Latest news with #NSDUH
Time of India
3 days ago
- Health
- Time of India
Elon Musk is on ketamine? What is it and how does it affect the body?
Image credits: Getty Images No matter how controversial his actions may be, Elon Musk is one man who has made a name for himself. From technology to politics, Musk has taken a deep dive into reigning fields in order to expand his forte and empire. The 53-year-old is the owner of Tesla, X and SpaceX and has even tried his hands at politics by donating a whopping $275 million to Trump's campaign and heading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). For someone to be able to do so much simultaneously would either require some superhuman powers or their diet needs to have something that fuels them from the inside. For Elon Musk, his diet includes a string of drugs like ketamine and psychedelic stimulants that have kept him running from one office to another in his Tesla. What is ketamine and how does it affect the body? Let's take a closer look. Musk once said he took ketamine every two weeks for depression as prescribed by his doctor. One would think a drug prescribed for depression would have positive and healing effects, right? Not really. Recently, the New York Times reported that during the 2024 presidential campaign, Musk was taking so much ketamine, sometimes daily, that he told people it was causing him bladder problems, which is a known symptom of excessive ketamine use. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo How many Americans use ketamine? Image credits: Getty Images Musk is not alone, as of 2015, 3 million Americans aged 12 or older have used ketamine in their lifetime. A recent study analysing the data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) found that past-year recreational ketamine use among adults has increased dramatically since 2015. From 2015 to 2019 ketamine use increased by 81.8% and from 2021 to 2022 it increased by 40%. While during the former years, the use was among adults with depression, in the latter years it was more among those without depression. One interesting point made in this study published in the Journal of Affective Disorders, people were more likely to use ketamine if they used other substances such as ecstasy/MDMA, GHB and cocaine, one of which even Musk used. What is Ketamine? Image credits: Getty Images Ketamine, both an anesthetic and a hallucinogen was first synthesized in the 1960s and has been a part of surgery and veterinary medicine for a long time. A study published in the National Library of Medicine stated that ketamine showed significant improvement in depression and anxiety symptoms immediately one hour after a single dose. Clinics administering the drug which must be licensed by the government to provide intravenous infusions are becoming popular. The FDA approved the first ketamine-derived nasal spray for depression in 2019. 'There is absolutely a role for ketamine to help people with depression and suicidal ideation,' said Dr. Kevin Yang, a resident physician in psychiatry at the University of California-San Diego. How does Ketamine affect the body? Image credits: Getty Images 'At the same time, that doesn't mean it's going to be safe and effective for everyone,' added Yang. He was the co-author of the study mentioned above which stated that in the past year, the percentage of Americans using ketamine grew by 82%. The people are driven by both medical and recreational reasons. Ketamine drug seizures nationwide increased from 55 in 2017 to 247 in 2022, according to a 2023 study led by Joseph Palamar at New York University. The drug has been edging into the mainstream with more and more reports on its efficacy in treating depression. This has led to an increase in its market where companies like Johnson & Johnson developed its own ketamine-derived treatment for depression which received FDA approval in 2019. Not only nasal spray, people can visit clinics to get an IV of conventional ketamine for treatment for which the clinics have increased from 60 in 2015 to 1,200 and 1,500 today. But it's not sunny with ketamine. Outside of a clinical setting, it is usually consumed as a pill or powder, either snorted or mixed with a drink. A recent survey found that more than half of patients who tried to take the drug at home for depression either intentionally or accidentally took more than the prescribed amount. Over time, you can also end up building a tolerance to the high dosage and thus keep on increasing them to feel better effects. Scientists have found that people who use ketamine can develop a dependency on it, especially with frequent and high-dosage use. They become irritable or anxious without the drug and experience other withdrawal symptoms. Additionally, while the purity of clinical ketamine is ensured the same can not be said for the illicit sources sold ketamine which according to Dr. Nabarun Dasgupta, who oversees the University of North Carolina's Street Drug Analysis Lab, has seen a recent rise in samples where ketamine is combined with other substances. Short-term overuse of the drug can lead to nausea, high blood pressure, and hallucination, whereas long-term use can lead to problems in a person's bladder and urinary tract. Rather than experimenting with the drug on your own or using it for recreational purposes, think of your health and safety and consult a medical expert if you need medical help. One step to a healthier you—join Times Health+ Yoga and feel the change
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
A New Survey Suggests Illicit Opioid Use Is Much More Common Than the Government's Numbers Indicate
