Online Predators: Myth versus Reality

Media stories about “online predators” who use the Internet to gain access to young victims often give inaccurate impressions of Internet-initiated sex crimes. Most such crimes involve adult men who use the Internet to meet and seduce adolescents into sexual encounters. Most offenders are open about their ages and sexual motivations. Most are charged with statutory rape (i.e., nonforcible sexual activity with victims who are too young to consent). Internet-initiated sex crimes account for a salient but small proportion of all statutory rape offenses and a relatively low number of the sexual offenses committed against minors overall. Victims are often at-risk youths who have previously been abused or have problems in school or at home. Prevention strategies should be developmentally appropriate, target youths directly, acknowledge normal adolescent interests in romance and sex, and provide adolescents with awareness and avoidance skills

Testing The Validity Of National Drug Surveys:Comparison Between A General Population Cohort And Household Surveys

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There are concerns that national population-based estimates of illicit drug use are underestimated. We investigated this by comparing estimates of illicit substance use at age 24 from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) with a birth cohort (Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, ALSPAC) and by comparing the Smoking and Alcohol Toolkit Studies (STS/ATS) to ALSPAC. DESIGN: Cross-sectional household survey and cross-sectional data from one wave of a longitudinal birth cohort. SETTING: England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Young adults aged 23-25 reporting on substance use in 2017 to CSEW (n = 1165), ALSPAC (n = 3389) and STS/ATS (n = 950). MEASUREMENTS: Lifetime and past-year illicit drug use, smoking status and hazardous drinking at age 24. FINDINGS: The 2017 CSEW estimate of lifetime illicit drug use was 40.6%, compared with 62.8% in ALSPAC (risk difference % [RD%] = 22.2%; 95% CI = 18.9-25.5%; P ≤ 0.001). The RD in lifetime use between ALSPAC and the CSEW was 23.2% (95% CI = 20.0-26.4%) for cannabis, 16.9% (95% CI = 14.4-19.4%) for powder cocaine and 24.8% (95% CI = 22.6-27.0%) for amphetamine. Past-year drug use was 16.4% in CSEW, compared with 36.7% in ALSPAC (RD% = 20.3%; 95% CI = 17.6-23.0%; P ≤ 0.001). For past-year substance use, the RD between ALSPAC and the CSEW was 15.4% (95% CI = 12.9-17.9%) for cannabis, 14.8% (95% CI = 13.0%-16.6%) for powder cocaine and 15.9% (95% CI = 14.5-17.4%) for amphetamine. Levels of current smoking were similar between STS (27.4%) and ALSPAC (29.4%). Hazardous drinking was substantially higher in ALSPAC (60.3%) than the ATS (32.1%; RD% = 28.2%; 95% CI = 24.8-31.6%; P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children provides one source of validation for measurements of drug use in government household surveys and indicates that illicit drug use may be underestimated in the Crime Survey for England and Wales

Incident psychotic experiences following self‐reported use of high‐potency cannabis: results from a longitudinal cohort study

Background and aims: High‐potency cannabis has been associated with increased risk of psychosis, but a lack of prospective data hinders understanding of causality in this relationship. This study aimed to combine prospective report of cannabis use with retrospective report of potency to infer the potency of cannabis used in adolescence and explore whether use of cannabis, and the use of high‐potency cannabis, in adolescence is associated with incident psychotic experiences. Design: Population‐based birth cohort study. Setting: United Kingdom. Participants: n = 5570 participants who reported on any cannabis use (yes/no) age 16 and 18 years, and n = 1560 participants from this group who also retrospectively reported on cannabis potency. Measurements: In questionnaires at ages 16 and 18, individuals self‐reported lifetime cannabis use, and at age 24, participants reported the type of cannabis they most commonly used in the whole time since first using cannabis. Psychotic experiences were assessed at age 24 years using the semi‐structured Psychosis‐Like Symptom Interview, with incident defined as new‐onset occurring between ages 19 and 24 years. Findings: Use of high‐potency cannabis at age 16 or 18 was associated with twice the likelihood of experiencing incident psychotic experiences from age 19–24 (Odds Ratio 2.15, 95% Confidence Intervals 1.13–4.06). There was less evidence for an effect of any cannabis use on incident psychotic experiences (Odds Ratio 1.45, 95% Confidence Intervals 0.94–2.12). Conclusions: Use of high‐potency cannabis appears to be associated with increased likelihood of psychotic experiences

The Relationship Between Childhood Physical and Sexual Abuse and Adolescent Cannabis Use: A Systematic Review

