the latest development in the history of
recreational stimulants and one that continues the close association with
music that started in the 1960s. Its effects are said to be ideally suited
for large dance parties, an effect of interpersonal warmth in addition to
the amphetamine-like component that keeps people dancing all night.
Everybody is perceived as potentially lovable. A particularly vivid account
of the use of dance drugs that seems only partly fictional is given by
Irvine Welsh (1996) in Ecstasy. The choices made by Glaswegian youth about
the appropriateness of amphetamine or Ecstasy depending on the particular
psychoactive state they seek are congruent with our data. Amphetamine
effects of confidence, power, and energy are also more appealing to some
individuals on the dance scene than the softer and psychologically more
passive sensuality of MDMA. The practice of combining them to bias one
aspect, or combining amphetamine with LSD to mimic the effect of MDMA, are
attempts to induce a more specific state, a common practice among polydrug
users experimenting with a much wider range of drugs.

It was just after Christmas when I started and it was like, building up ...
we were, like, mixing them, putting speed with the acid, things like that.
Me mum and dad were on holiday and I went through too many (overdosed).

I have the whizz first and the glue afterwards.

Straight afterwards?

No, I'd wait to come up on the whizz first, about half an hour to an hour
later. And what's good about that?

Well, you're up on the whizz first ... you're talking and you're very chatty
... then you have a good sniff at the glue. The glue's a downer ... you put
your body down like.

The most common combination was amphetamine and LSD. This was the result of
the perceived inadequacy or uncontrollability of just one drug. The
complaints about Ecstasy were that it was too expensive and that quality was
unpredictable. About amphetamine it was said that quality was (reliably)
poor. An enterprising and creative (though risky) range of cocktails were
tried, the effects on this youth were not interpreted as a simple substitute
for Ecstasy.

Speed and trip [LSD] mainly because the Ecstasy's been crap. If I'm having
trips I always have speed ... I think it helps me have confidence over the
trip.

Drinkers

There has been a traditional association between amphetamine and alcohol
since it was discovered that inebriation when drinking can be delayed or
even avoided by using them together. Young males on regular alcoholic
benders at local public houses are able to maintain control for several
hours and avoid embarrassment and the censure of their peers that would be
induced by sickness and loss of consciousness. It also gave them confidence:

Well, I don't think I'm shy, but it's just that when you go into a pub and
it's crowded, you can't be bothered pushing through. But when you're on
speed, you don't care.

Respondents who said that they could not normally hold their liquor were
particularly appreciative of the effects on their drinking capacity.
However, there was sometimes a price to pay:

As soon as I come down off it, I've drunk that much that I'm sick. When I
take speed, if I've got a pint in front of me, I'll keep drinking some
because, you know, me mouth's dry.

An interesting gender difference in the use of alcohol emerged in the data,
women were less likely to use amphetamine to prevent inebriation. They were
more likely to adopt a pragmatic approach, saying that alcohol was expensive
and it was a waste of money if its effects were not wanted.

It's cheaper really ... if you're going out for a bevy (drink) and you
haven't had any (amphetamine), you can spend £15 to £20 on ale ... but if
you've done some whizz it's only a fiver (usually £5 for a half-gram) and
you can drink coke.

Recreational, social drinking is a very common pursuit for the young, and
amphetamine is seen as a substitute with few of the problems associated with
alcohol.

Grafters

Amphetamine and various forms of crime were also associated. Most
respondents had been involved in minor crimes (other than drag use), usually
shoplifting. In some networks, particularly young males, it seemed simply to
co-occur, both were a part of the 'buzzing' lifestyle.

Up to getting in a place and actually doing a job ... you're on edge all the
time. But after you've got in there you're buzzin'. It's a really unusual
feeling when you know you've got away with it ... the adrenalin flowing
through you is unbelievable. You do it for fun ... it's more fun than
anything.

For others it was used for alertness, energy (to run if necessary), and
confidence when committing burglaries.