A new survey of American adults suggests that illicit opioid use in the United States is much more common than the government's numbers indicate. In the survey, conducted via the online platform Respondi in June 2024, 7.5 percent of respondents reported they had used (or might have used) illicitly manufactured fentanyl (IMF) in the previous 12 months, 25 times the rate suggested by the government-sponsored National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). RAND Corporation economist David Powell and University of Southern California economist Mireille Jacobson, who published their results in JAMA Health Forum on Friday, say the reasons for that huge disparity are unclear. "A number of previous studies also have reported higher rates of illicit opioid use, challenging the accuracy of the federal estimate," a RAND press release notes. A 2014 report by Beau Kilmer and eight other drug policy analysts at RAND, for example, estimated that something like 1.5 million Americans were "chronic heroin users" in 2010, when the NSDUH suggested a total of about 620,000 Americans used heroin. RAND suggests such disparities "may relate to the way the federal survey asks participants about illicit opioid use." Powell and Jacobson note that "about half of NSDUH surveys are conducted in-person," which may inhibit respondents' candor. The Respondi survey, by contrast, was conducted entirely online, which may have encouraged honesty by enhancing the participants' sense of privacy and making them less likely to shape their answers based on social expectations. The phrasing of the questions may also help explain the dramatic divergence in estimates. The NSDUH asks, "Have you ever, even once, used illegally made fentanyl?" If the respondent says yes, he is asked, "How long has it been since you last used illegally made fentanyl?" In the Respondi survey, by contrast, "participants were asked about use of nonprescription opioids within the past 12 months, with heroin and IMF given as examples." They "could respond in 1 of 3 ways: (1) yes, I intentionally used illicit opioids; (2) yes, I may have unintentionally used illicit opioids; or (3) no." Respondents who picked 1 or 2 "were subsequently asked about IMF use within the past 12 months with the following 3 options: (1) yes, I intentionally used illicitly made fentanyl; (2) yes, I may have unintentionally used illicitly made fentanyl; or (3) no." As Powell and Jacobson concede, the inclusion of unintentional fentanyl use, which they thought was appropriate given the vagaries of the black market drug supply, may have inflated their numbers because "individuals who had used an illicit substance but were unsure whether it contained fentanyl could have selected this response." But nearly 5 percent of the participants reported intentional IMF use, which is still more than 16 times the rate reported by the NSDUH. In addition to arguing that the NSDUH is subject to underreporting, critics of the survey have long noted that it omits groups, such as jail or prison inmates and people without fixed addresses, in which the prevalence of illegal opioid use is apt to be especially high. Powell and Jacobson's survey did not address that issue. In fact, they note that the participants had to have internet access, which may have affected the sample "in systematic ways." But that bias, they say, "would likely lead us to underestimate illicit opioid use." The NSDUH sample is much larger than the number of people who participated in the Respondi survey: 67,500 vs. 1,515. Still, the Respondi sample was larger than those routinely used in public opinion polling. Powell and Jacobson note that Respondi has a reputation for "high-quality nationally representative panels." Overall, 11 percent of respondents reported past-year use of illicit opioids, including fentanyl and heroin. Within that group, about 70 percent said that use was intentional. The survey also asked about the participants' first exposure to opioids. Among the people who reported past-year use of illegally manufactured opioids, 39 percent said their first exposure "involved opioids prescribed to them," while 36 percent said it "involved prescription opioids not prescribed to them." Although Powell and Jacobson are interested in the potential connection between opioid prescriptions and subsequent illicit use, they note that "we cannot claim that initial exposure caused subsequent illicit opioid use." Any such causal inference would be reckless, since a large share of American adults—one-third over just a two-year period, according to a 2018 survey—have received opioid prescriptions. Still, it is notable that most illicit opioid consumers in this survey had not received such prescriptions prior to using illegal drugs. The survey asked illegal opioid users to assess their risk of an overdose. Twenty-four percent said an overdose was very likely, while 33 percent thought it was unlikely. As one might expect, the breakdown was different among fentanyl users: about 33 percent and 18 percent, respectively. According to an estimate by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "synthetic opioids," the category that includes fentanyl, were implicated in about 65,000 U.S. deaths during the year ending in June 2024. "If we conservatively assume no fentanyl use among the 21.5% of the population that is younger than 18 years," Powell and Jacobson say, "the national illicit fentanyl use rate was 5.9%," which "implies an annual overdose death rate of 0.32% among the population using illicit fentanyl." One implication of the Respondi survey's results, in other words, is that fentanyl use is less dangerous than the NSDUH's numbers suggest. According to the latter survey, 0.2 percent of Americans 12 or older were past-year fentanyl users in 2023. That would make the "annual overdose death rate" within that group something like 9 percent rather than 0.32 percent. "Overall," Powell and Jacobson write, "17.4% of people reporting fentanyl use thought that it was unlikely that they would overdose from opioid use, implying that most people using IMF recognize the heightened risk of overdose from such consumption. Although speculative, the implied awareness about risk suggests that this population may be receptive to interventions that reduce the likelihood of overdose." Those interventions, they note, include making naloxone, an opioid antagonist that quickly reverses overdoses, "available over the counter" and "distributing fentanyl test strips" to reduce uncertainty about the composition of black market drugs. Although "polysubstance deaths" are becoming "increasingly common," RAND notes, "illegally manufactured fentanyl remains involved in most overdose deaths. Despite the importance of illicit opioids in the current substance-use landscape, relatively little is known about the prevalence of illicit opioid use." The post A New Survey Suggests Illicit Opioid Use Is Much More Common Than the Government's Numbers Indicate appeared first on
