DARE to Look at the Evidence!

We must have Drug Abuse Resistance Education…I am proud of your work. It has played a key role in saving thousands of lives and futures.

Speaking at the 30th DARE Training Conference, Attorney General Jeff Sessions was enthusiastic and strongly supportive of DARE, the program started in Los Angeles in 1983 that uses police officers to give young children messages about staying drug free and resisting peer pressure.

And what do our excellent colleagues at GMU’s Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy say about DARE?

D.A.R.E. is listed under “What doesn’t work?” on our Review of the Research Evidence. 

Rosenbaum summarized the research evidence on D.A.R.E. by titling his 2007 Criminology and Public Policy article “Just say no to D.A.R.E.” As Rosenbaum describes, the program receives over $200 million in annual funding, despite little or no research evidence that D.A.R.E. has been successful in reducing adolescent drug or alcohol use. As Rosenbaum (2007: 815) concludes “In light of consistent evidence of ineffectiveness from multiple studies with high validity, public funding of the core D.A.R.E. program should be eliminated or greatly reduced. These monies should be used to fund drug prevention programs that, based on rigorous evaluations, are shown to be effective in preventing drug use.”

A systematic review by West and O’Neal (2004) examined 11 published studies of D.A.R.E. and reached similar conclusions. D.A.R.E. has little or no impact on drug use, alcohol use, or tobacco use. They concluded that ““Given the tremendous expenditures in time and money involved with D.A.R.E., it would appear that continued efforts should focus on other techniques and programs that might produce more substantial effects” (West & O’Neal, 2004: 1028).

Recent reformulations of the D.A.R.E. program have not shown successful results either. For example, the Take Charge of your Life program, delivered by D.A.R.E. officers was associated with significant increases in alcohol and cigarette use by program participants compared to a control group (Sloboda et al., 2009).


Of course Jeff Sessions is an idiot, so we can't expect him to support something based on evidence. He reminds me of Hank Hill's dad on King of the Hill.

When I lived in LA it was known in some circles that having a DARE sticker on your rear bumper made you less likely to get traffic tickets. So perhaps it did work, as signalling to the cops that you were sympathetic to their little gravy train.

Of course Jeff Sessions is an idiot,

When I lived in LA

Irony is dead.

But cuckoldry is alive and well with me WINK!

Alex hasn't signed my time-card yet. I need to get paid, baby.

Art, honestly, what possible motivation would Alex Tabarrok have for paying someone to write stupid alt-right foul mouthed irrelevant snark on their website? Grow up and ignore this idiot, like the rest of us do. The guy is trolling you and winning because you keep responding.

I can't keep track of my sock-puppets.

Tryin' to help you here Art, you're just making it worse for yourself. At least spell my handle right.

To bad I can't help myself get any action because I'm so ugly no one would even look twice at me.

Ironic yes but in fairness Jeff Sessions is an idiot. He once said he thought the KKK was "OK until I found out they smoked pot." (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jeff-sessions-attorney-general-marijuana-justice-department-anti-drug-laws-a7425511.html)

That is the man currently in charge of enforcing our laws...

Ronald Weasley once observed that "Percy wouldn't know a joke if it danced naked in front of him wearing Dobby's tea cosy." And apparently, neither would you.

Yeah he's been accused of racist comments a bunch by a number of people so I really doubt that. Also not sure why he would come out and deny saying it if it was so clearly meant as a joke. I'm also of the persuasion that a US Attorney in Alabama shouldn't be joking about the KKK in any situation because part of their job is protecting civil rights.

Take his racist comments however you want, my interpretation is hes either 1) a racist or 2) an idiot who thinks its funny and in either case he shouldn't be in charge of the DoJ.

Yeah he’s been accused of racist comments a bunch by a number of people s

Yes, partisan Democrats never make stuff up about Republican politicians,.

Of course they do. But this isn't a case of just one accusation from one person it's more widespread. Not to mention the fact that his initial nomination to a district court was blocked by a REPUBLICAN controlled Senate Judiciary Committee. So clearly Republicans seemed to believe this as well.

