My students are very aware that I have an unusually negative view of chemically altering the human nervous system (with, of course, the exception of my favorite drug of choice–caffeine). I think it’s just fair to let students know if you bring this type of bias into the classroom–sort of a truth in packaging thing. I think working in Murray Jarvik‘s lab at UCLA during the 70s, where we administered all manner of stuff to our poor rhesus monkeys, left me with a strong negative impression.
The psychological literature has traditionally been rather drug-friendly. Emeritus professor Jack Block of Berkeley, probably one of the better-known developmental psychologists in the business, wrote along with Jonathan Shedler that youth who abstained from drug use were poorly adjusted compared to youth who experimented with drugs [1]. In a less-typical report, Joan Turner reported that marijuana abstainers got better grades, were involved in more extracurricular activities, and were emotionally better off than experimenters or heavy users (reporting more satisfaction with friends and family at age 23) [2].
So I was interested to see a report by a team led by Candice Odgers, Avshalom Caspi, and Terrie Moffit that looked at the development of 1000 teens in New Zealand [2]. Their team found that teens who used alcohol and marijuana regularly prior to the age of 15 were a mixed group. About half were traditional “at-risk kids,” or those who had a history of behavior problems in childhood and came from criminal, substance-abusing, and abusive households. The other half were kids who had none of these risk factors.
The Caspi team found that at-risk or not, all of these kids had significantly poorer health in their 30s than non-abusing individuals. Drug use simply put the not-at-risk kids onto the same trajectory as the at-risk kids, whose school failure, lifestyle, later substance abuse, criminal convictions, early pregnancy rates, and health did not differ from each other, but were all significantly worse than kids who didn’t use.
So I think I’ll continue to stick to my caffeine ( and yes, I did quit completely when I was having babies, including no cola, tea, chocolate, etc.). If I’m poorly adjusted as a result, well, I guess I’ll just have to live with that.
1. Shedler, J., & Block, J. (1990). Adolescent drug use and psychological health: A longitudinal inquiry. American Psychologist, 45(5), 612–630.
2. Tucker, J.S., Ellickson, P.L., Collins, R.L., & Klein, D.J. (2006). Are drug experimenters better adjusted than abstainers and users?: A longitudinal study of adolescent marijuana use. Journal of Adolescent Health, 39(4), 488–494.
3. Odgers, C., et al. (2008). Early exposure to drugs and alcohol. Psychological Science [in press]. Click on link to see entire article.
12 Comments
davideugene · October 19, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Good article, Laura! About 6 years ago I wrote a little book called “20 Good Reasons to Stay Sober (even if you don’t have a drinking problem)”. Articles like this continue to confirm my battle cry regarding the dangers of alcohol use/abuse. “Education is the key to making good choices.”
http://www.ReasonsToStaySober.com
Dave
mama5512 · October 19, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Drugs are scary things to experiment with because they can become addicting. I do like energy drinks especially when i have to stay up to study, write a paper, or need a little boost to keep me going for the rest of the day! but not addictive to them but do use them as a crutch when needed.
mama5512 · October 19, 2008 at 7:39 pm
What are the future side effects that I will have to face for drinking energy drinks? Is too much jolt of caffeine bad for the brain?
Amber Thompson · October 19, 2008 at 7:50 pm
I find it quite ironic that I’m reading this blog while studying for my midterm. One test shows that youth who experiment with drugs are more well-adjusted in later life than those who don’t. And the other study shows that students who abstain from drugs get better grades than those who don’t.
So, the question here is, is it better to study now and get a good grade on my test, or do some drugs so that I’ll be better off later in life?
Hmmm…that’s a tough one. 😉
(What does “well-adjusted” really mean anyway?)
Amber Thompson · October 19, 2008 at 7:54 pm
**For those of you who don’t pick it up (and I don’t blame you, it is too easy to mistake typed statements), my last statement was completely sarcastic.
Don’t do drugs! And study 20-30 hours a week! 🙂
Laura Freberg · October 19, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Well, we like to give students clear-cut answers, but we don’t always have those. You need to read the original Block and Turner articles, and make up your own minds. If you need copies, let me know.
I think the energy drinks are so new on the scene that we’ve yet to see a substantive literature. Unquestionably, caffeine can be overdone, but you usually know because you have heartbeats that are not right. I can take a look at the other ingredients.
joshpollitz · October 20, 2008 at 9:14 am
I grew up in the city, SF, and saw a lot of my childhood friends spoil rather quickly due to substances. These weren’t bad kids either, some of them were simply the best people I have ever met, but after years of addiction to serious drugs they never had the same look to them. One example, my best friend got very addicted to a substance, and she eventually overdosed at the age of 17. I remember her mother and father and the way they were at the funeral, and they played this slide show, I do wish things were different.
