Historically speaking, the biggest single cause of drug epidemics among US
children has been anti-drug campaigns.
The first example was the huge teen drinking epidemic during alcohol
prohibition. Prohibition was passed with a campaign of "Save the Children
from Alcohol". Within five years, teen admissions to hospitals for alcohol
problems had skyrocketed. Schools had to cancel dances because so many kids
would show up with hip flasks full of whiskey. Children became involved in the
bootlegging trade. The average age at which people started drinking dropped
dramatically. Some early supporters of prohibition turned against it because
they said that prohibition made it easier than ever for their children to get
alcohol. Alcohol prohibition was repealed with a campaign of "Save the
Children From Prohibition."
Another example was the rise of glue sniffing (inhalant abuse). Glue sniffing
was essentially unknown as a recreational activity in the US until 1959. Then,
by 1960, kids were being arrested by the thousands for sniffing glue -- even
though there were no laws against sniffing glue. What happened in 1959? A series
of dire-sounding media stories inspired US children who heard the message of
danger as a lure to try it.
Likewise, the speed epidemic and the rise of LSD use in the 1960s were both
preceded by major publicity campaigns about the dangers of these drugs. As one
major study of the subject concluded, "the warning (against drugs)
functions as a lure".
The first drug education class I attended in school was a perfect example. We
heard an hour about the horrors of drugs, really terrible stuff. As we left the
class, a friend turned to me and said, "Wow! If drugs are that bad and
people still take them, they must REALLY feel great!"
It struck me at the time that his logic was perfect, but exactly the opposite
of what the instructors had intended. He promptly went out looking for illegal
drugs, and found them.