It just gives you guts ... it's as if everything's yours.

The more frequent users, prone to paranoid delusions, tended to avoid it,
particularly for shoplifting because they feared that their hypersensitivity
would be noticeable.

An analysis of criminal activity in samples of primary amphetamine users
compared with heroin users (Klee and Morris 1994a) revealed a similarly high
incidence of property crime in both groups. There was, however, a difference
in motives. The costs of keeping up an expensive addiction were a major
feature of heroin dependence but featured less among amphetamine users who
tended to spend only a comparatively small amount on their drags and who
funded their use in a wider variety of ways.

Hooked: the Factors That Sustain Amphetamine Use among the Young

Most respondents were aware of the consequences of over-use of amphetamine
but, predictably, did not believe they would lose control. They were
enjoying themselves and, therefore, had no real reason to want to stop.
However, there were also negative pressures that induced repeated dosing. In
the short term, for example, the prospect or signs of a return of chronic
depression when 'coming down' after a few hours was a strong motivator to
take more, which could develop into a binge and result in more unpleasant
symptoms. This was most apparent among those who were self-medicating
fundamental social or psychological disorders with amphetamine (Klee 1997b).
The potential loss of confidence and consequent change in public image
threatened exposure of vulnerabilities and possible loss of friends. These
were all factors that sustained continued involvement.

Progressions to Other Drugs and to Injecting

The familiar supposition is that the softer drugs are gateway drags, drags
that will introduce people to psychoactive experiences thereby inducing them
to try harder drugs like heroin and cocaine, is often applied to
amphetamine. In a sense, any drag can have the effect of arousing more
interest and inducting novitiates more firmly into the drag culture.
However, there may be an argument for regarding amphetamine as having above
average gateway potential.

Most of the regular amphetamine users in our samples had at some time
overdone it and taken other drags as an antidote to excessive hyperactivity
or paranoid delusions or to avoid a particularly depressing withdrawal. The
more problematic cases lost control in a continuous search for balance.
Cannabis was very widely used, but sometimes benzodiazepines were preferred,
particularly diazepam and temazepam. Taken in high doses they were stronger
and could be acquired from legitimate sources, although they were also
easily available on the street. We found very few who were injecting
temazepam among primary amphetamine users, unlike samples of opiate or
polydrug users (Klee and Faugier 1990; Klee et al. 1993). The majority said
they would not use heroin, despite its value as a downer, it carried too
much stigma and its dependence potential was too high. Nevertheless it was
tried by some, who seemed on their way to becoming polydrug users having
started out on amphetarmine:

What sort of effects do you get?

Up and down ... because heroin's a downer and, like speed's an upper. I was
taking speed and LSD in the day and at night time I was using heroin and
methadone to help me sleep.

However, there were frequent examples of resistance to this emerging
pattern:

Does draw (cannabis) help you come down?

It does sometimes but normally I'd have a toot of gear (heroin). I was
getting a bit addicted to that so I'm not taking it any more ... the last
time I had a toot of gear I had another, then another ...

And many of the less experienced respondents were violently against it:

Why not smack?

Because I'm not a gaucher ... I'm known to be going out an' doing things,
not nodding off and being a loner. Half the people I know don't think I take
drugs at all.

They tended to be highly prejudiced, though perhaps not always admitting it,
needing to disassociate themselves from the junkie image:

They're dirty, that's what put me off. That's what would put me off going to
the CDT [community drug team], seeing them all there. They're all decent
people but the drug overcomes them.

They were not so reluctant about other drags:

It [amphetamine and temazepam] gives you a different buzz ... makes you
mellow ... you're speeding but you're mellowed out at the same time.

It's the best of all the uppers [cocaine] ... the coke, when you mix it with
speed ... it just makes it last that little bit longer.

Crack-cocaine was different, it was viewed as similar to heroin:

Have you any interest in that [crack].

