Proximity to the US–Mexico border: a key to explaining geographic variation in US methamphetamine, cocaine and heroin purity
Corresponding Author
James K. Cunningham
Department of Family and Community Medicine, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA,
James K. Cunningham, University of Arizona, 1450 N. Cherry Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85719, USA. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorJane Carlisle Maxwell
Center for Social Work Research, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA,
Search for more papers by this authorOctavio Campollo
Center of Studies on Alcohol and Addictions, Universidad de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico,
Search for more papers by this authorKathryn I. Cunningham
Department of Mathematics, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA and
Search for more papers by this authorLon-Mu Liu
Department of Economics, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
Search for more papers by this authorHui-Lin Lin
Department of Economics, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
James K. Cunningham
Department of Family and Community Medicine, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA,
James K. Cunningham, University of Arizona, 1450 N. Cherry Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85719, USA. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorJane Carlisle Maxwell
Center for Social Work Research, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA,
Search for more papers by this authorOctavio Campollo
Center of Studies on Alcohol and Addictions, Universidad de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico,
Search for more papers by this authorKathryn I. Cunningham
Department of Mathematics, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA and
Search for more papers by this authorLon-Mu Liu
Department of Economics, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
Search for more papers by this authorHui-Lin Lin
Department of Economics, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
Search for more papers by this authorABSTRACT
Aims Although illicit drug purity is a widely discussed health risk, research explaining its geographic variation within a country is rare. This study examines whether proximity to the US–Mexico border, the United States' primary drug import portal, is associated with geographic variation in US methamphetamine, heroin and cocaine purity.
Design Distances (proximity) between the US–Mexico border and locations of methamphetamine, cocaine and heroin seizures/acquisitions (n = 239 070) recorded in STRIDE (System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence) were calculated for the period of 1990–2004. The association of drug purity with these distances and other variables, including time and seizure/acquisition size, was examined using hierarchical multivariate linear modeling (HMLM).
Setting Coterminous United States.
Findings Methamphetamine, cocaine and heroin purity generally decreased with distance from the US–Mexico border. Heroin purity, however, after initially declining with distance, turned upwards—a U-shaped association. During 2000–04, methamphetamine purity also had a U-shaped association with distance. For each of the three drugs, temporal changes in the purity of small acquisitions (<10 g) were typically more dynamic in areas closer to the US–Mexico border.
Conclusions Geographic variance in methamphetamine, cocaine and heroin purity throughout the coterminous United States was associated with US–Mexico border proximity. The U-shaped associations between border-distance and purity for heroin and methamphetamine may be due to imports of those drugs via the eastern United States and southeast Canada, respectively. That said, areas closer to the US–Mexico border generally had relatively high illicit drug purity, as well as more dynamic change in the purity of small (‘retail level’) drug amounts.
Supporting Information
Table S1. HMLM analysis: association of methamphetamine median purity with distance to the US–Mexico border and year of acquisition (1990–1994).
Table S2. HMLM analysis: association of methamphetamine median purity with distance to the US–Mexico border and year of acquisition (1995–1999).
Table S3. HMLM analysis: association of methamphetamine median purity with distance to the US–Mexico border and year of acquisition (2000–2004).
Table S4. HMLM analysis: association of cocaine median purity with distance to the US–Mexico border and year of acquisition (1990–2004).
Table S5. HMLM analysis: association of heroin median purity with distance to the US–Mexico border and year of acquisition (1990–2004).
Please note: Blackwell Publishing are not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting materials supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing material) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
Filename | Description |
---|---|
ADD_3032_sm_tables1-s5.doc165.5 KB | Supporting info item |
Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
References
- 1 Darke S., Hall W., Weatherburn D., Lind B. Fluctuations in heroin purity and the incidence of fatal heroin overdose. Drug Alcohol Depend 1999; 54: 155–61.
- 2 Darke S., Hall W. Heroin overdose: research and evidence-based intervention. J Urban Health 2003; 80: 189–200.
