←back to thread

Decline in teen drug use continues, surprising experts

(arstechnica.com)
349 points pseudolus | 10 comments | 17 Dec 24 23:44 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
oortoo ◴[20 Dec 24 19:38 UTC] No.42474210[source]▶
Another aspect here I think is the generalized fear and anxiety present in young people. Having spoken to some family members in the 15-18 age bracket, the message they seem to be receiving is that they are without a future... they won't be buying homes, they won't be getting high paying jobs, and that the system is not going to work in their favor. I think people of this age are uniquely feeling mortal and vulnerable in a way teens typically have not, causing them to be more hesitant to risk losing their mind which they may need to protect themselves down the road. But they also are modern teenagers, not only low in willpower but also coddled by their smartphones, which is why technology addiction is the go to "safer" alternative to habitual drug use.

Also, you typically need to be unsupervised with friends to get into drugs, something teenagers no longer have access to compared to 10-15 years ago. If we look at the social decline due to the pandemic, what made experts think these kids would bounce back? They are forever changed, and will forever be less social than other generations because they missed out on formative experiences.

replies(16): >>42474272 #>>42474450 #>>42474470 #>>42474483 #>>42474512 #>>42474523 #>>42475236 #>>42476592 #>>42476722 #>>42477427 #>>42477607 #>>42477613 #>>42478117 #>>42480226 #>>42481153 #>>42481583 #
crtified ◴[20 Dec 24 20:02 UTC] No.42474450[source]▶
I imagine that, for the young people of the world, the Covid years really ripped away the illusion that the adults of the world are in competent control. To a degree that modern generations (from otherwise relatively stable, wealthy countries) have never experienced. While there are other major factors clearly contributing to the generational angst, I think this was the catalyst.

I wonder how the economics stack up, because intoxicants aren't free. If the researchers are saying there's X less drug use, then presumably that either implies (a) teenagers are now spending X more on other areas instead (and what are they?), or (b) teenagers now have X less money.

replies(2): >>42476589 #>>42477459 #
1. smogcutter ◴[21 Dec 24 04:00 UTC] No.42477459[source]▶
Agreed that Covid was disillusioning for young people, but uniquely so? The 2008 financial crisis, 9/11, and the GWoT would all like a word.

The only generation I can think of without a similar formative crisis (in the US at least) is Gen X. Does the death of Kurt Cobain count?

replies(2): >>42478151 #>>42481920 #
2. sznio ◴[21 Dec 24 08:01 UTC] No.42478151[source]▶
the financial crisis was just financial. 9/11 or war on terror was just behind a tv screen.

covid was actually something everyone felt personally - not just empathized with through media. I feel like I just started recovering mentally from the lockdowns - all my college years eaten up by them.

replies(3): >>42479663 #>>42479980 #>>42481896 #
3. germinalphrase ◴[21 Dec 24 13:50 UTC] No.42479663[source]▶
I mean, lock down absolutely was a disruption - but I know more than one or two young men that ended up in the desert after 9/11. Maybe we’ve also acclimated so much to the post-9/11 infrastructure of fear and surveillance that we assume this is how it always was?
4. throwameme ◴[21 Dec 24 14:46 UTC] No.42479980[source]▶
i am just old enough to have experienced 9/11 when i was in elementary school. it was a similar change to society to how covid screwed everything

when i was a child, there was no security in airports. like literally NONE. you could walk in and buy a flight with physical cash. if you wanted an international flight, there was a metal detector like you might find in a night club

government ID and drivers licence did not have your photograph on it, and some state drivers licenses were printed on non-laminated card. there was also no functional internet surveillance (there were no good search algorithms or tools in the early internet, so the government couldnt search either).

but the real big change, which is kind of what everyone felt i think, is the whole world was celebrating the end of the cold war and so vehemently protested going into the middle east, and the government just did it anyway. the largest protests in the history of the west were against that war and it was all totally ignored https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_Iraq_War

then we got the PATRIOT act, NSA/CIA spying on the population, heavily armed police. btw, in the 1990s you would NEVER see police with assault rifles and armoured trucks etc except for swat teams in major cities and the ATF. The idea of your local police department having a heap of military equipment was crazy. a great example of this is the LA riots in '92 - they had to call in the army and the national guard because the police simply werent equipped for it

and they would run these polls on tv, like gallup polls, falsely claiming that 20%+ of people publicly supported the war

even though it didnt affect anyone as much personally, it was the turning point where the gov just started brazenly ignoring people and introducing the heavy duty surveillance state, which was especially painfully felt in aus, canada, new zealand, the us, and the uk. and covid19 tyranny was only possible because of what bush did in response to 9/11 - it physically could not have happened in the 1990s as there were no government agencies that could have done it

replies(2): >>42480089 #>>42482212 #
5. aeonik ◴[21 Dec 24 15:06 UTC] No.42480089{3}[source]▶
I thought the AR-15s that the police carried in America were semi-auto. More like a sporting rifle than what the military uses.

AR-15s are more versatile than shotguns, though less powerful they are more accurate. If your going to carry a long gun around, it's probably the most logical option.

Basically anyone who isn't a prohibited person in America can field the same equipment. Though I think police have more access to restricted ammunition.

replies(2): >>42481874 #>>42484919 #
6. titanomachy ◴[21 Dec 24 20:01 UTC] No.42481874{4}[source]▶
Police carrying AR-15s is a very different vibe from police with only holstered sidearms. Regardless of the trigger system they’re equipped with.
7. Wytwwww ◴[21 Dec 24 20:04 UTC] No.42481896[source]▶
> really ripped away the illusion that the adults of the world are in competent control

In the context of this the GFC was much worse, though. It was entirely avoidable and a direct outcome of extreme greed and extreme incompetence. With Covid/lockdowns all options sucked to one extent or another.

8. crtified ◴[21 Dec 24 20:07 UTC] No.42481920[source]▶
When I was a kid in the 1980s, distant buildings were bombed too, and endless Cold wars and Middle East wars etc were a given too. However, your average 12 year old doesn't deeply care about finance or politics or distant wars. Their day-to-day routine goes on. Those are adult problems.

With Covid, the difference is that it came home, for everyone. And not just the US, but globally. Every home was directly affected, for months or years. 9/11 or 2008 didn't lock down entire countries for weeks and months at a time, impose country wide curfews, close all schools, suppress all socialising, impose home schooling, adults/parents working from home or not-at-all, shuttering of global supply lines, increased mortality fears for all older relatives, and constant everyday panic headlines and monitoring for years. We're still working through the aftereffects. So yes, very unique, in its direct effect upon the youth of wealthy countries in modern society.

9. dehrmann ◴[21 Dec 24 20:55 UTC] No.42482212{3}[source]▶
Sounds like you were born around 93, but a lot of the things you're saying weren't the case in 2000. Airports had metal detectors and xrayed carry-ons well before 2000, and drivers licenses also had photos on them around that time. What you're describing is more 1990 than 2000.
10. throwameme ◴[22 Dec 24 07:33 UTC] No.42484919{4}[source]▶
you are correct re: semi autos. most infantry would rarely use fully automatic fire with ar15 spec rifles too, as it is wasteful and inaccurate. exception being squad automatic weapons

echoing wat titanomachy said, there was a time where it was unthinkable to see police with anything more than a sidearm. a lot of police still had revolvers into the 90s as well.