September 2nd, 2009
News Feature
Pictures From Los Angeles City Council Proclamation
August 28th, 2009
News Feature
Read July, CAADPE Memo for the week here. 8.28.09 memo.pdf
August 14th, 2009
News Feature
Read July, CAADPE Memo for the week here. 8.14.09Memo.pdf
August 7th, 2009
News Feature
Read July, CAADPE Memo for the week here. 8.07.09Memo.pdf
July 31st, 2009
News Feature
Read July, CAADPE Memo for the week here. 7.31.09Memo.pdf
July 10th, 2009
News Feature
Read July, CAADPE Memo for the week here. 7.10.09Final.pdf
July 3rd, 2009
News Feature
Read July, CAADPE Memo for the week here. 7.3.09Memo.pdf
June 12th, 2009
News Feature
Read June CAADPE Memo for the week here. 61909final.pdf
March 27th, 2009
News Feature
Read March 27th, CAADPE Memo for the week here. 3.27.09 Memo
March 20th, 2009
News Feature
Read March 20th, CAADPE Memo for the week here. 3.20.09 Memo.pdf
$1 Spent on Prevention Saves $10, Study Says
March 16, 2009
News Summary
Investing in addiction prevention programs yields a 10-1 return for society, according to researchers from Iowa State University (ISU) who studied the Iowa Strengthening Families Program and the Life Skills Training Program.
Researchers Richard Spoth, Ph.D., and Max Guyll, Ph.D. detailed findings from the "Prevention's Cost Effectiveness: Illustrative Economic Benefits of General Population Interventions" and "Prevention of Substance-related Problems: Effectiveness of Family-focused Prevention" studies for a conference sponsored by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the World Health Organization.
"Effective and efficient prevention promises to save possibly billions of dollars per year, provided we can learn how to effectively implement it on a larger scale," said Spoth, director of ISU's Partnerships in Prevention Science Institute (PPSI).
March 13th, 2009
News Feature
Read March 13th, CAADPE Memo for the week here. 3.13.09 Memo.pdf
FLASH TRAFFIC
ADPA Bulletin
March 2nd, 2009
Please vist this link to view the most recent ADPA NEWS BULLETIN >>>> ADPABulletin1.0301.pdf
Washington weekly Roundup
February 24th, 2009
Congress Releases FY 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill, Which Includes Increased and Level Funding for Drug and Alcohol Prevention, Treatment and Research Programming;
This week, Congress released an omnibus spending bill which is intended to complete the FY 2009 appropriations process. The 2009 fiscal year runs from October 1, 2008 until September 30, 2009. Currently, most federal agencies and programs are operating on a continuing resolution (CR), which extends federal program funding at FY 2008 levels until March 6th. The FY 2009 omnibus spending bill combines funding for a number of federal agencies, including the Departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Justice and Labor. Funding for drug and alcohol prevention, treatment, recovery and research programming is included in the FY 2009 omnibus spending bill.
Under the FY 2009 omnibus spending bill, most drug and alcohol education, prevention, treatment and research programming would receive increases. Programming for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) would receive $3.33 billion in funding, an increase of $100.9 million over FY 2008 levels and $309.9 million more than President Bush’s FY 2009 budget request. The Safe and Drug-Free School and Communities State Grants program, slated for a nearly $195 million cut in President Bush’s FY 2009 budget, would receive level funding.
Click here for, "Overview of Funding Amounts For Drug and Alcohol Treatment, Prevention, and Research Programming in the FY 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill" chart.
Specifically, drug and alcohol prevention, treatment and research programming would receive the following funding under the FY 2009 omnibus spending bill:
The Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) Block Grant would receive $1.7786 billion, a $19.8 million increase over FY 2008 funding levels. This amount is equal to the FY 2009 budget request; however, although the FY 2009 budget called for a $20 million increase in SAPT Block Grant funds which would be allocated to states demonstrating “superior performance,” the FY 2009 omnibus bill does not include any language indicating support for this proposal and includes report language stating that, “the increase included for the SAPT Block Grant shall be distributed based on the current statutory formula.”
The Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) would receive $414.3 million, a $14 million increase over FY 2008 funding levels, and $77.5 million over the FY 2009 budget request. Under the FY 2009 omnibus spending bill, specific CSAT programs would receive the following funding levels:
o The Access to Recovery (ATR) Program would receive $99 million, an increase of $2.5 million over FY 2008 funding levels
o The Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) program would receive $29.1 million, funding level to FY 2008
o Programs in the Criminal Justice Activities portfolio would receive $37.6 million, an increase of nearly $14 million over FY 2008; within this allocation, drug treatment courts would receive $23.9 million, a $13.9 million increase over FY 2008
o Programs in the Children and Families portfolio would receive $20.7 million, a cut of $3.6 million from FY 2008; funding for these programs was slated for elimination in the FY 2009 budget
o The Recovery Community Services Program (RCSP) would receive $5.24 million, funding level to FY 2008
o The Addiction Technology Transfer Centers (ATTCs) would receive $9.08 million, funding level to FY 2008
o Opioid Treatment Programs/Regulatory Activities would receive $8.9 million, funding level to FY 2008
o Programs for Pregnant and Postpartum Women would receive $16 million, a $4.2 million increase over FY 2008
o Minority AIDS programs would receive $66 million, an increase of $2.9 million over FY 2008
o Treatment Systems for the Homeless would receive $42.75 million, an increase of $250,000 over FY 2008
The Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) would receive $201 million, a $6.88 million increase over FY 2008 levels and $43 million more than President Bush’s FY 2009 budget request. Under the FY 2009 omnibus spending bill, specific CSAP programs would receive the following funding levels:
o The Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grants would receive $110 million, $5.3 million more than FY 2008 funding
o Sober Truth on Preventing (STOP) Underage Drinking programming would receive $7 million, a $1.6 million increase over FY 2008 funding
o Minority AIDS programming would receive $41.39 million, a $2 million increase over FY 2008 funding
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools State Grants program would receive $294.76 million, level to FY 2008 funding; this program was slated for a nearly $195 million cut in the FY 2009 budget.
The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) would receive $1.033 billion, a $30.8 million increase over FY 2008 spending and $32 million over the FY 2009 budget request.
The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) would receive $450.23 million, a $13.9 million increase over FY 2008 and $13.5 million over the FY 2009 budget request.
The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote on the FY 2009 omnibus spending bill later this week. The Senate is expected to vote on the package after the House finishes its consideration of the bill. If the FY 2009 omnibus is not approved before March 6th, when the current CR is due to expire, Congress will likely pass another CR in order to continue to fund programs at FY 2008 levels until the omnibus is approved by both the House and Senate. Full text of the proposed FY 2009 omnibus bill can be found at : http://www.rules.house.gov/111/LegText/111_omni2009.htm.
February 12th, 2009
FLASH TRAFFIC
As was discussed at today’s regular Coalition Meeting, Coalition President Jim Morrow has invited all Coalition Members to familiarize themselves with the information contained in ADP’s most recent “ Summary of the Draft Counselor Certification and Licensing Language” release. You may access this document in its entirety by clicking the following link >>> ADP Draft Release
February 11th, 2009
News Feature
Read February 06th, CAADPE Memo for the week here, 2.6.09Memo.pdf
Massachusetts Enacts Full Parity for Addiction Treatment
August 10, 2008
News Feature
by Eric Helmuth
Capping years of effort by addiction policy advocates and their allies at the statehouse, Massachusetts enacted legislation last week requiring the state's private health insurers to provide unlimited coverage for medically necessary treatment of substance use disorders and other mental health conditions. "This historic legislation is both health care expansion and civil rights legislation," said Rep. Ruth Balser, D-Newton, the author and lead sponsor of the legislation. "It will go a long way towards ending stigma by recognizing that addictions are illnesses like all other illnesses, and those who suffer from them will receive the treatment they need and deserve," said Balser, who is also a clinical psychologist. Addiction treatment and recovery advocates, who had been working on parity with Balser and other supportive lawmakers for years, expressed delight at the legislation's passage. Calling it a "monumental accomplishment," Connie Peters, vice president for substance abuse at Mental Health and Substance Abuse Corporations of Massachusetts (MHSAC), said the new law will "help us further remove the stigma of addiction by requiring it to be treated as the chronic disease that it is." Peters coordinates the Massachusetts Coalition for Addiction Services, an alliance of several professional and grassroots groups that supported the parity legislation.
