Three Way News
Your Source. For everything. Really.
Contributors
- Hammer
- Jambo
- Libby Mae
Current Poll
Recurring features
Hammer's Favorites
- Dobson v. Sponge-Bob
- Calvin, the nest egg
- Pat's predictions
- Bachmann spins Cupertino
- 205 atheists assume the bench
- Fox spins Oil for Food
- Fact check: highest taxed state
- Gen. Myers v. Reality
- Janice Rogers Brown
- Killing Field
- Kline hates Big Bird
- Vote Luca Brasi!
- Cornyn's Stalinist Supreme Court
- Rumsfeld's hidden metrics
Jambo's Favories
- Dolphin research updates
- We all shine on
- If you have to write...
- Columnist NY Times should have
- Truth about taxes
- Fourth of July
- Movie objects
- Lost in supermarket
- Dysfunctional Farmer Labor party
- Punks you hated
- Some preacher from east
- Winning issues
Thursday, July 03, 2008
Meth on the decline
Apparently, meth is use and production is on the decline in Minnesota. That's great. But I wonder why?
Is is cost? Did the restriction on the sale of medicine containing pseudoephedrine drive up the price of meth to make an alternate high more affordable? Are fewer people using drugs, or just meth? If users are moving from meth to heroin, is that good? How about meth to coke?
Unlike some other class 1 substances, meth is horribly destructive. Maybe education worked?
3 Comments:
the news said it was because of restricting the sales of it, but I am pretty sure you can get it in bulk if you wanted to.
92% is a big decline tho
It's a huge decline. But why are anti-meth efforts successful when anti-most-everything-else efforts fail?
Because meth makes you ugly.
By 
, at
7:41 AM