Daily Mail
30-04-2025
- Health
- Daily Mail
People who smoke weed 20 times more likely to die from colon cancer, says shock study
Smoking weed has been linked to colon cancer, one of the fastest-growing cancers, according to a shock new study. Consuming cannabis nearly every day increased the risk of dying from colon cancer by up to 20-fold, the research found. The findings challenge the long-held belief in some circles that cannabis can treat cancer - something scientists now say may be dangerously misleading. Researchers at the University of California San Diego tracked over 1,000 colon cancer patients and compared daily marijuana users to non-users. The difference was stark - people who used weed daily before their diagnosis had a 56 per cent chance of dying within five years of spotting the cancer. That was 11 times higher than those who never touched the drug. The outlook was even worse for patients who had an official cannabis addiction diagnosis. They were 24 times more likely to die than their peers within five years. The experts believe THC, the active ingredient in cannabis that causes hallucinogenic effects, may cause inflammation in the colon, which causes cancer cells to grow. THC may also block the production of disease-fighting T cells, which normally destroy cancer cells. Additionally, Cannabis use disorder (CUD) may lead to depression and anxiety, making patients less likely to commit to cancer treatments, the researchers said. However, just three per cent of participants had CUD, and it's unclear what stage their cancers were. The researchers said more studies are needed to understand how exactly cannabis addiction may increase the risk of colon cancer death. But the findings come at a critical time: cannabis use among young people has never been higher and a record number of youngsters are developing colon cancer. According to recent data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 4.5 million young adults aged 18 to 25 in the U.S. reported using cannabis daily or nearly every day. And of them, eight in 10 daily users met the criteria for cannabis use disorder, indicating problematic patterns of use that can lead to health and social issues. Overall about 18million Americans of all ages use marijuana daily or nearly everyday. CUD is defined as using cannabis every day or nearly every day to the point where it negatively impacts a user's life, such as making it difficult to hold down a job. Dr Raphael Cuomo, associate professor in the Department of Anesthesiology at UC San Diego School of Medicine, said: 'This study adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that heavy cannabis use may have underrecognized impacts on the immune system, mental health and treatment behaviors - all of which could influence cancer outcomes.' According to the latest data, early-onset colon cancer diagnoses in the U.S. are expected to rise by 90 per cent in people 20 to 34 years old between 2010 and 2030. In teens, rates have surged 500 per cent since the early 2000s. Cannabis use is also on the rise, largely due to recent decriminalization across the U.S. From 1992 to 2022, for example, daily and near-daily use has seen a 15-fold rise. The new study, published Monday in the Annals of Epidemiology, look at medical records from 1,088 colon cancer patients in the University of California Health system between 2012 and 2024. Of those, 34 were also diagnosed with CUD. The average age at colon cancer diagnosis was 59. On average, patients with CUD were diagnosed four months before learning they also had colon cancer. After accounting for other health factors like age, gender and disease severity, the researchers found the risk of dying within five years of diagnosis for patients with an active cannabis addiction was 56 per cent compared to five per cent in non users. Additionally, patients diagnosed with CUD before colon cancer had a 24-fold increased risk of death within five years of diagnosis. The researchers wrote: 'The results of this study indicate that a history of cannabis use disorder prior to colon cancer diagnosis is independently associated with an increased risk of mortality, even after adjusting for demographic and clinical confounders.' Dr Cuomo said further research is needed to understand the mechanisms of cannabis addiction and colorectal cancer. Indepedent researchers also emphasized the need for increased research but were also 'concerned' about the findings. Dr Rosario Ligresti, chief of gastroenterology at at Hackensack University Medical Center in New Jersey who was not involved in the research, said: 'This study raises serious concerns about the potential health risks associated with cannabis use. 'While further research is needed to fully understand the underlying mechanisms, these findings underscore the importance of educating the public about the potential dangers of marijuana, particularly in relation to colon cancer.' Dr Ligresti also agreed marijuana may suppress T cells, leading to colon cancer developments. Despite the findings, Dr Cuomo emphasized the findings don't mean cannabis users have to quit entirely. He sadi: 'This isn't about vilifying cannabis. It's about understanding the full range of its impacts, especially for people facing serious illnesses. 'We hope these findings encourage more research - and more nuanced conversations - about how cannabis interacts with cancer biology and care.'