Believe it or not something inconsistent with your opinion isn't automatically a conspiracy.

Of course they do. But this isn’t a case o

It's a case of a combox denizen fixated on three-decade-old gossip, operating under the illusion that someone else is the idiot.

And see here is where you screwed it up, after misspelling my handle to try to sock puppet me (wrong target it's not me impersonating you), you were so quick to throw another old man snarkbomb that you forgot to change your handle back. Just ignore the impersonator(s?) dude.

Ironic yes but in fairness Jeff Sessions is an idiot. He once said he thought the KKK was “OK until I found out they smoked pot.

To the prog-mind, a man is an 'idiot' because he made an ironic crack to a staff member 30 years ago and said staff member then called up the Democratic staff on the Senate Judiciary committee.

No, Sessions is an idiot because he's a humorless cranky old man of extremely limited intelligence who is focused on battles that became irrelevant decades ago. All to the detriment of the nation's safety and well being.

Kevin wins the thread

No, Sessions is an idiot because he’s a humorless cranky old man of extremely limited intelligence who is focused on battles that became irrelevant decades ago. All to the detriment of the nation’s safety and well being.

You mean 'humorless and cranky' as in kvetching about a wisecrack uttered in 1984?

It doesn't work OR it doesn't work very well OR it works but still some kids take drugs, OR...

This is the problem all parents and educators face. You try to raise children to teens and young adults to be honest and drug free and it isn't an easy job. As children become teens and young adults they acquire free will and the ability to pretty much do what they want. Should parents, educators and society then give up??? Or should they keep trying reaching many/most children/teens and having some success and also risk being called an idiot by some ignorant ne'er-do-well jerk?

In any area, some programs work better than others. Let's figure out which are which and fund the ones that work, not just the ones we wish worked because they sound good.

Sure, if you view it as a drug-use prevention program, it's not effective.

But if you view it as a comedy, it does the job.

You bet!

I was at a presentation for one of my kids years ago. The young lady student who was making her presentation said "if you take one puff on a marijuana cigarette your life will be ruined forever!"

Few of us were able to keep straight faces after that. Don't recall any outright giggles though.

Pure indoctrination. One wonders what one of those students thought when they saw some dude inhale and was not immediately struck by lightning.

"For example, the Take Charge of your Life program, delivered by D.A.R.E. officers was associated with significant increases in alcohol and cigarette use by program participants compared to a control group."
Are they giving alcohol and grugs ro the children?

Maybe they just make cigarettes and beer sound really fun?

If it were so, wouldn't Malboro hire then as ad executives?

No, it's much cheaper to leave cigarettes legal and everything else illegal.

They do it anyway, I am talking about making use of D.A.R.E.'s talent pool.

What for? Then they have to pay them a salary. Might as well let DARE keep 'em on the payroll.

But then they would work all the time instead of following public service schedule.

Ya know Thiago your living in Ohio has improved your command of the English Language.

No, it hasn't. I've never spent more than two days in a English-speaking country and never will. My most recent forefather who spoke English died in the 14 th Century after defecting to Portugal.

I remember DARE fondly but I do believe for a large number of students it normalized drug use.

How? Do they say all cool kids are doing it?

I remember them bringing them into our classroom (in a locked suitcase they were in possession of the whole time)

Somewhat. Same reasons some cigarette warnings backfired, I presume. Telling people something is dangerous lends a certain cool to it. Especially young men, who often signal their physical fitness to the opposite sex by engaging in reckless activities.

It is sad to see America's youth being destroyed by drugs.

I recall only that we all made fun of it for being stupid, over-simplistic, and patently misinforming us.

The problem as I recall is that they treated every drug as equally dangerous.

Sad to see that America can not get its act together to defeat Drugs.

Maybe Brazil can help the US by showing all of their techniques for making Brazil totally drug free. It is drug free in Brazil, right Thiago? No problems with drug use or drug gangs? US could learn a lot from Brazil, like how to be a shithole.

