6 ms·

Quote from the article: > A newly released national survey suggests the percent of adults who have used illicit drugs increased to 12.8 percent in 2022, up fro

Quote from the article: > A newly released national survey suggests the percent of adults who have used illicit drugs increased to 12.8 percent in 2022, up from 7.8 in 2001 So, No.

calgoo 3y ago
Portugal has also been having economical issues since the early 2000s which would probably influence the metric.
quickthrower2 3y ago
Even if respondents were unbiased and truthful. That sounds like a useless metric to me. You need a metric of the harm to society. Drug motivated violent crime for example.
- oneshtein 3y ago
  Quote from the article: > Overdose rates have hit 12-year highs and almost doubled in Lisbon from 2019 to 2023. Sewage samples in Lisbon show cocaine and ketamine detection is now among the highest in Europe, with elevated weekend rates suggesting party-heavy usage. In Porto, the collection of drug-related debris from city streets surged 24 percent between 2021 and 2022, with this year on track to far outpace the last. Crime — including robbery in public spaces — spiked 14 percent from 2021 to 2022, a rise police blame partly on increased drug use. > overdoses this year in Portland, the state’s largest city, have surged 46 percent. > Residents have launched U.S.-style neighborhood watches and hired private security guards — something exceedingly rare in Europe.
  - pedrosorio 3y ago
    What does Portland (Oregon?) have to do with Portugal? > Crime — including robbery in public spaces — spiked 14 percent from 2021 to 2022 I wonder what else changed between 2021 and 2022 that could have caused robbery in public spaces to spike. So many things have changed in Portugal over the last decade, Lisbon and Porto in particular, that looking just at drug policy is insufficient. In particular, cost of living and immigration from poorer countries (both correlated with “number of desperate people”) have risen significantly.
  - estebank 3y ago
    Also from the article > After years of economic crisis, Portugal decentralized its drug oversight operation in 2012. A funding drop from 76 million euros ($82.7 million) to 16 million euros ($17.4 million) forced Portugal’s main institution to outsource work previously done by the state to nonprofit groups, including the street teams that engage with people who use drugs. You'll notice that 2012 comes before 2019.
    - Izkata 3y ago
      That's talking about a spike between 2019 and 2023. Why did it take nearly a decade to happen, then happen all at once? Seems like something else changed more recently than the funding in 2012.
      - danShumway 3y ago
        > Why did it take nearly a decade to happen, then happen all at once? Well, by that logic clearly decriminalization wasn't the cause. Why would the negative effect take nearly two decades to happen, then happen all at once? Seems like something else changed more recently than the decriminalization in 2001. ---- Snarkiness aside, I find these discussions on HN to be mostly pointless and circular, precisely for this reason. There's very little actually substantive discussion happening under this article. A trend was noticed, one side has an explanation, the other side says "nah, I don't think that's it" and then we go in circles saying "hmmm... doesn't sound convincing to me" and meme a bit about Singapore and Seattle. It's HN at its worst. That this comment exists almost immediately after another comment further upstream saying "well, of course we wouldn't expect to see the negative effects of decriminalization immediately" to me sums up how entirely arbitrary online arguments about decriminalization often are.
  - fy20 3y ago
    Comparing data on populations from 2020 or 2021 is probably not going to give very accurate data because of COVID. Much of Europe was locked down making travel often impossible. All that really says is there is a lot of drug tourism.
- hackerlight 3y ago
  We also need a metric of harm to the individuals who are doing the drugs. If they're doing less severe drugs with less adulterants for a cheaper price (less need to turn to theft) with medical support then it could still be a win even if % usage is up.
BeefWellington 3y ago
How do they define "illicit drugs" if everything is legal?
- djaychela 3y ago
  I think they're still illegal, but personal use is permitted. That's what I understand from having been there recently, anyway, but happy to stand corrected on that point if anyone knows more than this.
- johngladtj 3y ago
  It's never been legalized.
- alistairSH 3y ago
  They decriminalized personal use. They didn’t fully legalize use. Similar to speeding tickets in the US. Speeding is against the law, but minor infractions are not criminal offenses.
klabb3 3y ago
You are right, but the metric of total drug use, or first time use, is only a proxy for the goal of reducing drug-related harm to society and individuals. From what I’ve seen it’s not a great proxy. For instance, Sweden implemented an extremely restrictive drug policy focused on scaring people from trying drugs at all, at the expense of existing users who were shunned and penalized harshly. It now has one of the highest overdose mortality rates in Europe and a well-known gang violence problem that’s unprecedented in its history or in any of the otherwise similar countries. I personally think these “clever” policies where you try to optimize for a proxy metric are just moralistic and unscientific garbage. Not to mention the consequences of giving the task (and the funding) to the criminal justice system first. If we transferred the issues of smoking cessation or alcoholism to the police, what would we expect to happen?
debugnik 3y ago
How did you miss the "then they reduced funding" part? So yes, at first, then not anymore.
jabradoodle 3y ago
It isn't surprising that more people admit to doing something now it isn't illegal.