No ... totally different drug, more dangerous. Cocaine is more like
amphetamine.

One could argue that the frequent mixing of drugs with amphetamine to
improve its performance or create designer versions that produced a new
effect, and also selfmedicating the more unpleasant symptoms with other
drags, are common activities that could be described as facilitating
transitions and progressions. In this sense it has high gateway potential.

An equally hazardous transition is to injecting. Many young people were
injecting amphetamine in the areas sampled by the research. The purity level
of amphetamine sulphate, apart from occasional fluctuations, has averaged at
5% for several years, and a reason given for injecting was to filter out the
additives and impurities from the powder. It was regarded as 'cleaner'. At
the same time, injection produced an instant high and there was no waiting
around for the psychoactive effects. Most injectors said that it was
unlikely that they would go back to other modes of administration having
experienced these effects. There were those who simply disliked the taste of
amphetamine, which was strong enough to induce vomiting, or had tried
snorting (nasal inhalation) but encountered difficulties with nose bleeds.
Some actively enjoyed the ritual of injecting, also commonly observed in
opiate and polydrug users. A sort of professional pride was occasionally
evident in respondents when talking about their injecting practices.
However, there were those who disliked needles:

You don't inject, then?

I probably would if I wasn't scared of injections. I take it in a drink. I
used to take it in a capsule [emptied of original contents], it takes about
half an hour to work but you get a warm flow in the stomach. That's the
easiest way to take it. I have just necked [swallowed] it, but I'm just
heaving then and there's nothing there. When I come down I get a lot of
phlegm. If you neck a full gram it lines you all the way down.

The dangers of vital and other infections indicate a need to deter young
people from injecting. Just as it is difficult to return to a pre-speed era
of one's life, so it is to abandon injecting. Prevention is probably easier,
as well as better, than cure. It would be more difficult to apply
harm-reduction principles by attempting to convert injectors to other modes
of administration. Addressing the need for damage limitation in the case of
multiple drag use is another education issue. There are ways that the
majority exercise control over their use of amphetamine, sometimes for many
years, and we need to understand and learn from them.

The Millennium: Influences on Youth Drug Trends

Epidemic use of amphetamine -- the problem of definition

Although predicting drug trends would be immensely valuable to legislators,
health professionals, and police, the multiplicity of contributory factors
would deter any futurologist from pontificating too strongly. However, it is
at least possible to examine the adequacy of an existing predictive model,
and in this final section an attempt will be made to identify some key
factors that are likely to influence the future drug use of British youth,
and in particular their use of amphetamine. The epidemic model of
amphetamine use appears to be insufficiently elaborated to be of real value
in the future, either in the United Kingdom or anywhere else in the world.
Some aspects of it may continue to be important because they are
psychologically robust, for example, the impact on potential users of
credible information about the negative consequences of amphetamine use.

The concept of epidemic does not itself incorporate a time scale. Applied to
behavior rather than disease it is often interpreted as a phenomenon in
which particular human activities spread to new populations and eventually
change or decline as a consequence of reactions to them. The time span for
drag epidemics has been conceived in years rather than decades. Verbs like
'erupt' and 'break out' are typically used and they imply a limited time
span. The monitoring of drag-use patterns has been too poor to track them
adequately and determine with any degree of accuracy the reasons for their
rise and apparent fall. In the case of an amphetamine epidemic of the
future, the process is likely to be subject to a wide range of factors that
are new and that will change the nature of such an epidemic. There may be no
bum out in any real sense, only a series of changes that generate different
patterns of use.