- 3 Cunningham J. K., Liu L.-M. Impacts of federal ephedrine and pseudoephedrine regulations on methamphetamine-related hospital admissions. Addiction 2003; 98: 1229–37.
- 4 Cunningham J. K., Liu L.-M., Callaghan R. Impact of US and Canadian precursor regulation on methamphetamine purity in the United States. Addiction 2009; 104: 441–53.
- 5 Mittleman R. E., Wetli C. V. Death caused by recreational cocaine use. JAMA 1984; 252: 1889–93.
- 6 Hopfer C. J., Mikulich S. K., Crowley T. J. Heroin use among adolescents in treatment for substance use disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2000; 39: 1316–23.
- 7 Hopfer C. J., Khuri E., Crowley T. J., Hooks S. Adolescent heroin use: a review of the descriptive and treatment literature. J Subst Abuse Treat 2002; 23: 231–7.
- 8 Tarabar A. F., Nelson L. S. The resurgence and abuse of heroin by children in the United States. Curr Opin Pediatr 2003; 15: 210–15.
- 9 Cho A. K. Ice: a new dosage form of an old drug. Science 1990; 249: 631–4.
- 10 Cook C. E., Jeffcoat A. R., Hill J. M., Pugh D. E., Patetta P. K., Sadler B. M. et al. Pharmacokinetics of methamphetamine self-administered to human subjects by smoking S-(+)-methamphetamine hydrochloride. Drug Metab Dispos 1993; 21: 717–23.
- 11 McKetin R., Kelly E., McLaren J. The relationship between crystalline methamphetamine use and methamphetamine dependence. Drug Alcohol Depend 2006; 85: 198–204.
- 12 Cunningham J. K., Liu L.-M., Muramoto M. Methamphetamine suppression and route of administration: precursor regulation impacts on snorting, smoking, swallowing and injecting. Addiction 2008; 103: 1174–86.
- 13 Brugal M. T., Barrio G., De La Fuente L., Regidor E., Royuela L., Suelves J. M. Factors associated with non-fatal heroin overdose: assessing the effect of frequency and route of heroin administration. Addiction 2002; 97: 319–27.
- 14 De la Fuente L., Saavedra P., Barrio G., Royuela L., Vicente J. Temporal and geographic variations in the characteristics of heroin seized in Spain and their relation with the route of administration. Spanish Group for the Study of the Purity of Seized Drugs. Drug Alcohol Depend 1996; 40: 185–94.
- 15 Brugal M. T., Barrio G., Regidor E., Mestres M., Cayla J. A., De La Fuente L. Discrepancias en el número de muertes por reacción aguda a sustancias psicoactivas registradas en España [Discrepancies in the number of deaths from acute reaction to psychoactive substances recorded in Spain]. Gaceta Sanitaria 1999; 13: 82–7.
- 16 Delegación del Gobierno para el Plan Nacional sobre Drogas. Informe No. 3. Observatorio Español sobre Drogas, Marzo 2000 [Government Delegation for the National Plan on Drugs. Report 3. Spanish Drug Observatory, March 2000]. Madrid: Ministerio del Interior; 2000.
- 17
Pfeiffer D. U.,
Robinson T. P.,
Stevenson M.,
Stevens K. B.,
Rogers D. J.,
Clements A. C. A.
Spatial Analysis in Epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198509882.001.0001 Google Scholar
- 18 Dummer T. J. B. Health geography: supporting public health policy and planning. Can Med Assoc J 2008; 178: 1177–80.
- 19 Tunstall H. V. Z., Shaw M., Dorling D. Places and health. J Epidemiol Commun Health 2004; 58: 6–10.
- 20 Kearns R., Moon G. From medical to health geography: novelty, place and theory after a decade of change. Prog Hum Geogr 2002; 26: 605–25.
- 21
Thomas Y. F.,
Richardson D.,
Cheung I.
Integrating geography and social epidemiology in drug abuse. In: Y. F. Thomas,
D. Richardson,
I. Cheung, editors. Geography and Drug Addiction. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2008, p.
17–26.