Quote from the article: > A newly released national survey suggests the percent of adults who have used illicit drugs increased to 12.8 percent in 2022, up from 7.8 in 2001 So, No.

calgoo 3y ago

Portugal has also been having economical issues since the early 2000s which would probably influence the metric.

quickthrower2 3y ago

Even if respondents were unbiased and truthful. That sounds like a useless metric to me. You need a metric of the harm to society. Drug motivated violent crime for example.

oneshtein 3y ago
Quote from the article: > Overdose rates have hit 12-year highs and almost doubled in Lisbon from 2019 to 2023. Sewage samples in Lisbon show cocaine and ketamine detection is now among the highest in Europe, with elevated weekend rates suggesting party-heavy usage. In Porto, the collection of drug-related debris from city streets surged 24 percent between 2021 and 2022, with this year on track to far outpace the last. Crime — including robbery in public spaces — spiked 14 percent from 2021 to 2022, a rise police blame partly on increased drug use. > overdoses this year in Portland, the state’s largest city, have surged 46 percent. > Residents have launched U.S.-style neighborhood watches and hired private security guards — something exceedingly rare in Europe.
- pedrosorio 3y ago
  What does Portland (Oregon?) have to do with Portugal? > Crime — including robbery in public spaces — spiked 14 percent from 2021 to 2022 I wonder what else changed between 2021 and 2022 that could have caused robbery in public spaces to spike. So many things have changed in Portugal over the last decade, Lisbon and Porto in particular, that looking just at drug policy is insufficient. In particular, cost of living and immigration from poorer countries (both correlated with “number of desperate people”) have risen significantly.
- estebank 3y ago
  Also from the article > After years of economic crisis, Portugal decentralized its drug oversight operation in 2012. A funding drop from 76 million euros ($82.7 million) to 16 million euros ($17.4 million) forced Portugal’s main institution to outsource work previously done by the state to nonprofit groups, including the street teams that engage with people who use drugs. You'll notice that 2012 comes before 2019.
  - Izkata 3y ago
    That's talking about a spike between 2019 and 2023. Why did it take nearly a decade to happen, then happen all at once? Seems like something else changed more recently than the funding in 2012.
    - danShumway 3y ago
      > Why did it take nearly a decade to happen, then happen all at once? Well, by that logic clearly decriminalization wasn't the cause. Why would the negative effect take nearly two decades to happen, then happen all at once? Seems like something else changed more recently than the decriminalization in 2001. ---- Snarkiness aside, I find these discussions on HN to be mostly pointless and circular, precisely for this reason. There's very little actually substantive discussion happening under this article. A trend was noticed, one side has an explanation, the other side says "nah, I don't think that's it" and then we go in circles saying "hmmm... doesn't sound convincing to me" and meme a bit about Singapore and Seattle. It's HN at its worst. That this comment exists almost immediately after another comment further upstream saying "well, of course we wouldn't expect to see the negative effects of decriminalization immediately" to me sums up how entirely arbitrary online arguments about decriminalization often are.
- fy20 3y ago
  Comparing data on populations from 2020 or 2021 is probably not going to give very accurate data because of COVID. Much of Europe was locked down making travel often impossible. All that really says is there is a lot of drug tourism.
hackerlight 3y ago
We also need a metric of harm to the individuals who are doing the drugs. If they're doing less severe drugs with less adulterants for a cheaper price (less need to turn to theft) with medical support then it could still be a win even if % usage is up.

BeefWellington 3y ago

How do they define "illicit drugs" if everything is legal?

djaychela 3y ago
I think they're still illegal, but personal use is permitted. That's what I understand from having been there recently, anyway, but happy to stand corrected on that point if anyone knows more than this.
johngladtj 3y ago
It's never been legalized.
alistairSH 3y ago
They decriminalized personal use. They didn’t fully legalize use. Similar to speeding tickets in the US. Speeding is against the law, but minor infractions are not criminal offenses.

klabb3 3y ago

You are right, but the metric of total drug use, or first time use, is only a proxy for the goal of reducing drug-related harm to society and individuals. From what I’ve seen it’s not a great proxy. For instance, Sweden implemented an extremely restrictive drug policy focused on scaring people from trying drugs at all, at the expense of existing users who were shunned and penalized harshly. It now has one of the highest overdose mortality rates in Europe and a well-known gang violence problem that’s unprecedented in its history or in any of the otherwise similar countries. I personally think these “clever” policies where you try to optimize for a proxy metric are just moralistic and unscientific garbage. Not to mention the consequences of giving the task (and the funding) to the criminal justice system first. If we transferred the issues of smoking cessation or alcoholism to the police, what would we expect to happen?

debugnik 3y ago

How did you miss the "then they reduced funding" part? So yes, at first, then not anymore.

jabradoodle 3y ago

It isn't surprising that more people admit to doing something now it isn't illegal.