Hey, lay off Thiago. The poor guy has to live in Brazil. Take pity on him, as we all do.

It is widely known that Brazil is the best country to live in the entite world. It is sad, desperate Americans who deserve pity as they try to throw off the yoke of their oppressors. It is a mystery where al this Brazil hatred comes from it really is.

Two dogs-in-the-manger and an impersonator! I can tell you that Brazil is tough on crime and Brazilians are morally superior (I have never drunk alcohol, I have never smoked, I have never used drugs). I can not imagine a Brazilian leader zcting disgracefully as Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump do. As the title of a Brazilian movie says, in Brazil, The Law Is For Everyone.

If you keep attakcing Brazil I may have to turn you dogs into ensopado de cachorro!

These monies should be used to fund drug prevention programs that, based on rigorous evaluations, are shown to be effective in preventing drug use.”

Such as?

These monies should be used to fund drug prevention programs that, based on rigorous evaluations, are shown to be effective in preventing drug use.”

IOW, another social work / mental health trade snark. Since it won't be providing a salary to a burnt-out cop, it'll all be good.

(The notion that a program might be 'effective' because the alternative would the tender mercies of the criminal justice system is an idea that will not be entertained, natch).

Yeah sure maybe we should have prohibition of alcohol once again too.

Alcohol is a social lubricant of antique origin.

Coincidentally my penis is a thing of antique origin that needs lubricants.

Got picked up on another morals charge. Need bail money, Alex.

thanks for keeping the dream alive. it takes a village to ride Art into the ground.

My sockpuppets keep multiplying like the sorcerer's apprentice.

But we should.

I am for banning all alcolhol production and sales except for religious consumption.

Good thing no one cares.

Maybe they should.

Thiago, speak more about this august. What's the deal there?

Which August? Brazilian government expects to finish its reforms and close its investigations until August. Congress vacarion can interfere, though.

The "august" you reference in your mussing on about Brazil visavis the Roman Empire. It's good fodder and excellent television.

Brazil is august because Brazil is "marked by majestic dignity or grandeur ".

Actually Brazil is a shithole, because it's a big "hole filled with shit". They aren't even as civilized as Argentina there.

It is a lie, Brazil is a powehouse of civilization.

Just another subsidy for cops, like bike races, concerts, sporting events (Super Bowl overtime) and Walmart entrances. http://nailheadtom.blogspot.com/2014/10/anchorage-cops-want-more-part-time-work.html http://www.mndaily.com/article/2013/02/dinkytown-late-night-security-plan-moves-forward Jeff Sessions also enthusiastically defends the obscene practice of civil asset forfeiture, https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeleef/2017/01/03/sessions-has-no-problem-with-civil-asset-forfeiture-and-thats-a-problem/#4630f3897a05, reason enough to be skeptical of the aims of the Trump administration.

The website for the Center for Evidence Based Crime Policy seems to be built for other academics, not for government officials. Sad!

DARE is failure, but so are most drug-use prevention programs, and so are most rehabs as well. I recall reading somewhere that the rate for hard-drug use in the U.S. is somewhere around 20%, and way way higher if you consider marijuana, alcohol and tobacco drugs (which they technically are). With statistics like that a permanently addicted class is a forgone conclusion, I think the statistics prove that out, and a subordinated percentage of addicts is also a forgone conclusion. Bad money after bad money.

P.S. Several countries have historically managed to solve their drug problem, but the only solution that seems to work and has historical merit isn't pretty.

20% of the public is not using cocaine, heroin, LSD, or methamphetamine. You won't find 20% of the late adolescents using street drugs like that. You wouldn't have found in 40 years ago, when drug use was at its peak.

I believe "use" here must mean "have ever used".

I also wouldn't even consider putting psychedelics in the same grouping as those other three.

(Per below, you solve "the drug problem" by legalizing them, since you sure as hell can't stop people using them, no matter how illegal you make them.

The problems we can solve are those created by illegality.)

