MONITORING FUTURE the - Monitoring the Future

1 MONITORING . the FUTURE . NATIONAL SURVEY RESULTS. ON DRUG USE. 1975 2016. 2016. Overview Key Findings on Adolescent Drug Use Lloyd D. Johnston Patrick M. O'Malley Richard A. Miech Jerald G. Bachman John E. Schulenberg Sponsored by The National Institute on Drug Abuse at The National Institutes of Health MONITORING THE FUTURE . NATIONAL SURVEY. RESULTS ON. DRUG USE. 2016 Overview Key Findings on Adolescent Drug Use by Lloyd D. Johnston, Patrick M. O'Malley, Richard A. Miech, Jerald G. Bachman, John E. Schulenberg, The University of Michigan Institute for Social Research Sponsored by: The National Institute on Drug Abuse National Institutes of Health This publication was written by the principal investigators and staff of the MONITORING the FUTURE project at the Institute for Social Research, the University of Michigan, under Research Grant R01 DA.

2 001411 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the sponsor. Public Domain Notice All material appearing in this volume is in the public domain and may be reproduced or copied, whether in print or non-print media including derivatives, without permission from the authors. If you plan to modify the material, please contact the MONITORING the FUTURE Project at for verification of accuracy. Citation of the source is appreciated, including at least the following: MONITORING the FUTURE , Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan.

3 Recommended Citation Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Miech, R. A., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2017). MONITORING the FUTURE national survey results on drug use, 1975-2016: Overview, key findings on adolescent drug use. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan. Institute for Social Research The University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan Printed January 2017. Contents Click on any item below (in blue) to go directly to that page. Introduction ..1. study Design and Methods ..3. Summary of Key Findings ..5. Specific Results by Drug Any Illicit Drug ..9. Marijuana ..11. Synthetic Marijuana ..13. Inhalants.

4 15. LSD ..17. Cocaine ..19. Crack ..21. Amphetamines and Other Stimulant Drugs ..23. Methamphetamine and Crystal Methamphetamine (Ice) ..25. Heroin ..27. Other Narcotic Drugs, Including OxyContin and Vicodin ..29. Tranquilizers ..31. Sedatives (Barbiturates) ..33. MDMA (Ecstasy, Molly) and Other Club Drugs ..35. Cigarettes ..39. Smokeless Vaping ..43. Small Cigars, Cigarillos, Large Cigars, and Tobacco Using a Hookah ..45. Steroids ..47. Subgroup Differences ..49. Lessons Tables 1. Trends in Lifetime Prevalence of Use of Various Drugs for Grades 8, 10, and 12 2. Trends in Annual Prevalence of Use of Various Drugs for Grades 8, 10, and 12 3.

5 Trends in 30 Day Prevalence of Use of Various Drugs for Grades 8, 10, and 12 4. Trends in Daily Prevalence of Use of Selected Drugs for Grades 8, 10, and 12 5. Trends in Lifetime Prevalence of Use of Various Drugs in Grades 8, 10, and 12 ..62. 6. Trends in Annual Prevalence of Use of Various Drugs in Grades 8, 10, and 12 ..68. 7. Trends in 30 day Prevalence of Use of Various Drugs in Grades 8, 10, and 12 ..76. 8. Trends in 30 Day Prevalence of Daily Use of Various Drugs in Grades 8, 10, and 12 ..82. 9. Trends in Harmfulness of Drugs as Perceived by 8th Graders ..87. 10. Trends in Harmfulness of Drugs as Perceived by 10th Graders ..90.

6 11. Trends in Harmfulness of Drugs as Perceived by 12th Graders ..93. 12. Trends in Disapproval of Drug Use in Grade 8 ..97. 13. Trends in Disapproval of Drug Use in Grade 10 ..100. 14. Trends in Disapproval of Drug Use in Grade 12 ..103. 15. Trends in Availability of Drugs as Perceived by 8th Graders ..107. 16. Trends in Availability of Drugs as Perceived by 10th Graders ..109. 17. Trends in Availability of Drugs as Perceived by 12th Graders ..111. Introduction MONITORING the FUTURE (MTF) is a long-term study of In addition, trends in the perceived availability of each American adolescents, college students, and adult high drug are presented, which at times have proven school graduates through age 55.

7 It has been conducted important to explaining changes in usage levels for annually by the University of Michigan's Institute for some drugs. Social Research since its inception in 1975 and is supported under a series of investigator-initiated, A synopsis of the design and methods used in the study competitive research grants from the National Institute and an overview of the key results from the 2016. on Drug Abuse. survey follow this introductory section. We then provide a separate section for each individual drug The need for a study such as MTF is clear. Substance class, including figures that show trends in the overall use by American young people has proven to be a proportions of students at each grade level (a) using the rapidly changing phenomenon, requiring frequent drug, (b) seeing a great risk associated with its use assessments and reassessments.

8 Since the mid-1960s, (perceived risk), (c) disapproving of its use when it burgeoned in the general youth population, (disapproval), and (d) saying that it would be fairly illicit drug use has remained a major concern for the easy or very easy to get if they wanted to (perceived nation. Smoking, drinking, and illicit drug use are availability). For 12th graders, annual data are available leading causes of morbidity and mortality during since 1975 and for 8th and 10th graders since 1991, the adolescence as well as later in life. How vigorously the first year they were included in the study . nation responds to teenage substance use, how accurately it identifies the emerging substance abuse The tables at the end of this report provide the statistics problems, and how well it comes to understand the underlying the figures; in addition, they present data on effectiveness of policy and intervention efforts largely lifetime, annual, 30-day, and (for selected drugs) daily depend on the ongoing collection of valid and reliable For the sake of brevity, we present these data.

9 MTF is uniquely designed to generate such data prevalence statistics here in tabular form only for the in order to provide an accurate picture of what is 1991 2016 interval, but statistics on 12th graders going happening in this domain and why, and the study has back to 1975 are available in other MTF publications. served that function well for the past 42 years. Policy For each prevalence period, the tables indicate which discussions in the scientific literature and media, in one-year changes from 2015 to 2016 are statistically government, education, public health institutions, and significant. (In the text below, s' indicates p .05, ss'.)

10 Elsewhere have been informed by the ready availability indicates p .01, sss' indicates p .001, and ns'. of extensive and consistently accurate information indicates not statistically significant). The graphic from the study relating to a large and ever-growing depictions of multiyear trends often reveal gradual number of substances. Similarly, the work of change that may not reach significance in a given one- organizations and agencies providing prevention and year interval but nevertheless may be shown to be real treatment services is informed by MTF. over a longer time frame. The 2016 MTF survey involved about 45,500 students An extensive analysis of the study 's findings on in 8th-, 10th-, and 12th grades enrolled in 372 secondary secondary school students may be found in Volume I, schools nationwide.