Inheriting Behavior

The epidemic model of amphetamine use includes the 'seeding' of a new
generation by those who have maintained their use in the face of a more
general decline. It depends, presumably, on how many receive the messages
and their receptivity to them, and then whether they act on the information
and decide to try it. Amphetamine use currently stretches across at least
two generations in the United Kingdom. The millennium will see a new
generation of the children of today's ravers. One predictor of drug use is
parental use (Newcomb and Bentier 1987) and we can anticipate that a large
proportion of the coming generation will be exposed to parental experiences,
past or present, of amphetamine and Ecstasy. Respondents in our studies have
tended to be against the use of drugs by their children,or their prospective
children. One of the most common reasons given for stopping the use of drags
was to protect a child (Klee and Ruben 1993; Klee et al. 1996) and part of
this protection was not to set a bad example. Thus the messages passed on by
today's users will not always be positive, but this may not matter. When
parental values are challenged what could be more important is what parents
did rather than how they evaluate what they did. Adolescents are usually
highly protective of the right to make up their own minds.

The prevailing view of amphetamine among our younger respondents was that it
is relatively harmless and controllable and is not to be thought of in the
same way as hard drags like heroin and crack-cocaine. This is despite the
occasional evidence of casualties. Evidence of serious damage to health is
rare in view of the prevalence of use and can be dismissed as the result of
incompetence by the user or endemic pre-disposition. This is easily
contrasted with the damage caused to individuals and society by heroin and
crack cocaine. In addition, if kept under control all the psychoactive
effects are socially acceptable good mood, sociability, energy, and
confidence attributes that are not only highly valued in contemporary
society but contribute to a sense of self-worth. As a corollary to these
observations, if it is widely regarded as relatively harmless then the
credibility and motives of official views become suspect, particularly by
the young, and they are open to challenge.

In societies like the United Kingdom in which heroin is the standard for
junkie stereotypes, the image includes personal neglect, criminal
tendencies, and violence. The controlled or occasional amphetamine user can
occupy the high moral ground, assume a low profile, escape the attention of
the authorities, and enjoy the drug without too much concern.

However, although the majority are simply enjoying themselves, a significant
minority are self-medicating the effects of stressors such as personal
inadequacy, depression, tiredness, obesity, and unavoidable environmental
pressures (see Khantzian 1985). Amphetamine is not simply a recreational
drug, it is highly functional in a variety of ways and will, therefore, have
additional appeal. People not only feel better, they perform better too,
something that students have valued over the years. This aspect of
amphetamine is likely to sustain a large group of followers even in the face
of competition from other drags that are associated with the adoption of new
fashions.

The International Context

The future of amphetamine use by British youth cannot be separated from the
wider context of international trafficking that determines the drug's
availability. Although there are domestic sources of supply, the bulk is
smuggled into the country, largely from or through the Netherlands. There
appear to have been changes over recent years that have affected many
nations world-wide and have now precipitated action. In 1995 the United
Nations International Drug Control Programme initiated a review of
amphetamine-type stimulants following "worldwide diversion of vast
quantities ofephedrine and pseudoophedrine from licit manufacture and trade
to be used for the illicit manufacture of methamphetamine" (UNDCP 1995b). It
was acknowledged that "International drug control has traditionally been
dominated by the three plant-based drags: opium, cocaine and cannabis. This
factor sometimes over-shadows other issues and may even prevent, or at any
rate, delay, the recognition of a problem when it appears" (UNDCP 1995a). At
subsequent expert meetings in Vienna and Shanghai in 1996, delegates
expressed their concern at the difficulties they were facing in controlling
a drug (amphetamine) that was easily manufactured using well-known and
simple techniques and at low cost. With the removal in Europe of barriers to
trade and movement across national boundaries, the doors were opened to
entrepreneurial activity, particularly by east European nations lately
emerged from economically stultifying regimes wanting to acquire as fast as
possible the trappings of prosperity. The trade in precursors for
amphetamine, and the end product itself, has increased dramatically. Further
afield, Japan and other nations in southeast Asia are facing similar
problems: of control due to inadequate, inexperienced, or occasional corrupt
policing; and of successfully intercepting laboratories that can be set up
almost anywhere overnight and be gone in a couple of days. The United States
has problems not only with domestic manufacturing but with supplies that are
coming in through Mexico. One analyst (Pietschmann 1996, 1997) suggests that
trafficking in amphetamine is already more profitable than that of cocaine,
and there is concern that this is becoming widely known to dealers. The
delegates at UNDCP meetings have stressed the urgent need for concerted and
coordinated action by all nations to exert control over trade in amphetamine
and its precursors. Unfortunately, the financial implications for the poorer
nations with extensive rural areas that are inaccessible are not yet
evaluated, and it is likely to be some time before the recommendations will
be put into operation. Meanwhile the popularity of amphetamine and Ecstasy
continues to grow in Europe, southeast Asia, Australasia, and the United
States.