10.1007/978-1-4020-8509-3_2 Google Scholar
- 22
McLafferty S.
Placing Substance Abuse. In: Y. F. Thomas,
D. Richardson,
I. Cheung, editors. Geography and Drug Addiction. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2008, p.
1–16.
10.1007/978-1-4020-8509-3_1 Google Scholar
- 23 Drug Enforcement Administration. Drugs of Abuse. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice; 2005.
- 24 Drug Enforcement Administration. Heroin. Domestic Monitor Program2006.Washington, DC: US Department of Justice; 2007.
- 25 Drug Enforcement Administration. Heroin. Domestic Monitor Program Washington 2007. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice; 2008.
- 26 Division of Epidemiology, Services and Prevention Research. Epidemiologic Trends in Drug Abuse. Proceedings of the Community Epidemiology Work Group, vol. II. Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse; 2008.
- 27 Office of National Drug Control Policy. The Price and Purity of Illicit Drugs: 1981 through the Second Quarter of 2003. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President of the United States; 2004.
- 28 Fries A., Anthony R. W., Cseko A., Gaither C. C., Schulman E. The Price and Purity of Illicit Drugs: 1981–2007. Alexandria, VA: Institute for Defense Analyses; 2008.
- 29 Redlinger L. J. Dealing in Dope: Market Mechanisms and Distribution Patterns of Illicit Narcotics. Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms, Inc.; 1970.
- 30 Brown G. F., Silverman L. P. The retail price of heroin: estimation and applications. J Am Stat Assoc 1974; 69: 595–606.
- 31 Caulkins J. P., Padman R. Quantity discounts and quality premia for illicit drugs. J Am Stat Assoc 1993; 88: 748–57.
- 32 National Narcotics Intelligence Consumers Committee (NNICC). The NNICC Report 1996: The Supply of Illicit Drugs to the United States. Washington, DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 1996.
- 33 National Drug Intelligence Center. National Drug Threat Assessment 2005. Johnstown, PA: US Department of Justice; 2005.
- 34 Constantine T. A. Statement by Thomas A. Constantine, Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration, United Sates Department of Justice. Before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, Regarding Drug Trafficking in Mexico. Washington, DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 1996.
- 35 National Drug Intelligence Center. National Drug Threat Assessment 2008. Johnstown, PA: US Department of Justice; 2007.
- 36 Wankel H. D. Statement by Harold D. Wankel, Chief of Operations, Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Department of Justice. Before the House Judiciary Committee, Regarding Drug Control Along the Southwest Border. Washington, DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 1996.
- 37 Constantine T. A. Statement by Thomas A. Constantine, Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Department of Justice. Before the House Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs and Criminal Justice. Regarding the Threat of Heroin to the United States. Washington, DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 1996.
- 38 Bucardo J., Brouwer K. C., Magis-Rodríguez C., Ramos R., Fraga M., Perez S. G. et al. Historical trends in the production and consumption of illicit drugs in Mexico: implications for the prevention of blood borne infections. Drug Alcohol Depend 2005; 79: 281–93.
- 39 Milford J. Statement by James Milford, Acting Deputy Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration. Before the Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs and Criminal Justice. Regarding Caribbean/South Florida. Washington, DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 1997.
- 40 National Drug Intelligence Center. Florida Drug Threat Assessment. Johnstown, PA: US Department of Justice; 2003.
- 41 Intelligence Division. The Availability of Southwest Asian Heroin in the United States. Washington DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 1996.
- 42 Intelligence Division. Drug Intelligence Brief. Southeast Asian Heroin in the United States: DEA Indicator Programs Signal Reduced Availability. Washington, DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 2008.
- 43 Coomber R. The cutting of heroin in the United States in the 1990s. J Drug Issues 1999; 29: 17–36.
- 44 Arc View-2828-ESRI. ArcView. Redlands, CA: ESRI; 2008.
- 45 Payan T. Three U.S.–Mexico Border Wars: Drugs, Immigration, and Homeland Security. Westport, CT: Praeger; 2006.
