Replies

I don't understand why you guys are getting your panties in such a wod over this. Reason misquoted on the "1 in 7" figure they gave but were dead on about the "99 percent" quote on the meth-is-death site.

"First, there’s the fact that 99 percent of first-time meth users are hooked after the first try. (So if you think you’re tough enough to “try it” and walk away, you better WAKE UP!)" http://www.meth-is-death.com/ (look in the body of the text, it says 99%, in the bullet section it says 95%)

Radioman may have been wrong to quote the Reason article without checking the meth-is-death site, and he was wrong to say it was a DEA owned site. We all make mistakes. The Reason article said the DEA site includes a "conspicuous link" to the Meth is Death site. That is absolutely correct. The DEA even have a banner on their page with the "95% of those who are hooked on meth became hooked after the first time" quote. That's a patently false statement parroted by the DEA who knew better and who ought not use lies in their scare tactic propaganda because as soon as kids see that stuff and realize it's a lie they aren't going to believe all of the true things the DEA is saying about meth. The truth about meth is bad enough, they shouldn't lie and jeopardize their credibility.

Here is the Reason article: http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2005/08/the_meth_death.shtml

Here is the DEA anti-drug website: http://www.justthinktwice.com/
*click on the "Got Meth" picture to open their meth "magazine" and then click through to "The First High" section where you will find the banner with the "95% quote" with the link to the meth-is-death site.

Radioman may have been wrong to quote the Reason article without checking the meth-is-death site, and he was wrong to say it was a DEA owned site. We all make mistakes.

His was not a mistake. He went to reason.com, altered and plagerized their post and implied that he had done original work by visiting a DEA site. And it wasn't even a DEA site!

The truth about meth is bad enough, they shouldn't lie and jeopardize their credibility.

99% seems high but I can't say it is a lie. At least it was put in the 'editorial' part and not the list of facts.

OTOH, why would reason.com and radioman jeopardize their credibility in such a dishonest manner?

Which makes more sense to you, and which would you cite with your name on it?

"99 percent of first-time meth users are hooked after the first try" or "95% of those who are hooked on meth became hooked after the first time."

Yeah, that's what I thought.

I don't understand why you guys are getting your panties in such a wod over this.

Lol!
They can't refute the facts so they attack the message.

Reason misquoted on the "1 in 7" figure they gave but were dead on about the "99 percent" quote on the meth-is-death site

Honest mistake when you're dealing with the "Meth Is Death" project. This project consists of many websites nationwide. methprevention.com is another "meth is death" project website that still contains the 1 in 7 figure at the top of the list.

and he was wrong to say it was a DEA owned site

The "meth is death" project is funded by congress through the DEA and ODCP. That looks DEA owned to me, but I may be technically wrong.

I agree with you about meth, but this based on faith propaganda is increasing, not decreasing, meth use.
.