Background: Among adolescents, cannabis use is a health concern due to associations with drug addiction and mental health disorders across the life course. It has been shown that childhood maltreatment is associated with drug addiction in adulthood. However, a better understanding of the relationship between maltreatment and drug use may improve targeted prevention and interventions. The aim of this systematic review is to describe the association between exposure to childhood maltreatment, specifically physical and sexual abuse, with adolescent cannabis use. Methods: A systematic search strategy was applied to Embase, PsycINFO, and Ovid MEDLINE(R) databases. Methods followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Abstract and title screening was performed to identify papers which reported an estimate of the association between childhood physical or sexual abuse and adolescent cannabis use. Full text screening of each paper was performed, and data were extracted and study quality assessed. Weighted means meta-analysis was performed on studies reporting odds ratios as effect estimates. Results: Of 8,780 screened articles, 13 were identified for inclusion. Eight papers received a quality rating score indicating lower risk of bias. Eleven papers reported the relationship between childhood sexual abuse and adolescent cannabis use; effect estimates ranged from AOR 0.53-AOR 2.18 (weighted mean OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.08-1.49). The relationship between childhood physical abuse and adolescent cannabis use was reported in 7 papers; effect estimates ranged from AOR 1.25-AOR 1.87 (weighted mean OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.12-1.66). Differences in the strength of the evidence were observed by the method of exposure ascertainment, and there was some evidence of differences in association by gender, age of cannabis initiation, and the severity of the abuse. Conclusions: This systematic review indicates childhood physical or sexual abuse may increase risk of adolescent-onset cannabis use. Few studies considered variation in timing of onset, or by gender. Adolescent cannabis use precedes is strongly associated with increased risk of negative mental health outcomes; further exploration of adolescent cannabis use's place on the causal pathway between childhood abuse and adult mental health problems is warranted to improve intervention

Overlap of heritable influences between Cannabis Use Disorder, frequency of use and opportunity to use cannabis: Trivariate twin modelling and implications for genetic design

Background: The genetic component of Cannabis Use Disorder may overlap with influences acting more generally on early stages of cannabis use. This paper aims to determine the extent to which genetic influences on the development of cannabis abuse/dependence are correlated with those acting on the opportunity to use cannabis and frequency of use. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 3303 Australian twins, measuring age of onset of cannabis use opportunity, lifetime frequency of cannabis use, and lifetime DSM-IV cannabis abuse/dependence. A trivariate Cholesky decomposition estimated additive genetic (A), shared environment (C) and unique environment (E) contributions to the opportunity to use cannabis, the frequency of cannabis use, cannabis abuse/dependence, and the extent of overlap between genetic and environmental factors associated with each phenotype. Results: Variance components estimates were A = 0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58–0.70] and E = 0.36 (95% CI 0.29–0.42) for age of opportunity to use cannabis, A = 0.74 (95% CI 0.66–0.80) and E = 0.26 (95% CI 0.20–0.34) for cannabis use frequency, and A = 0.78 (95% CI 0.65–0.88) and E = 0.22 (95% CI 0.12–0.35) for cannabis abuse/dependence. Opportunity shares 45% of genetic influences with the frequency of use, and only 17% of additive genetic influences are unique to abuse/dependence from those acting on opportunity and frequency. Conclusions: There are significant genetic contributions to lifetime cannabis abuse/dependence, but a large proportion of this overlaps with influences acting on opportunity and frequency of use. Individuals without drug use opportunity are uninformative, and studies of drug use disorders must incorporate individual exposure to accurately identify aetiology

High-Potency Cannabis, Mental Health and Substance Use in Adolescence:Results from a UK General Population Sample

Importance Cannabis use is consistently linked to poorer mental health outcomes, and there is evidence that use of higher-potency cannabis increases these risks. To date, no studies have described the association between cannabis potency and concurrent mental health in a general population sample or addressed confounding using longitudinal data. Objective To explore the association between cannabis potency and substance use and mental health outcomes, accounting for preceding mental health and frequency of cannabis use. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study used data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, a UK birth cohort of participants born between April 1, 1991, and December 31, 1992. Present data on outcomes and exposures were collected between June 2015 and October 2017 from 1087 participants at 24 years of age who reported recent cannabis use. Exposures Self-reported type of cannabis most commonly used in the past year, coded to a binary exposure of use of high-potency cannabis or lower-potency cannabis. Main Outcomes and Measures Outcomes were reported frequency of cannabis use, reported cannabis use problems, recent use of other illicit drugs, tobacco dependence, alcohol use disorder, depression, generalized anxiety disorder, and psychotic-like experiences. The study used secondary data; consequently, the hypotheses were formulated after data collection. Results Past-year cannabis use was reported by 1087 participants (580 women; mean [SD] age at onset of cannabis use, 16.7 [3.0] years). Of these, 141 participants (13.0%) reported the use of high-potency cannabis. Use of high-potency cannabis was associated with increased frequency of cannabis use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 4.38; 95% CI, 2.89-6.63), cannabis problems (AOR, 4.08; 95% CI, 1.41-11.81), and increased likelihood of anxiety disorder (AOR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.11-3.32). Adjustment for frequency of cannabis use attenuated the association with psychotic experiences (AOR 1.29; 95% CI, 0.67-2.50), tobacco dependence (AOR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.89-2.27), and other illicit drug use (AOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.77-2.17). There was no evidence of association between the use of high-potency cannabis and alcohol use disorder or depression. Conclusions and Relevance To our knowledge, this study provides the first general population evidence suggesting that the use of high-potency cannabis is associated with mental health and addiction. Limiting the availability of high-potency cannabis may be associated with a reduction in the number of individuals who develop cannabis use disorders, the prevention of cannabis use from escalating to a regular behavior, and a reduction in the risk of mental health disorders

