Michael Rosenthal

(7/2018) Last month we introduced the subject of drugs, medicinal and recreational, and the fuzzy boundary between them. When I was young I remember aspirin as the primary day-to-day drug in our house, and I don’t remember hearing much about drug addiction in the largely middle class environment in which I lived. Alcoholism was in the day-to-day news; we all had friends or family who drank too much, and as now, tobacco addition was everywhere. I began "borrowing" my mother’s cigarettes at a young age, and my wife and I fortunately quit smoking successfully in our early 20s!

Opioids were, however, there in the background. There were stories about opium, and places called opium dens, back at least to the early twentieth century. Doctors often supported the addiction. In the late nineteenth century, morphine, taken by needle, was prescribed by physicians, even for minor ailments and mental problems. Other drug uses included laudanum, an opium tincture often used to pacify colicky children.

Overdoses were not uncommon. Attempts to control this problem included federal legislation, including the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, the Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act of 1914, and the Heroin Act of 1924.

Drug abuse was never eliminated, and it rose publically again in the 1950s. The favorite drugs in black market sales evolved into heroin, morphine, and cocaine, eventually adding fentanyl as a major abused drug. Opioid use kills tens of thousands people every year! According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 45,000 people died of overdoses in the twelve months ending in last September. The number of deaths is comparable to those from the AIDS crisis at its peak, and experts predict that the death toll will rise. Much of the addictive drugs come from street sales of heroin and fentanyl, cheap and available even online, and as many as 2.6 million people suffer from opioid use disorder today in the United States alone.

As pointed out in a recent 60 Minutes story, pharmaceutical companies and their staff members are far from innocent in this crisis. They minimized the addictive likelihood of the use of OxyContin and Vicodin as early as the 1980s, encouraging doctors to prescribe and patients to purchase these drugs. Doctors accepted this guidance, and many prescribed the drugs believing them to be safe in the reduction of pain, one of the things that doctors feel a responsibility to do.

Like the AIDS epidemic, the government was slow in its response to the Opioid Crisis. Unlike the AIDS Crisis, where government finally rose to the occasion by funding in 1990 treatment and support to people with AIDS, the government has not yet responded with a similar action. Deaths from AIDS have declined to a very low level due to recognition of the problem, but drug overdoses, including opioid overdoses, continue to rise dramatically. Drugs such as buprenorphine and methadone are proven to assist people with these addictions, but acquisition has not yet been funded by government. Relatively few clinics offer medication- assisted treatment at this time in the United States. Government action is needed! Some legislators have recognized the problem and have proposed legislation for research, treatment and support, but neither previous government leadership nor current leadership has taken the action that is sorely needed to address the problem.

So why does this exploitation of human weakness continue, and at accelerated rates as we see daily? One reason is the overprescribing of habit forming drugs without adequate supervision by physicians, often meaning well. Another is having adequate regulation by the drug industry to discourage the sometimes irresponsible production and distribution of drugs. The amount of income to the drug industry from these drugs is huge. Recently TV’s Sixty Minutes did a report of the distribution of these addictive drugs, and emphasized the huge financial incentives and resulting actions for skirting or weakening drug laws. I highly recommend this program, which I think is available on-line.

Now let’s look at updates of some previous Real Science topics.

Every day the news is filled with energy production stories. A recent regional story involves the potential for energy derived from offshore wind in Virginia. A recent report from the prestigious Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, derived from a study of the value of offshore wind along the United States Eastern Coast, concludes that Virginia offers very high value in utilization of offshore wind. There is a current demonstration project underway between Dominion Energy and the State of Virginia to explore energy production from offshore wind farms.

Offshore wind production has not grown in America as well as in Europe. Not only is wind an environmentally excellent source, but the cost is low. Some people do not like to see wind generation apparatus offshore, as we have previously discussed, so education and social adjustment remains to be developed. Financial costs should fall in America as these projects continue, and hopefully energy from offshore wind will evolve into a major source of energy along our coasts. In Virginia, this direction will have secondary benefits as well through new jobs and commerce. Progress, though slow, is being made. The Virginia General Assembly recently passed the Grid Transformation and Security Act, declaring that 5,000 megawatts of wind and solar energy are in the public interest. Energy produced in this way is so much better for the environment, as well as cheaper than use of fossil fuels. We should move in this direction whenever we can.

Plastic waste and its effect on the environment continue to be a serious and contentious issue. The European Commission (EC) has proposed a new law that bans or restricts the ten single –use plastic products most often found on European beaches and in its seas. There has been no national effort of this sort in the United States. The most visible move here has been California’s efforts to limit the use of single-use plastics.

The specific products involved include cotton swab shafts, cutlery, plates, straws, drink stirrers and balloon sticks, all items found in use here in the United States. Under the law these items will need to be made of more sustainable materials. The targeted products constitute 70% of all plastic marine litter, says the EC.

Plastic producers will be obliged to help cover the costs of waste management and cleanup, under the proposed law, and to promote "litter awareness." The EC says it will provide industry with incentives to develop less polluting alternatives.

Not surprisingly, PlasticsEurope, Europe’s leading plastics industry association, is not happy with the law. They blame the problem on poor waste management infrastructure and "inappropriate littering behavior." European environmental organizations welcomed the proposed legislation, supporting the use of bioplastics which would biodegrade in the environment and stimulate the industry as well.

Europe has played a leading role in this issue. In January a Europe-wide strategy was proposed stipulating that all plastic packaging must be recyclable by 2030. This action has stimulated similar reform around the world. In the United States, prohibitions have been on the state and local level only, with California leading the way. A California referendum supported a state ban on plastic shopping bags, which was then enacted by law, and further restrictions on plastic use are under consideration there. New York City has made attempts to regulate use of plastic bags, polystyrene foam containers, and plastic straws, but little progress has been made there.

Michael is former chemistry professor at Mount. St. Marys

Read other articles by Michael Rosenthal