Backers honed message, personal stories
Advocates in the mental health and addictions community worked for several years to build legislator support for a strong parity law. They marshaled a mountain of research to counter insurance industry opposition to the expanded coverage, from actuarial studies showing the likely impact on premiums to be less than 1 percent a year, to research on treatment effectiveness and evidence that adequate coverage for addiction would actually save the state money by reducing the impact of alcohol and drug problems on the healthcare, social service and criminal justice systems.
The arguments were not just economic, however. "This is about keeping people alive," said Maryanne Frangules, director of Massachusetts Organization for Addiction Recovery (MOAR), a statewide advocacy group of individuals in recovery and family members. MOAR's activists made sure their legislators heard that message repeatedly.
"If legislators hear the same mantra from various sources, they know it is an issue," said Frangules.
Paul Kusiak is a MOAR member and parent whose teenage son just graduated from a recovery high school in Beverly, Mass. Kusiak said that having a child in need of addiction treatment woke him up to the harsh realities of the current system for individuals and families who need help. "As with most families, until this hit home, it wasn't on my radar screen. But once it was, I realized how fragmented the system is, and how difficult it is to get care," he told Join Together.
"Insurance companies have been banking on the fact that you'll be too embarrassed or ashamed to fight for your right to have adequate care," Kusiak said. "This legislation will open up the door for so many individuals and families who won't have to suffer in silence any longer."
As important as grassroots engagement was, advocates in the community are quick to credit strong support from elected officials as being key to finally passing the law. "Mental health and substance abuse advocates have been active for many years on this front, but leadership from the top is critical," Peters said.
Treatment advocates point to Rep. Balser's years-long persistence in advocating for parity in the legislature, and the support this year of Governor Deval Patrick. With Patrick on board, the state's Department of Mental Health became actively involved in promoting the parity bill early in the session, providing significant support to legislators working to pass it, Balser's office said.
Statewide leadership trainings aided final push
A series of leadership advocacy trainings this year across the state led by Join Together, MOAR and MHSAC created a network of new grassroots advocates and community leaders committed to press for statewide policy improvements in the alcohol and drug arena.
The Massachusetts Alcohol and Other Drug Advocacy Leadership Training Institutes took place just as backers of the parity bill were making their final push for passage, giving trainees a real-world opportunity to put their new advocacy skills into practice. Spurred by email action alerts and using online tools for contacting their legislators, many applied some well-timed pressure on lawmakers to support the parity bill as its sponsors worked furiously to shepherd the legislation through both chambers of the statehouse before the July 31 end of the legislative session. In the end, parity supporters beat the clock, with the final version of the bill passing on July 29. The bill was signed into law by the governor on August 5 and takes effect in July 2009. The new law updates the state's first parity bill passed eight years ago in 2000, adding alcohol and drug disorders to a list of mental health conditions that insurers must cover to the same extent as any other medical disorder, without preset limits on benefits. Three new mental health conditions -- eating disorders, post-traumatic stress disorders, and autism -- were also added to the list.
Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous Benefit Adolescents Who Attend
While Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) has existed for more than 70 years, and is the most commonly sought source of help for alcohol-related problems in the United States, there is little “hard scientific evidence” showing that AA and Narcotics Anonymous (NA) can improve substance-use outcomes. This study examined how helpful AA and NA may be for adolescents, finding long-term benefits even though many youth discontinue attendance after time.Results will be published in the August issue of Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research and are currently available at OnlineEarly. “It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of mutual-help organizations like AA through randomized controlled experiments because the AA ‘intervention,’ being a community organization based on anonymity, cannot be directly under the control of the researcher in the usual way,” explained John F. Kelly, associate director of the MGH-Harvard Center for Addiction Medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital, and assistant professor in psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. Yet their popularity and cost-effectiveness cannot be denied, added Kelly, also the study’s corresponding author.“AA and NA are explicitly focused on abstinence and addiction recovery, they are widely available across most communities, they provide entry to a social network of recovery-specific support and sober events that can be accessed ‘on demand’ – particularly at times of high-relapse risk such as evenings and weekends, the services are free, and AA/NA can be attended as intensively, and for as long, as individuals desire,” he said.