Factors Likely to Influence Patterns of Drug Use in the Future

Although the analysis of drag trends is inevitably speculative, there are
factors that could be rated high for probability of playing a role in
determining changed patterns of use. Among such factors some stand out as
potentially very powerful, partly because they will affect many nations.
They are: information technology, international and national competitive and
materialistic philosophies, ease of movement across national borders, the
impact of accelerated third world economic growth, political cynicism, the
growing violence in reaction to the constraints of social order, and lack of
international agreement on drug control policy. Strictly speaking. these are
not limited to the British drug scene or the use of amphetamine by young
people in Britain. However, they are likely to affect adolescent drug use in
significant ways.

Information

Perhaps more than any other single factor, the exponential growth of
information technology has already set a process in motion that threatens to
force political, economic, and social systems into the Global Village
without any preparation at all. National boundaries are breached in
cyberspace on the Internet without any possibility of intervention, or even
detection, a process that could threaten the governance of nation states.
The range of information available through Internet is unprecedented, access
is almost instantaneous and mostly unsupervised. Procedures for producing
cold nuclear fission, how to synthesize amphetamine, how to make bombs,
information about defense plans, and many other pieces of information that,
in the wrong hands, could threaten social order are regularly shared
anonymously by people across the world. The authorities have little control
over the information, and the use of the network has quickly outstripped
surveillance, policy decisions, and the development of international
agreement on what should not be part of the public domain.

Young people have, thus, more sophisticated ways of accessing information
than any previous generation. They are growing up in a world of such
unparalleled information opportunity, in which every possible taste or need
can be met, that the fundamental problems of selection and knowledge
retention in the 'hardware' of the human brain will inevitably present
significant challenges to educators. The impact on emotional and social
development during the transition years between child and adult could be
equally profound.

In the context of access to such riches in world knowledge, information on
drugs (for example their manufacture, detailed instructions on drug
combinations, and the observations of self-styled experts) may be
comparatively unremarkable. With the growth in popularity of Internet
'cafes' that allow access to the net for those not registered or who are not
in possession of a computer, the demand may become high for this sort of
information, and no doubt there will be those who will meet it. Because the
information exchange is unrestrained, its nature is not always cataloged and
the demand for it not always recorded, it is difficult to predict whether
this will induce people to try drugs to any significant extent or whether it
will be educative and even protective. Looking on the positive side, the
choices made from the range of drugs on offer should be informed choices.

At a different level, the growth of traffic on the Internet is bringing
about significant changes in the world economy. Business concerns, keen to
maintain viability in competitive markets, are making use of fast contact
with databases, potential suppliers, and manufacturers around the world as
well as myriad other facilities that can be transmitted as software through
cyberspace. Aspects of commerce and production can be conducted abroad and
managed with minimal direct contact. Participation in global commerce is now
open to anyone with a computer.

The random nature of such developments, that are not part of any strategic
plan, seems to ensure that political interventions will be increasingly
redundant and, without serious analyses of the trends and their
implications, governments will not know until it is too late. With the
greater power of big business, not known in the United Kingdom for its
concerns for the welfare of the workforce, the consequences for investment
and employment in communities with inappropriate skills are potentially
serious. Given the links between social deprivation and drug use (Bukoski
1991), these trends are likely to encourage the tendency to use drugs.
Increased time for non-productive activities by British youth has resulted
in concentrated and extended interactions with peer groups, rather than
mixed groups of working colleagues and, for the less sociable, empty hours
threaten to be aimless, boring, or depressing. It is not surprising that
drugs are seen as a good antidote. Demand for drugs is likely to remain high
while there are poor and/or marginalized groups in need of compensation for
their state of deprivation.