(Per below, you solve “the drug problem” by legalizing them,

If by 'solve' you mean 'triple the quantum of drug consumption', I suppose that might be so.

since you sure as hell can’t stop people using them, no matter how illegal you make them.

Earth to Sigvald, the objection to drug laws is that you're interfering with someone's recreation - i.e. stopping them from being stupefied with the frequency they would like. (There are other stated objections, but that's trumpery).

The drug problem runs counter clockwise from rich to the poor. Designer drugs, acid in the 60/70's, cocaine mothballs in the 80's, cocaines a helluva drug, and heroin in the 90's. And in the 90's you get the rise of depression, ADD, and the designer drugs, valium, Xanax, kalonipin, which continued into the new millennium. What percentage of business school students take Adderall? 100%. What percentage of Wall Street employees snort Adderall? at least 65%. In some business schools, it is mandated. Then of course, the conflaguration created ecstasy and the design of MDMA for the chainsmoker generation. You have a generation of Tom Ford wearing selfie taking mannequin lookalikes celebrating celebrity culture with their own type of punch, and smoking synthetic pot, rubber stamped at the record studios.

Meanwhile the rise of crack in the 90's, and heroin too in poor populations, smuggled often from Vietnam, and crystal meth into the new millennium. And heroin is cheaper than an opiate. And beer is cheaper still.

Is there anyway around this? Is there any proof that drugs are bad? Car's also have accidents. The War on Drugs? Like the War on Poverty, a massive failure. Just say no? Like abstinence, a massive understatement. Prevention and treatment?

Earth to Art Deco: the objection to drug laws is that they don't stop drug use and they're incredibly expensive to society.

Earth to Art Deco: the objection to drug laws is that they don’t stop drug use and they’re incredibly expensive to society.

No, they don't eliminate drug use. No sort of law enforcement eliminates crime. They just provide for a situation where there is less crime.

Expenditures on law enforcement amount to about 2% of domestic product. About 20% thereof is fairly attributable to the enforcement of drug laws. You're spending about 8x that on our bloated higher education system.

Took the words out of my mouth

You're not going to 'solve' your 'drug problem' any more than you'll 'solve' your violent crime problem or your suicide problem. You can merely reduce the prevalence and incidence of a problem. (Actually, with suicide, you likely cannot manage that).

Some Asian societies have come damn close, but at great ethical cost. In places like Laos, Burma, Malaysia, and yes, even China, the solution was to be as Draconian as possible. Even going so far as to use "hot dosing" as an effective murder weapon against users....oh yeah, and murdering their families as guilt by association. Yeah. It was that bad.

Although Ethically deplorable the solution had the effect of radically changing the culture to the extent that recreational drug use became socially taboo, worthy of capital punishment, and shameful to one's family. Politics is downstream from culture, and a cultural memory exists in some of these places as to why these policies exist.

So I disagree. It is theoretically possible, but not without government sanctioned murder of users and dealers.

Hasn't hot dosing been used in America? I think I read sometjing anout it.

To my knowledge, never acknowledged nor proven that the US government or its agents did so against US citizens. Keep in mind...proven. However there are many documented occurrences of this occurring between dealers (and serial killers) and users for a myriad of reasons.

Bluntly - and I'm only supposing this as a hypothetical - you have to admire the effectiveness of that method. If the junky you are targeting is truly incurably addicted, "hot dosing" said population is theoretically 100% effective at removing hopeless users from your system, and beyond that creating a motivation in others to get clean Once a certain critical mass of hot doses within the system reaches a level of probable fatality above the probability of death by say overdosing, a "deal gone wrong", or natural bodily breakdown the junky's choice becomes very simple. Die or get clean. The ones that can't get clean die, but on a far faster timescale than the natural environment would allow.