However,, he added, despite growing evidence that adults benefit from AA and NA, little is known about how these abstinence-focused organizations help youth, and what is known lacks scientific rigor. “This knowledge gap is particularly noteworthy given that adolescents and young adults face more barriers to AA and NA than older adults and yet appear to be referred there just as frequently by treatment providers,” said Kelly. “Youth tend to have less severe addiction problems, on average, and consequently do not feel a strong need to stop using alcohol and/or drugs. ‘Why should they bother to go to abstinence-oriented organizations like AA and NA, and would they benefit even if they did go?’” These are the questions Kelly and his colleagues wanted to address.The researchers recruited 160 adolescent inpatients (96 males, 64 females), with an average age of 16 years, who were enrolled at two treatment centers in California having a focus on abstinence and based on a 12-step model. The study participants’ length of stay ranged from four to six weeks, after which they were re-assessed on a number of clinical variables at six months, and one, two, four, six, and eight years. “We found that most of the youth attended at least some AA/NA meetings post-treatment,” said Kelly. “Those patients with severe addiction problems and those who believed they could not use alcohol/drugs in moderation attended the most. The NA and AA focus on abstinence/recovery probably resonates better with these more severely dependent individuals who also typically need ongoing support.”Even though many of the youth discontinued AA/NA after time, they nonetheless appeared to benefit from attendance. “We found that patients who attended more AA and/or NA meetings in the first six months post-treatment had better longer term outcomes, but this early participation effect did not last forever – it weakened over time,” said Kelly. “The best outcomes achieved into young adulthood were for those patients who continued to go to AA and/or NA. In terms of a real-world recovery metric, we found that for each AA/NA meeting that a youth attended they gained a subsequent two days of abstinence, independent of all other factors that were also associated with a better outcome.”
A little can go a long way, he added. “During the first six months post-treatment,” said Kelly, “even small amounts of AA/NA participation – such as once per week – was associated with improved outcome, and three meetings per week was associated with complete abstinence. This suggests youth may not need to attend as frequently as every day, sometimes recommended clinically, to achieve very good outcomes.”Kelly believes that part of the reason for the success of AA/NA among adolescents who attend meetings is related to their developmental needs.“Given the need for social affiliation and peer-group acceptance outside of the family at this stage of life, peers can exert strong influence on the behavior of young people,” he noted. “When you couple this fact with the reality that most adolescents and young adults are experimenting with, or heavily using, alcohol and other drugs, it may be hard to find suitable peer contexts that can facilitate recovery. In fact, we know that most youth relapses are connected with social contexts where alcohol/drugs are present; unlike adults, youth rarely relapse alone. So, organizations such as AA/NA may provide support, and encourage and provide alternatively rewarding sober social activities.”
Funding for this Addiction Science Made Easy project is provided by the Addiction Technology Transfer Center National Office, under the cooperative agreement from the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment of SAMHSA.
Articles were written based on the following published research:
Sandra A. Brown, Mark Myers, Ana Abrantes, Christopher W. Kahler. (August 2008). Social recovery model: an 8-year investigation of adolescent 12-step group involvement following inpatient treatment. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research (ACER). 31(8):
This page was last modified on Wednesday, September 02, 2009 11:34:59 AM
Proposition 5, the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act (NORA), offers common-sense solutions to California’s
prison overcrowding crisis. The measure will appear on the Nov. 4, 2008, statewide ballot. NORA’s major
components are:
1 Treatment diversion programs for adults. NORA creates a unified system of care and provides $385 million
per year to pay for drug treatment and related costs. Nonviolent drug offenders would be placed in one of
three different levels of care and supervision, based on their criminal history and drug problem severity.
NORA motivates participants to complete t reatment and rehabilitation through an appropriate mix of
incentives, rewards, sanctions and consequences. Participants who fail at the lower levels could be moved
up to the more intensive levels, or could be jailed for noncompliance. Completing the prescribed course of
treatment can lead to the participant’s drug offense being dropped from his or her criminal record.
2 Prison system and parole reforms. NORA makes rehabilitation a real priority for the state prison system
and restructures the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to further that goal. The measure creates
a new post of Secretary of Rehabilitation and Parole to supervise the transition, and places a new “rehabilitation
warden” at each facility. The measure saves prison beds by requiring local sanctions, not prison, to punish minor
parole violations by nonviolent offenders. Parolees and former parolees would get rehabilitation services to help
them stay clean and to return as productive members of society. An independent oversight panel would have
authority over major aspects of implementation.