What Next?

The UNDCP (1995a) has noted the growth of the designer drugs market.
Numerous substances can be synthesized from different precursor chemicals
with only minor variations in the manufacturing process. The consequences of
such versatility me far-reaching. offering opportunities to stay in the
licit market and avoid control. Manufacturers can keep one stage ahead of
the law by switching to a new compound, knowing that the slow process of
legislation will mean they have considerable time to abandon a drug and
develop another. In the future perhaps computer modeling will provide ways
of creating new drugs quickly, at present there seems to be extensive use
made of Pihkal (Shulgin and Shulgin 1991) in which recipes for new drugs are
given and the precursors and procedures described.

There are other ways of avoiding the law. Precursor chemicals can be
converted into a licit form for transit, then reconverted to an active form
at the target destination for synthesizing by manufacturers there.
Legislative procedures are currently incapable of preventing these ingenious
criminal manipulations. In the United Kingdom, the procedures for
legislative changes to accommodate new products are comparatively easy. For
2 decades a statutory modification (1977: no. 1243) of the Misuse of Drugs
Act (Teff 1975) has been in operation. This brought in generic control of
'substituted amphetamines,' and when Ecstasy appeared on the scene the
mechanisms of control were already in place. Furthermore, for inclusion in
the list of controlled substances, no proof is needed that a drug is a
health hazard, but simply that it has the potential for social harm[1]. The
United Kingdom was fortunate in having preemptive legislation that makes the
response to new amphetamine-type substances fairly simple and rapid.
Legislation governing generic categories rather than specific drags is now
being considered elsewhere in the world.

Summary

Demand is increasing among the young for cheap stimulants that suit their
lifestyle. Those that are long-lasting and, hence, good value for money,
like amphetamine, are economically accessible and of greater functional
value. In addition, new experiences are sought that are 'appropriate' in
some way to a particular activity or setting. These can be met by new
designer drugs. Self-medication for psychological problems--that young
people are not able or willing to articulate to their doctor--continues to
be popular. In particular, confidence and self-esteem are sought by the
casualties of economic recession. These demand factors combined ensure a
large market for amphetamine-type substances among young people in the
future. With runaway technology setting the pace, the start of the next
millennium will be exciting, but this will not be without its drawbacks.
Perhaps we need to remember that to live in exciting times is a traditional
Chinese curse.

Notes

1. My thanks to Dr Leslie King at Aldormaston Drugs Intelligence Laboratory
for this information.

References

Bukoski, W.J.

1991 A framework for drug abuse prevention research. In Drug Abuse
Prevention Intervention Research: Methodological Issues, eds. C.G. Leukefeld
and W.J. Bukoski. Rockville, MD:National Institute on Drug Abuse Research
Monograph 107.

Connell, P.M.

1958 Amphetamine Psychosis. London:Oxford University Press Maudsley
Monograph No.5.

Davies, J.B., and J. Ditton

1990 The 1990's: decade of the stimulants? British Journal of Addiction
85:811-813.

Drugs Branch Inspectorate

1987 Drugs Branch Inspectorate Annual Report. London:Her Majesty's
Stationery Office.

Greaves, G.B.

1980 Psychosocial aspects of amphetamines and related substance abuse. In
Amphetamines and related stimulants: Chemical, biological, clinical and
sociological aspects, ed. J. Caldwell. Florida:CRC Press. Inc.