This has always fascinated me. Most junkies would tell you they absolutely acknowledge that what they're doing has a high likelihood, even will certainly cause their deaths. But because of the speed of that process the human mind thinks that by some miracle escape velocity could be achieved and that maybe, by that miracle there's a 1/1000 or 1/10000 it could be you that finds the courage to stop. But they don't. They keep pushing the envelope until it happens organically. Hot dosing removes that lag and creates a different force, an "evil actor" in the system that guarantees NO SURVIVAL for anyone. No more miracles. Furthermore, once they clean after looking down the barrel of a gun, they can never be quite sure the "evil actor" left the system, if they had the courage to get off, and remember why, they fundamentally can't relapse...again the loaded gun.

It is sinister in the extreme, but I would imagine on a large and officially sanctioned scale, 100% effective. The state essentially forces you to commit suicide for being an addict, and only you can stop it from happening.

Denatured alcohol says something very interesting to me.

If completely legal do you think that manufacturers could create a drug that people like as much as current opioid but it very difficult to OD on?

Perhaps. Although that would not alleviate the social and economic damage that addicts do to society. Food for thought though.

They used to say drug overdose deaths were due to prohibition, if they could sell heroin in a form where the dosage was consistent, no one would get a too-high dose.

They don't say that anymore.

Sessions' other priority is mandatory minimum sentences. Of course, they don't work either (although they work great for private prison companies). Sessions' problem (or one of them) is that he views the world from a 1950s perspective (not to mention from a small man's perspective). Sessions' benefit (to Trump) is that the Trump base supports nonsense like DARE and mandatory minimum sentences. Is there any doubt that Trump picked Sessions for AG because Trump knew Sessions would be loyal to Trump. [I recall my time working for a committee in my state's legislature, at a time when mandatory minimum sentences were just becoming popular among the law and order crowd (lock em up and throw away the key). In writing committee reports for these bills, I was instructed to include a projected cost, which I did by comparing the average sentence served for the particular crime with the mandatory minimum (which always exceeded the average) and multiplying that amount by the cost per day of housing a felon. The law and order committee members complained, claiming that the mandatory minimum sentences would result in far fewer crimes and therefore an enormous cost savings for the state, so I was ordered not to include the cost in my reports and, instead, to offer the sponsors' claim that there would be a cost savings. That was over 40 years ago, and since then we have lots of data that show that mandatory minimum sentences have little or no effect on crimes. Fake data, I suppose.]

Sessions’ other priority is mandatory minimum sentences. Of course, they don’t work either

They keep lawyers and judges from conspiring to turn the criminal justice system into a social work system. This bothers dotty old lawyers who want that, so they pretend that it doesn't 'work'. It merely does not 'work' toward their silly ends.

You might learn some basic arithmetic before you pontificate on public policy. Hint, 23% is not 'about half'.

I couldn't cum last night while I was watching my boyfriend servicing a stranger so I'm in a really bad mood today. Apologies in advance for any snippy remarks.

Probably ought to redirect that money to more SWAT teams to execute pot busts. The cops seem really effective at sending battalion strength forces to kick down doors.

Antisocial cops are nothing new. Expecting a group with far more than average antisocial personalities to be effective at drug use prevention is just dumb.


"Men with antisocial personality disorder have been found to be three to five times more likely to misuse alcohol and drugs than those without the disorder, and have an increased risk of dying prematurely as a result of reckless behaviour or attempting suicide."http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/antisocial-personality-disorder/Pages/Introduction.aspx

My personal experience with cops leads me to believe substance abuse and antisocial behaviors tend to, um, aggregate among them. Generally without intervention or consequence.

Maybe a DARE program for police.

Dare to Resist using Excess Force
Dare to stop lying in court...

My personal experience with cops leads me to believe substance abuse and antisocial behaviors tend to, um, aggregate among them.

You were a punk and they treated you with the indelicacy that you'd earned and deserved.

God I need to nut so bad

Art is extra salty today, wonder what his problem is. Still funny watching him post as if anyone cares what his crotchety old opinion of them is.

Pot, meet kettle.

spliff made from milkweed

I'm talking about my drinking buddies ya massengil.

Antisocial cops are nothing new. Expecting a group with far more than average antisocial personalities to be effective at drug use prevention is just dumb.