3 Youth programs. NORA commits about $65 million per year to drug treatment and other support programs
for at-risk youth, creating a system of care for young people under the age of 18 where no services exist
now. Additional money for youth treatment would come from fines paid for possession of marijuana, an
offense which, for adults and for minors, would be reclassified from a misdemeanor to an infraction. Young
people under the age of 18 would be required to attend a drug education class if found guilty of possessing
marijuana.
Proposition 5 would sharply limit the incarceration of nonviolent offenders, according to the nonpartisan Legislative
Analyst’s Office (LAO). The LAO projects that the measure would require spending about $1 billion in total each
year, offset by savings of $1 billion or more each year in prison and parole costs. According to the LAO, the
state would see additional net savings of $2.5 billion over several years as prison-construction costs would be
reduced by NORA’s reforms.
Added 07/26/2008 @ 12:26:10 PM PDT
SAMHSA's NREPP Posts 100th Program Review
SAMHSA Press Office
Article Launched: 7/25/2008 11:21:17 PM PDT
SAMHSA’s National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices (NREPP) has added two programs, bringing to 100 the number of evidence-based programs on the NREPP system. NREPP is a searchable database with up-to-date, reliable information on the scientific basis and practicality of mental health and substance use interventions. The two programs are:
#99 - Cocaine-Specific Coping Skills Training - developed at the Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies at Brown University, this intervention uses cognitive behavioral and support strategies to successfully reduce or eliminate cocaine and alcohol use among program participants.
#100 - Not On Tobacco - initially developed at West Virginia University and adopted nationally by the American Lung Association, this school-based intervention has enabled thousands of teens to stop smoking.
Launched in March 2007, NREPP (www.nrepp.samhsa.gov) is part of SAMHSA’s efforts to help community organizations and state and local officials make informed decisions about evidence-based interventions for the prevention and treatment of mental and substance use disorders. Approximately 15,000 individuals visit the NREPP Web site each month.
“NREPP has emerged as a leading source of information on evidence-based services to prevent and treat mental and substance use disorders in community-based settings,” said Terry Cline Ph.D., SAMHSA Administrator. “The continued growth of NREPP will provide even more options for organizations interested in adopting proven and effective interventions.”
Key features of the NREPP system include:
• Custom searches using keywords, topics, target populations, and service settings;
• Details on each intervention including a brief descriptive summary, the types of outcomes achieved, the costs and history of implementing the intervention, and the complete contact information for the intervention developer;
• Two independent expert ratings for each intervention – the first assessing the quality of research supporting specific intervention outcomes, and the second assessing the availability of implementation and training materials to support adoption of the intervention in routine service settings.
NREPP supports SAMHSA’s Science and Service Initiative, which promotes greater adoption in routine clinical and community-based settings of those services that science has demonstrated to be effective in preventing and treating mental and substance use disorders. SAMHSA collaborates with the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, and the National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health on this effort.
Between 40 and 50 new interventions are expected to be added annually to the NREPP system.
For more information about NREPP ratings, how to use NREPP to identify specific interventions, or how to submit an intervention for review, visit the Web site at www.nrepp.samhsa.gov; contact NREPP at 1-866-43NREPP (1-866-436-7377); or send an e-mail to NREPP@samhsa.hhs.gov.
Added 07/25/2008 @ 23:15:45 PM PDT
Alcohol abuse costs county $11B yearly
By Victoria Colliver, San Francisco Chronicle
Article Launched: 07/24/2008 09:21:17 PM PDT
Alcohol problems cost California $38 billion a year in deaths, injury, health care expenditures, lost productivity in the workplace, crime, and pain and suffering, according to a summary released Wednesday of an upcoming study by an alcohol-industry watchdog group.
The Marin Institute, based in San Rafael, relied on data from hospitals, police and highway patrol statistics, Child Protection Services, state vital statistics and other sources to estimate the impact of harmful drinking on society. The study focused on drinking in excess of three drinks per day for men and a drink and half for women.
The state's largest county, Los Angeles, had by the far the highest costs for alcohol use at nearly $11 billion a year. In the San Francisco Bay Area, Santa Clara, Alameda and Contra Costa counties all generated annual costs in excess of $1 billion.