Hartnoll, R.L., R. Lewis, and S. Bryer

1984 Recent trends in drug use in Britain Druglink Spring: 22-24.

Hartnoll, R.L., and M. Mitcheson

1973 Attitude of young people towards drug use. Bulletin of Narcotics 25:9.

Home Office Statistical Bulletin

1996 Statistics of Drug Seizures and Offenders Dealt With in United Kingdom
1994. London:Her Majesty's Stationery Office.

Khantzian, F.

1985 The serf-medication hypothesis of addictive disorder. American
Psychiatry 142:1259-1264.

King, L.

1996 Personal communication. Aldermaston, UK:Drugs Intelligence Laboratory
Forensic Science Service.

Kleber, H.

1988 Epidemic cocaine abuse: America's present, Britain's future. British
Journal of Addiction 83: 1351-1371.

Klee, H.

1992 A new target for behavioural research: amphetamine misuse. British
Journal of Addiction 87:439-446.

Klee, H.

1992 Sexual risk among amphetamine users: prospects for change. In AIDS:
Rights, Risk and Reason, eds P. Aggleton, P. Davies, and G. Hart.
London:Falmer Press.

Klee, H.

1993 The sexual behaviour of injecting women: heroin and amphetamine use
compared. Addiction, 88:1055-1063.

Klee, H.

1997a Amphetamine misusers in contemporary Britain: The emergence of a
hidden population. In Amphetamine Misuse: International Perspectives on
Current Trends, ed. H. Klee. Reading, UK:Harwood Academic Publishers.

Klee, H.

1997b A typology of amphetamine users in the United Kingdom. In Amphetamine
Misuse: International Perspectives on Current Trends, ed. H.Klee. Reading,
UK:Harwood Academic Publishers.

Klee, H., and J. Faugier

1990 Intravenous drag users: Their role in the sexual mediation of HIV
infection. Final Report to the Economic and Social Research Council, United
Kingdom.

Klee, H. and J. Morris

1994a Crime and drag misuse: economic and psychological aspects of the
criminal activities of heroin and amphetamine injectors. Addiction Research
1(4): 377-386.

Klee, H., and J. Morris

1994b Factors that lead young amphetamine misusers to seek help:
Implications for drug prevention and harm reduction. Drugs: Education,
Prevention and Policy 1(3):289-297.

Klee, H, and J. Morris

1997 Amphetamine misuse: The effects of social context on injection risk
behaviour. Addiction Research 4(4):329-342.

Klee, H., J. Morris, T. Carnwath, and J.Merrill

1997 Amphetamine misuse and treatment: An exploration of individual and
policy impediments to effective service delivery. Final report to Department
of Health, United Kingdom.

Klee, H., J. Morris, and S. Ruben

1993 Polydrug Misuse: health risks and implications for HIV transmission.
Final Report to Department of Health, United Kingdom.

Klee, iH., and P. Reid

1995 Amphetamine Misusing Groups: A Feasibility Study of the Use of Peer
Group Leaders for Drug Prevention Work among Their Associates. London
UK:Home Office Central Drug Prevention Unit Paper 3.

Klee, H., and S., Ruben

1993 Amphetamine misuse: Implications for HIV transmission. Final report to
the Economic and Social Research Council, United Kingdom.

MacGregor, S., ed.

1989 The public debate in the 1980's. In Drugs and British Society, ed. S.
Macgregor. London:Routledge.

McKim, N.A.

1986 Drugs and Behaviour: An Introduction to Behavioural Pharmacology.
London:Prentice-Hall.

Miller, M.A., and N.J. Kozel

1991 Introduction and overview. In Methamphetamine Abuse: Epidemiologic
Issues and Implications. Rockville MD:National Institute on Drug Abuse
Research Monograph 115.

Morgan, P., and J.E. Beck

1997 The legacy and the paradox: Hidden contexts ofmethamphetamine use in
the United States. In Amphetamine Misuse:Inernational Perspectives on
Current Trends, ed. H. Klee. Reading, UK Harwood Academic Publishers.