Effect of four-week cannabidiol treatment on cognitive function: secondary outcomes from a randomised clinical trial for the treatment of cannabis use disorder

RATIONALE: Chronic cannabis use is associated with impaired cognitive function. Evidence indicates cannabidiol (CBD) might be beneficial for treating cannabis use disorder. CBD may also have pro-cognitive effects; however, its effect on cognition in people with cannabis use disorder is currently unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess whether a 4-week CBD treatment impacted cognitive function. We hypothesised that CBD treatment would improve cognition from baseline to week 4, compared to placebo. METHODS: Cognition was assessed as a secondary outcome in a phase 2a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group and placebo-controlled clinical trial of 4-week daily 200 mg, 400 mg and 800 mg CBD for the treatment of cannabis use disorder. Participants had moderate or severe DSM-5 cannabis use disorder and intended to quit cannabis use. Our pre-registered primary cognitive outcome was delayed prose recall. Secondary cognitive outcomes were immediate prose recall, stop signal reaction time, trail-making task performance, verbal fluency and digit span. RESULTS: Seventy participants were randomly assigned to placebo (n = 23), 400 mg CBD (n = 24) and 800 mg CBD (n = 23). A 200 mg group was eliminated from the trial because it was an inefficacious dose at interim analysis (n = 12) and was not analysed here. For the primary cognitive outcome, there was no effect of CBD compared to placebo, evidenced by a lack of dose-by-time interaction at 400 mg (0.46, 95%CIs: - 1.41, 2.54) and 800 mg (0.89, 95%CIs: - 0.99, 2.81). There was no effect of CBD compared to placebo on secondary cognitive outcomes, except backwards digit span which increased following 800 mg CBD (0.30, 95%CIs: 0.02, 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical trial for cannabis use disorder, CBD did not influence delayed verbal memory. CBD did not have broad cognitive effects but 800 mg daily treatment may improve working memory manipulation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02044809) and the EU Clinical Trials Register (2013-000,361-36)

Living Under Coronavirus and Injecting Drugs in Bristol (LUCID-B): a qualitative study of experiences of COVID-19 among people who inject drugs

BACKGROUND: : People who inject drugs (PWID) are a high-risk group for COVID-19 transmission and serious health consequences. Restrictions imposed in the UK in response to the pandemic led to rapid health and housing service alterations. We aimed to examine PWID experiences of: 1) challenges relating to the COVID-19 public health measures; 2) changes to opioid substitution therapy (OST) and harm reduction services; and 3) perceived effects of COVID-19 on drug use patterns and risk behaviour. METHODS: : Telephone semi-structured interviews were conducted with 28 PWID in Bristol, Southwest of England. Analysis followed a reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: : Concern about COVID-19 and adherence to public health guidance varied. Efforts made by services to continue providing support during the pandemic were appreciated and some changes were preferred, such as less frequent OST collection, relaxation of supervised consumption and needle and syringe programmes (NSP) home delivery. However, remote forms of contact were highlighted as less beneficial and more difficult to engage with than in-person contact. Public health guidance advising people to ‘stay home’ led to increased isolation, boredom, and time to ruminate which impacted negatively on mental health. Lockdown restrictions directly impacted on sources of income and routine. Changes in drug use were explained as a consequence of isolation and fewer interactions with peers, problems accessing drugs, reduced drug purity and reduced financial resources. CONCLUSION: : This study captures the significant impacts and challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic on the lives of PWID. While rapid adaptations to service delivery to help mitigate the risks of COVID-19 were appreciated and some changes such as relaxation of supervised daily OST consumption were viewed positively, barriers to access need further attention. Going forwards there may be opportunities to harness the positive aspects of some changes to services