I would say with a good deal of certainty, that the kids that “abused” illegal substances had a harder path from then on. Many of them, though bright students (even a couple 4.0 high students), are not in college and working jobs they “hate.” They spend almost every dollar on that stuff and I have to admit I haven’t seen them the same in a long time now. From my experiences and what I have learned from those close to me is that this “stuff” eats at you. I would never say there were any good that could come from thousands of dollars spent stuffing pure crap into your system. As to the article saying that at risk kids were better adjusted, I find that not only offensive but ridiculous. I am not speaking from my experiences with my friends alone, growing up in the city I saw a lot of people abusing, even family members and family friends, and then realized why they were so degenerate. It is a dirty game they play, and most of the time it a very selfish act. It is very unfortunate that people fall victim to addiction, but to even hint at the possibilities of recreational drug use to better adjust a person into “society” is not only silly but plain stupid.
Laura Freberg · October 20, 2008 at 2:33 pm
You’d have to be pretty familiar with Jack Block’s work to see how he defines “well adjusted.” He seems to think that if you’re “undercontrolled,” that’s just peachy, but if you’re “overcontrolled,” it’s awful.
In another study, Block describes future drug users as follows:
“Overall, preschool children subsequently using drugs at age 14 were characterized as undercontrolled: restless and fidgety, emotionally labile, unobedient, lacking in calmness, domineering, behaving immaturely when under stress, reluctant to yield and give in, aggressive, overreactive to frustration, teasing, and unable to recoup after stress” (p. 322).
I’m not sure how that relates to “well adjusted.” Block is also famous for his “whiny Republicans” study, where he provides a very different view of what undercontrolled and overcontrolled mean:
“Invoking our own theoretical parlance, and with regard to the present sample, during their earlier nursery school years, female Conservatives may be viewed as trending substantially toward over-control (Block, 2002; Block & Block, 1951, 1952; Block & Block, 1980b), as tending toward uncertainty, constriction, and compliance, becoming—usually—followers rather than leaders in their social settings” (p. 13).
“Reciprocally, our female Liberals when in nursery school appear inclined toward under-control, manifesting an independence of evaluations, an expressiveness, and a relative unconstraint by others. In adulthood, these now women still trend toward under-control. The male sample when in nursery school appears relatively resilient and tilted toward under-control. In adulthood, these now men have become aware of the troubling complexity and complications of life….” (p. 13)
Jennifer Jones · October 21, 2008 at 6:55 pm
It’s interesting that the two different studies, both on the youth population, gave such differing results. I suppose the definition of what it means to be “well-adjusted” comes into play here. I would love to know what the results would be if comparing someone who used those drugs regularly before the age of 15 (like in this study) to someone who began later in their teens. I wonder if the differences would be that major. Either way, we all know that drugs greatly affect the central nervous system in bad ways.
ajacopet · October 21, 2008 at 9:35 pm
I have mixed thoughts on this study; I know some people that do abuse substances too often and barely passed high school and today, have gone nowhere. But in contrast, I know of many people that wouldn’t dare to abuse anything but still also have gone no where. On the opposite side of the spectrum, my most successful friends have never abused, but there are a few that had/have experimented with substances, that are just successful. My plain and simple point; I believe it simply comes down to biology and whether or not a person has substance abuse or addiction in their genes. I don’t think there is an experiment out there that can pinpoint whether one will be better off in life solely based on if they abused substances or not.
Jaclyn Shostrom · October 28, 2008 at 4:00 pm
I find it very interesting that two studies can come to such completely different conclusions from similar observations. Growing up, we’re bombarded with the idea that drugs are bad and will end up winding you down a path to nowhere and in my experience, it seems as if that’s not too far from the truth. Using drugs and abusing drugs are two different issues, however, and although I wouldn’t suggest using drugs, there are those who use them and do fine. Others do seem to have many more issues with them, however. It really depends on the individual person as to how drug usage will affect them. From my experience, it seems that the majority of people will do better off without using drugs and studies that contradict that really will need to have some strong evidence supporting them.
Early Drug and Alcohol Use Has Long-lasting Effects · October 19, 2008 at 12:35 pm
[…] Original post: Early Drug and Alcohol Use Has Long-lasting Effects […]
Comments are closed.