Mott, J., and C. Mirlees-Black

1995 Self-reported Drug Misuse in England and Wales: Findings from the 1992
British Crime Survey. London:iHome Office. Research and Planning Unit Paper
89.

Newcomb, M.D., and P.M. Bentler

1987 Substance use and ethnicity: differential impact of peer and adult
models. Journal of Psychology 120:83-95.

Parker, H, F. Measham, and J. Aldridge

1995 Drugs Futures: Changing Patterns of Drug Use Amongst English Youth.
London:Institute for the Study of Drug Dependence Research Monograph Seven.

Pearson, G.

1987 The New Heroin Users. Oxford:Basil Blackwell.

Pearson, G., M. Gilman, and S. McIver

1985 Young People and Heroin. London:Health Education Council Research
Report No. 8.

Pietschmann, T.

1996 Economic gains from manufacturing and trafficking amphetamine-type
stimulants in comparison with plant-based drugs. Paper presented to the
expert meeting on the manufacture, trafficking and abuse of amphetaminetype
stimulants and their precursors. Vienna:United Nations Drug Control
Programme.

Pietschmann, T.

1997 Economic forces driving manufacture, trafficking and consumption of
amphetamine-type stimulants. In Amphetamine Misuse: International
Perspectives on Current Trends, ed. H.Klee. Reading, UK:Harwood Academic.

Redhead, S.

1990 The end of the century party: Youth and pop towards 2000. Manchester
UK:Manchester University Press.

Shapiro, H.

1988 Waiting for the Man: The Story of Drugs and Popular Music. United
Kingdom:Mandarin Press.

Shulgin, A., and A. Shulgin

1991 Pihkal: A Chemical Love Story. Berkeley CA:Transform Press.

Spear, B.

1990 SCODA: Report of conference 'Working with Stimulant Users'. London:
Standing Conference on Drug Abuse.

Stimson, G.V., L. Alldritt, K. Dolan, and M. Donoghoe

1988 Injecting Equipment Exchange Schemes: Final Report. London:Goldsmith
College.

Stutman, R.

1989 Crack stories from the States. Druglink 5:6-7.

Suwaki, H.

1991 Methamphetamine abuse in Japan. In Methamphetamine Abuse: Epidemiologic
Issues and Implications, eds. M.A. Miller and N.J. Kozel. Rockville
MD:National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph 115.

Teff, H.

1975 Drugs, Society and the Law. United Kingdom:Saxon House

United Nations Drug Control Programme

1995a Amphetamine-Type Stimulants: A Global Review. Vienna:United Nations
Drug Control Programme Technical Services Branch discussion paper.

United Nations Drug Control Programme

1995b Manufacture, trafficking and abuse of amphetamine-the stimulants and
their precursors: A global review. Vienna:United Nations Drug Control
Programme Technical Services Branch. outline of a policy support project.

Welsh, I.

1996 Ecstasy. London: Jonathan Cape.

Yoshida, T.

1997 Use and misuse of amphetamines: an international overview. In
Amphetamine Misuse: International Perspectives on Current Trends, ed. H.
Klee. Reading, UK:Harwood Academic Publishers.

~~~~~~~~

By Hilary Klee

Hilary Klee is Research Professor in Psychology at the Manchester
Metropolitan University and Director of the Centre for Social Research on
Health and Substance Abuse (SRHSA). She has a special interest in the use of
amphetamine sulphate, and has directed several research projects on the
lifestyles of amphetamine users and the prevention and treatment problems
that are associated with them. Address correspondence and requests for
reprints to Hilary Klee, Centre for Social Research on Health and Substance
Abuse, The Manchester Metropolitan University, Elizabeth Gaskell Campus,
Hathersage Road, Manchester M13 OIA.
                             -------------------
Copyright of Journal of Drug Issues is the property of Florida State
University / School of Criminology & Criminal Justice and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without
the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.
Source: Journal of Drug Issues, Winter98, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p33, 24p.
Item Number: 487596