The police officers who do this sort of work have asked to be relived of patrol in favor of working as schoolteachers. I'm sure they're real 'antisocial'.

Antisocials, psychopaths, love working with vulnerable populations.

In Jr. High we were put through an early version of it, a few years before it was officially called D.A.R.E. They really turned up the crazy in the class, especially about marijuana. It made us curious, so we tried some. We were quite disappointed that it did not live up to the hype.

When I was in junior high school (a long time ago), all of the girls were assembled in the auditorium where they were instructed in sex education. According to the girls, the sex educator held a flower in her hand and, as she plucked the pedals from the flower, told the girls that the boy would pluck the pedals from her flower, until the boy turned the girl's tabernacle into a tavern. [For those who don't know, according to the Hebrew Bible the tabernacle is an inner shrine, the Holy of Holies.] That version of sex education worked about as well as DARE. Please don't tell Sessions about sex education when I was in junior high school. Session may decide to implement it throughout the nation.

Alex, I think I've made it quite clear that my presence in your comment threads is sufficiently noxious, even without the impostors mocking me, that I should be permanently banned from the site and probably publicly scolded in a blog post. Why do you tolerate this?

Huh, I always thought it stood for


Drugs Are Rad, Everybody!

Old news, about 10 years old. Is AlexT recycling old news now that he's on vacation? In fact D.A.R.E. has incorporated peer reviewed procedures into their methodology and the new DARE actually works, at p < 0.05 levels.

DARE doesn't work? Why, next I suppose you'll claim that Headstart doesn't work!

Well, OK, perhaps they don't quite work as intended (or at least as promised). But, they work as jobs programs, don't they?

Exactly the point, I suspect. As I looked over materials from the university my son will be attending this Fall I was struck by the fact that it employs 3 administrative types for every 1 prof/adjunct/lecturer/TA. Intrigued I went looking through old yearbooks and found a page that tallied up all those educating students and all those supporting (down to the gardeners) the school and its educators - it was ~ 1.2:1. I had assumed that schools had been on the same course as my clients who have been hacking away at middle management and outsourcing the gardening for a couple of decades now. Apparently not. Could it be the case that the unrest on college campuses has far less to do with ideology and far more to do with agitating for more jobs for the social workers (whose outrage is really just masking their fears about the job market for their skills)? If so, they've taken a page from the AFL-CIO playbook circa 1950.

Yet the 1950's were a progress of unmitigated progress for the USA.

The DARE program didn't work because it involved lots of outright lying to teenagers.

They repeatedly told ridiculous lies about drugs. They claimed that acid "stayed in your spine" and was released when you burned the wrong fat molecule, resulting in a flashback. They claimed that marijuana damaged the DNA of your potential offspring. They claimed pot was a gateway drug to hardcore usage of heroin and meth. DARE told kids that marijuana was addictive and that just one use of cocaine would lead to lifelong, crippling addiction.

The teens became aware of their lies and decided that *everything* the DARE officers said was bullshit.

I remember as a kid my Dad making me read Time magazine articles (IIRC) about Gerald Ford's WIN (whip inflation now) buttons / bumper stickers, etc. and the Pet Rock craze. He then asked me what I thought about it (I don't recall what I said) and he replied "If you ever get involved with nonsense like this at least be the person who's doing the peddling to the idiots".

So that's what those D.A.R.E signs near schools mean.

I thought it was about not smoking cigarettes.

Some effective campaign if you do not know the sign means.

Interesting hearing about this program, I feel happy visiting this lovely blog to get awareness of all the things happening around. I do Forex trading, so having eye on the world happening is very important. I find it a lot easy and better with company like OctaFX who are highly supportive and have excellent set of schemes from lowest possible spreads at 0.1 pips to high leverage up to 1.500, over 70 instruments to pick from and much more that makes trading easy.

Anyone remember Stephen Glass of The New Republic? I remember reading his article decades ago about how DARE didn't work and found it very convincing. Then it turned out Glass made up all or almost all of his stories. Interesting how if you wait long enough even fiction gets confirmed.

Comments for this post are closed