Back to Annual Meeting

Back to Annual Meeting

APHA Scientific Session and Event Listing

Jean C. O'Connor, JD, MPH¹, Jamie Chriqui, PhD, MHS¹, Shelby S. Eidson, JD¹, Carissa Baker², and Duane C. McBride, PhD³. (1) Center for Health Policy and Legislative Analysis, The MayaTech Corporation, 2751 Buford Highway, NE, Ste 202, Atlanta, GA 30324, 404-264-2644, joconnor@mayatech.com, (2) The MayaTech Corporation, Center for Health Policy and Legislative Analysis, 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 900, Silver Spring, MD 20910, (3) Behavioral Science Department, Andrews University, Nethery Hall #123E, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI 49104

The domestic production of methamphetamine is a significant threat to the public's health and safety, due to the drug's psychopharmacological aggression effects, production- and distribution-related violence, increased risk of sexually transmitted diseases, and production-related toxicity issues that may affect drug manufacturers, others present at manufacturing labs (such as children), and law enforcement personnel involved in lab seizures. Controlling the domestic, clandestine manufacture of methamphetamine is difficult because the essential precursors to methamphetamine, such as ephedrine or pseudo-ephedrine, are found in common over-the-counter cold remedies available in drug and grocery stores, other household products, and common agricultural products.

In response to the problems associated with methamphetamine manufacture, states are developing policies to control methamphetamine precursors. Several states have enacted, and more than 25 states are proposing to enact, laws aimed at restricting the availability of precursor chemicals used to make methamphetamine. As part of a larger study to evaluate the relationship between methamphetamine precursor policies and clandestine laboratory seizures, this paper utilizes a rapid response methodology to identify, analyze, and report on the restrictiveness of state methamphetamine precursor chemical laws in effect as of October 1, 2005. Preliminary data show that state approaches to controlling methamphetamine manufacturing vary but include some combination of the following provisions: scheduling the essential precursors under the state's controlled substances act; restrictions on the quantity of the essential precursors and other precursors sold per retail transaction; restrictions on the precursor sales environment; penalties for the purchase or possession of precursors; and preemption of local ordinances.

Learning Objectives:

• At the conclusion of the presentation, participants will be able to identify, discuss, and assess state laws and legislation designed to reduce the domestic manufacture of methamphetamine and associated public health concerns.

Keywords: Substance Abuse Prevention, Public Health Legislation

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Not Answered