Associated Press
04-04-2025
- Health
- Associated Press
Shatterproof Statement on SAMHSA National Survey on Drug Use and Health Staffing Cuts
NORWALK, Conn., April 4, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Staff at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) responsible for conducting the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) were impacted by the recent reduction in force within HHS and its component agencies. There is reason to be concerned that these changes will impede the public's ability to access important data from this survey that has been ongoing since 1971. NSDUH provides valuable insights annually on the scope of the problem of drug use in the United States, including the types of substances used, treatments engaged, and payors involved in paying for that treatment. This data informs policymakers and market participants on unmet needs and solutions to address addiction. Nearly 49 million Americans ages 12 and older had a substance use disorder (SUD) within the past year, and the NSDUH is an invaluable source of nationally representative data on the use of tobacco, alcohol, and drugs and the trends and challenges driving the addiction crisis in the U.S. HHS Secretary Kennedy and Congress have made addressing addiction a priority, and it is essential that we have a robust, best-practice national survey to inform substance use policy and treatment resources. Ideally, this should include the publication of the forthcoming NSDUH 2024 data without interruption. This will enable Congress and state and local governments to make evidence-informed decisions in the fight against addiction – one of our nation's most pressing public health challenges that take the lives of nearly 250 people a day. 'Without this single, historic measure of U.S substance use and misuse, we lose our ONLY way to monitor and manage problems that seriously affect the entire population,' said Thomas McLellan, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, and Shatterproof Scientific Advisor. 'America cannot be great if it continues to suffer from substance use disorder - and without NSDUH we will lose our major monitoring and management tool.' As one of the leading national nonprofits focused on helping people navigate the complexities of SUD, Shatterproof urges the Trump Administration and Congress to make publication of the NSDUH a very timely priority. About Shatterproof Shatterproof is a national nonprofit organization dedicated to transforming the addiction treatment system in the U.S. Shatterproof is focused on guiding society, especially families, through the complexities of a substance use disorder; informing the public on prevention, treatment and recovery from addiction; and educating the public to reduce addiction stigma to ensure that people who use substances or have a substance use disorder can live healthy and fulfilled lives. Find Shatterproof on Facebook, X and YouTube: @ShatterproofHQ or follow them on Instagram at @weareshatterproof. To learn more, visit
Yahoo
02-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
4 key takeaways as Trump's sweeping HHS layoffs begin
(The Hill) — Thousands of employees across the vast Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) began receiving layoff notices as early as 5 a.m. on Tuesday. The purge comes on the heels of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. forcing out a top vaccine official late last week. Entire divisions were axed across multiple agencies, including much of the Food and Drug Administration's communications and media affairs staff. In total, the layoffs, part of the agency restructuring plan publicly announced late last week, are anticipated to impact as many as 10,000 staffers. The layoffs will touch every aspect of the agency. According to some notices seen by The Hill, HHS Chief Human Capital Officer Tom Nagy stated the reduction in force (RIF) would go into effect on June 30. Federal firings and office closures create concerns for miners Nagy wrote that employees would 'be ranked on a retention register based on tenure, veterans' preference, length of service, and performance ratings.' Some employees who received notices were told to contact Anita Pinder, former director of the Office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights, if they believed they were being discriminated against. Pinder died last year. Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) union, called the mass layoffs at HHS 'dangerous, irresponsible, and unacceptable.' 'Cutting 10,000 critical public health jobs puts every American at risk — weakening our defenses against disease outbreaks, unsafe medications, and contaminated food,' said Kelley. 'Congress and citizens must join us in pushing back. Our health, safety, and security depend on a strong, fully staffed public health system.' Here are four takeaways as President Donald Trump's sprawling cuts to the federal government descend on health agencies. The top officials overseeing new drug reviews and tobacco safety were all part of deep cuts to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The head of the FDA's tobacco center, Brian King, was placed on administrative leave. Dozens of employees in the center were also notified of their dismissals, and two entire offices were eliminated. 