Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Decline in teen drug use continues, surprising experts

    (arstechnica.com)
    349 points pseudolus | 12 comments | 17 Dec 24 23:44 UTC | HN request time: 1.126s | source | bottom
    Show context
    vouaobrasil ◴[20 Dec 24 19:19 UTC] No.42474017[source]▶
    I wonder if the new drug of choice is actually technology. In some ways I think that the addiction to technology has some similar mellowing effects as drugs. Some research indicates that smartphone addiction is also related to low self-esteem and avoidant attachment [1] and that smartphones can become an object of attachment [2]. The replacement of drugs by technology is not surprising as it significantly strengthens technological development especially as it is already well past the point of diminishing returns for improving every day life.

    1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S07475...

    2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S07475...

    replies(27): >>42474251 #>>42474255 #>>42474258 #>>42474428 #>>42474552 #>>42474820 #>>42474840 #>>42475416 #>>42476573 #>>42476771 #>>42476830 #>>42477157 #>>42477286 #>>42477871 #>>42478303 #>>42478352 #>>42478504 #>>42478717 #>>42478824 #>>42478837 #>>42479083 #>>42479553 #>>42480244 #>>42481141 #>>42481485 #>>42482200 #>>42483991 #
    Spooky23 ◴[21 Dec 24 13:31 UTC] No.42479553[source]▶
    I think it’s not technology as a thing people are hooked to - it’s taken over social life. My 13 year old and his buddies socialize online, period. In person stuff is mostly organized. That is helped by school policy that got rid of the idea of a neighborhood school.

    Additionally, the social activities that coalesced around things like alcohol are out of reach of many teens. I live in a city that had a very active college bar scene. It’s dead and gone. Crackdowns on underage serving and cost drives it away. Happy hour special at a place that other day was $12 for 4 coors lights in a bucket. In 1998, I’d pay $15 for a dozen wings and all you can drink swill for 3 hours.

    replies(2): >>42479602 #>>42479695 #
    cluckindan ◴[21 Dec 24 13:39 UTC] No.42479602[source]▶
    ”My 13 year old and his buddies socialize online, period.”

    Nothing new under the sun. Me and my friends were like that 30 something years ago.

    replies(4): >>42479641 #>>42479685 #>>42482601 #>>42484113 #
    1. ChrisMarshallNY ◴[21 Dec 24 13:46 UTC] No.42479641[source]▶
    It's a different beast, these days, though.

    Back then, only "nerds" socialized online. Nowadays, everyone does it.

    I'm of two minds about this.

    On one hand, I'm really glad that kids aren't screwing up their formative years. Drug use during growing/development years can wreck someone's life.

    The issue is that, if you are an addict (which is different from physical addiction. Many addicts never get physically addicted to anything), then you'll eventually have problems with drugs; even if they are "socially acceptable" ones, like pot or alcohol (pot being "socially acceptable" is kinda new, around here, but Things Have Changed).

    It'll still destroy your life, but, at least, you'll hopefully have something like an education, and living skills, by then, which can help Recovery (and also hinder it).

    replies(4): >>42480664 #>>42481355 #>>42481518 #>>42482204 #
    2. derwiki ◴[21 Dec 24 16:49 UTC] No.42480664[source]▶
    It was maybe only nerds in 1994, but by 1998 everyone at school was asking their parents for the internet so they could talk on ICQ—not just the nerds!
    replies(2): >>42481401 #>>42481475 #
    3. jrm4 ◴[21 Dec 24 18:42 UTC] No.42481355[source]▶
    My gut is that this will mostly break even at best.

    Whatever "gains" you see in terms of less drug addiction, etc, you're going to see losses in terms of the negative effects of not being "in person."

    I confess that it's probably to early to even strongly know what those negative effects are, but I don't think this picture is likely one of strong improvement.

    4. mgbmtl ◴[21 Dec 24 18:48 UTC] No.42481401[source]▶
    ICQ was a way of texting friends so that you could go party. At least for me, and I'm a nerd. I remember even "normal" friends were using IRC as a way to hookup. Cell phones were not very common.

    Looking at my non-nerd 17 year old, they meet maybe once a month, and it's to cook food together during the day. Nobody drinks. They just see it as a waste of money. Maybe not the most normal sample. They love biking and also go to circus school together (Montreal).

    replies(1): >>42481591 #
    5. ryoshu ◴[21 Dec 24 19:00 UTC] No.42481475[source]▶
    That was still nerd behavior depending on the group you were in. A lot of folks knew AIM, but ICQ was different.
    6. klooney ◴[21 Dec 24 19:07 UTC] No.42481518[source]▶
    I was addicted to, of all things, text MUDs, when I was younger. It's ditch weed compared to what you can get now.
    replies(1): >>42481825 #
    7. thefaux ◴[21 Dec 24 19:20 UTC] No.42481591{3}[source]▶
    Love how you describe your kid as not a nerd and then mention he bikes and goes to circus school :)
    replies(1): >>42481730 #
    8. jamal-kumar ◴[21 Dec 24 19:43 UTC] No.42481730{4}[source]▶
    Nah that's just normal quebecois stuff. Picture cirque du soliel or how much the french love bikes
    9. Modified3019 ◴[21 Dec 24 19:54 UTC] No.42481825[source]▶
    My drug of choice was “Wyvern” by Steve Yegge, which was heavily influenced by MUDs despite being graphical: https://web.archive.org/web/20040102095422/http://www.caboch...

    You could connect to it with just telnet, and while not realistically playable that way, it was great when just chatting.

    10. aniviacat ◴[21 Dec 24 20:54 UTC] No.42482204[source]▶
    > if you are an addict [...] then you'll eventually have problems with drugs

    Do I understand you correctly that you're saying that people addicted to smartphones in their youth will (more likely) become drug addicts in adulthood?

    What makes you think that people don't just continue being addicted to phones as adults (instead of doing drugs)?

    replies(2): >>42482264 #>>42482414 #
    11. ChrisMarshallNY ◴[21 Dec 24 21:03 UTC] No.42482264[source]▶
    Nah, but addiction to smartphones might be an indication of future issues with other stuff (not just drugs). Long story, not really the kind most folks around here are interested in hearing.
    12. DiggyJohnson ◴[21 Dec 24 21:21 UTC] No.42482414[source]▶
    I’m not sure which of you I agree with more, but I don’t think GP is crazy: self-control (i.e. delayed gratification) is a transferable skill.