"What we've done, really, is put numbers to a very human problem. People aren't surprised at the numbers because they're living it every day, but they're still dramatic," said Michele Simon, research and policy director for the Marin Institute and a co-author of the report.
In addition to the dollar figures, the report found that 90 percent of alcohol-related crime costs come from violent crimes such as murder, assault, rape and robbery and that 26 percent of all traffic collisions involve alcohol, causing some 1,144 deaths.
Countering potential criticism that the numbers lack credibility because they come from an advocacy group, Marin Institute officials noted the study has been peer-reviewed and will appear online next month in the academic journal "Alcoholism: Clinical and ExperimAlcohol problems cost California $38 billion a year in deaths, injury, health care expenditures, lost productivity in the workplace, crime, and pain and suffering, according to a summary released Wednesday of an upcoming study by an alcohol-industry watchdog group.
The Marin Institute, based in San Rafael, relied on data from hospitals, police and highway patrol statistics, Child Protection Services, state vital statistics and other sources to estimate the impact of harmful drinking on society. The study focused on drinking in excess of three drinks per day for men and a drink and half for women.
The state's largest county, Los Angeles, had by the far the highest costs for alcohol use at nearly $11 billion a year. In the San Francisco Bay Area, Santa Clara, Alameda and Contra Costa counties all generated annual costs in excess of $1 billion.
"What we've done, really, is put numbers to a very human problem. People aren't surprised at the numbers because they're living it every day, but they're still dramatic," said Michele Simon, research and policy director for the Marin Institute and a co-author of the report.
In addition to the dollar figures, the report found that 90 percent of alcohol-related crime costs come from violent crimes such as murder, assault, rape and robbery and that 26 percent of all traffic collisions involve alcohol, causing some 1,144 deaths.
Countering potential criticism that the numbers lack credibility because they come from an advocacy group, Marin Institute officials noted the study has been peer-reviewed and will appear online next month in the academic journal "Alcoholiental Research."
The study's authors said they consider the cost figures to be conservative estimates of the problem.
"We've been very careful to only pick crimes that we thought were caused by alcohol - not all the ones involving alcohol, for example," said Ted Miller, principal research scientist with the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation. "We attributed only half of alcohol-involved assaults to alcohol, and that's pretty conservative."
Marin Institute officials acknowledged minor health benefits of alcohol for some people at risk of heart disease, but said damage caused by alcohol abuse far outweighs such advantages. The study makes various recommendations, such as increased funding to cities and counties to mitigate and prevent alcohol harm, and higher taxes on alcohol products.
A spokesman from the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States declined to comment directly on the study because he was unfamiliar with the findings. But he questioned whether responsible alcohol consumers should have to pay higher taxes to cover the costs of abuse.
Added 07/24/2008 @ 22:12:35 PM PDT
Alcohol consumption costs state of California $38 billion and 9,439 deaths
Daily News Wire Services
Article Last Updated: 07/23/2008 01:24:49 PM PDT
Moderate to high alcohol consumption by residents costs the state of California economy $38 billion and results in 9,439 deaths annually, according to a report released today by the Marin Institute, a self-described alcohol industry watchdog.
The institute, based in San Rafael, released a reported titled "The Annual Catastrophe of Alcohol in California" at a town hall meeting in Los Angeles, concluding that alcohol abuse has a more costly impact on the state's economy than natural disasters.
"Unlike earthquakes, fires, floods and mudslides, which come along infrequently, the catastrophe of alcohol in California happens annually, with devastating effects, and can be prevented," said Simon Rosen, one of the report's co-authors.
The report broke down the economic impacts of alcohol use on the state's health care and criminal justice systems, including alcohol-involved crime, drunken driving, injuries and illness. The report also found that one person dies every hour in California due to alcohol abuse.
Representatives of the institute called for higher taxes on alcohol in an effort to reduce excessive consumption.
" ... Alcohol's cost is much more than the price paid for a drink at the corner liquor store or neighborhood bar," said Sen. Mark Ridley-Thomas, D- Los Angeles. "As a legislator, I look forward to engaging my colleagues along with representatives of the industry in a discussion of the report's findings and recommendations."
The study will be published next month in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research.