'Leadership has been kneecapped, and I think it's going to be much more difficult for the center to do its job,' Mitch Zeller, the FDA's former tobacco chief, told The Hill. The agency had increased staffing recently because of complaints from the e-cigarette industry about an approvals backlog; those people are now gone, Zeller said. Also out at the FDA is Peter Stein, director of the Office of New Drugs, who reportedly resigned rather than take a reassignment. Jennifer Hoenig, director of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), shared online that she had received an RIF notice and warned that the data from the agency should no longer be relied on. 'This morning myself and the entire team of the Office of Population Surveys in SAMHSA, the team overseeing all of NSDUH, were RIF'd. My office, OPS, was staffed the by the brightest, most dedicated, and statistically savvy scientists who care deeply about improving the lives of Americans,' Hoenig said in a LinkedIn post. 'I don't know who will continue on with this work, or if it will, as [Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality] scientists were let go en masse.' The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cut senior infectious disease officials, as well as researchers working in the Division of HIV Prevention, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. The agency completely eliminated its Environmental Health Science division, according to agency staff who received layoff notices. Former FDA Commissioner Robert Califf declared Tuesday morning that 'the FDA as we've known it is finished.' 'With most of the leaders with institutional knowledge and a deep understanding of product development and safety no longer employed. I believe that history will see this as a huge mistake,' Califf wrote on LinkedIn. Kennedy's plan called for FDA to lose about 3,500 employees, with the Centers for Disease Control losing about 2,400. 'FDA as we've known it is finished': Former commissioner According to a former FDA official who spoke with The Hill, the staffing cuts at the agency will dethrone the U.S. as the 'gold standard' on drug approvals. 'I think these changes, these layoffs, fundamentally change FDA and bring it back to what it was decades ago,' said Howard Sklamberg, former FDA deputy commissioner for global regulatory operations and policy. 'It's likely true that these changes will put FDA below European regulatory agencies in terms of their expertise and in terms of their ability to oversee drug development.' Experts and former agency officials said the loss of talent and institutional knowledge will be profound. 'This is a tremendous amount of expertise that the agency is losing across all areas that it regulates,' said Patricia Zettler, a law professor at The Ohio State University College of Law who served as HHS Deputy General Counsel until January. 'It is unprecedented to have this kind of dramatic brain drain from FDA and HHS all at once,' Zettler added. 'I don't want to say things aren't fixable. But, it's hard to see any good outcomes here.' Sklamberg noted that many of the staffers at the FDA who received RIFs appeared to be in policy offices. 'People may have thought, oh well policy means like legislation, and that's duplicative of other parts of the government who would work with Congress and legislation. So, we can just cut that,' said Sklamberg. 'FDA developed policy offices to provide guidance to companies that were going to make investments in developing drugs and medical devices, and a lot of those people have been fired.' 'The whole system of medical product applications depends on the expertise and staffing in policy offices,' he said. Sklamberg argued the cuts also go directly against the aims of Kennedy's 'Make America Healthy Again' agenda, specifically its stated goal of providing healthier food to the U.S. population. 'The irony here is that a lot of the changes that HHS has talked about, the MAHA agenda, involves changes in a lot of food standards, which would be in regulations and guidances,' said Sklamberg. 'Those regulations and guidances are written by policy staff.' Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), the chair of the Senate's health committee, asked Kennedy to testify about the reorganization plans before his panel on April 10. Cassidy, who was highly conflicted but ultimately voted to confirm Kennedy, said the hearing would be a chance for Kennedy to 'set the record straight' and lay out his goals and plans. He said news coverage of the effort was 'being set by anonymous sources, and opponents are setting the perceptions.' Ahead of the layoff announcement, House and Senate Democrats questioned whether the reorganization effort was even legal and wrote to Kennedy demanding answers. 'Authoritatively stating that these drastic changes will improve the health of Americans without any explanation insults the American public and defies logic,' Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) wrote in a letter to Kennedy on Monday. 'The stunning lack of transparency surrounding these changes leaves us deeply concerned about what the administration is hiding. Moreover, several actions taken or proposed by the Administration appear to violate federal law.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