- 46 Von Hippel P. T. Normalization. In: M. S. Lewis-Beck, A. Bryman, T. F. Liao, editors. Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2004, p. 746–7.
- 47 Cunningham J. K., Liu L.-M. Impacts of federal precursor chemical regulations on methamphetamine arrests. Addiction 2005; 100: 479–88.
- 48 Cunningham J. K., Liu L.-M. Impact of methamphetamine precursor chemical legislation, a suppression policy, on the demand for drug treatment. Soc Sci Med 2008; 66: 1463–73.
- 49 Raudenbush S. W., Bryk A. S. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2002.
- 50 Tobler W. A computer model simulation of urban growth in the Detroit region. Econ Geogr 1970; 46: 234–40.
- 51 Rengert G. F., Lockwood B. Geographical units of analysis and the analysis of crime. In: D. Weisburd et al., editor. Putting Crime in Its Place. New York: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC; 2009.
- 52 Cohen J., Cohen P., West S. G., Aiken L. S. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2003.
- 53 Kreft I. The effects of centering in multilevel analysis: is the public school the loser or the winner? A new analysis of an old question. Multilevel Modelling Newsletter 1995; 7: 5–8.
- 54 Criminal Intelligence Directorate. Drug Situation in Canada—2003. Ottawa, ON: Royal Canadian Mounted Police; 2004.
- 55 Criminal Intelligence Directorate. Drug Situation in Canada—2004.Ottawa, ON: Royal Canadian Mounted Police; 2005.
- 56 US Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies. Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS), 1992–2007. Concatenated Data [Computer File]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research; 2008.
- 57 Richard K. Emerging Trends in Drug Seizures—Information from the Drug Analysis Service (DAS). Ottawa, ON: Health Canada; 2008.
- 58 Walker W. J. Statement of William J. Walker, Associate Special Agent in Charge, New York Field Division, Drug Enforcement Administration, Before the House Committee on Government Reform, Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources & Select Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Infrastructure and Border Security. May 19, 2003. Washington, DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 2003.
- 59 National Drug Intelligence Center. National Drug Threat Assessment 2004. Johnstown, PA: US Department of Justice; 2004.
- 60 Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs. International Narcotics Control Strategy Report: Canada, Mexico, and Central America. Washington, DC: US Department of State; 2008.
- 61
Kenney M.
The architecture of drug trafficking: network forms of organisation in the Columbian cocaine trade.
Global Crime
2007; 8: 233–59.
10.1080/17440570701507794 Google Scholar
- 62 Constantine T. A. Statement by Thomas A. Constantine, Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Department of Justice, for Subcommittee on Crime and Criminal Justice, U. S. House of Representatives. Concerning Heroin Production and Trafficking Trends. September 29, 1994. Washington, DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 1994.
- 63 Intelligence Division. Drug Intelligence Brief. Heroin Signature Program: 2006. Washington, DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 2008.
- 64 Grassley C. E. Review of the Drug Enforcement Administration's Heroin Signature and Domestic Monitor Programs. Washington, DC: United States General Accounting Office; 2001.
- 65 Cazenavette G. J. Statement by George J. Cazenavette, III, Special Agent in Charge, New Orleans Field Division, Drug Enforcement Administration, before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime. February 25, 2000. Washington, DC: Drug Enforcement Administration; 2000.
- 66 Drug Enforcement Administration. DEA Busts Georgia's First Meth ‘Super-Lab’. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice; 2005.
- 67 Preble E., Casey J. J. Taking care of business—the heroin user's life on the street. Int J Addict 1969; 4: 1–24.
- 68 Office of National Drug Control Policy. The Price of Illicit Drugs: 1981 through the Second Quarter of 2000. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President of the United States; 2001.
- 69
McKetin R.,
McLaren J.,
Kelley E.,
Chalmers J.
The market for crystalline methamphetamine in Sydney, Australia.
Global Crime
2009; 10: 113–23.
10.1080/17440570902783905 Google Scholar
- 70 Robinson W. S. Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. Am Soc Rev 1950; 15: 351–7.