National Amphetamine-Type Stimulant Strategy Background Paper

75
1994). Significant improvements were only found in regards to knowledge of syringe
cleaning procedures and the associated risk of concurrent alcohol and amphetamine use
(Kamieniecki et al., 1998).
Targeted campaigns
As with prevention campaigns, strategies aimed at reducing harms associated with ATS use
need to be targeted toward those known to be at risk of such harms or towards high risk
behaviours/contexts of use (e.g., use in relation to driving; use at work). Thus, campaigns
may be targeted toward particular sub-populations such as gay, lesbian and transgender
populations, injecting drug users and ecstasy users, or toward particular types of ATS, with
regard to form and content or to particular settings such as entertainment venues or in
relation to particular work practices.
The issue of targeting specific risk and harm factors was raised in a number of written
submissions. NDARC made mention of the need to reduce the risk of blood borne virus
(BBV) transmission among injecting ATS users, and targeting messages warning of the
risks associated with BBV infections toward young people prior to uptake of injecting
ATS use. Also, the need to address sexual risk behaviour was emphasised, particularly
among methamphetamine injectors who report higher levels of such behaviour than other
injecting drug users, and among men who have sex with men. Because of the particular
risks associated with certain patterns of ATS use, the Australian Drug Foundation (ADF)
highlighted a need to target strategies that address polydrug use and bingeing among ATS
users. In their submission, the private company ‘Convenience Advertising’, suggested that it
was important to disseminate strategically planned public health communication programs,
termed ‘narrowcasting’, in campaigns to target ATS use, particularly for young people, men
who have sex with men, and those working in the hospitality industry.
The issue of the diversity of patterns of ATS use demanding diverse responses was noted in
the written submission from the Victorian Alcohol and Drug Association (VAADA):
Given the diversity of patterns of ATS use, it is highly unlikely that any blanket response
to ATS use would be successful. ATS users are very diverse, and it is unlikely that they
all have the same treatment needs. Potential ATS users will be drawn from a similar
assortment of social groups, and it is improbable that a monolithic treatment campaign
would effectively target all the different people who might potentially use ATS.
The recommendation for targeted campaigns was also a central theme across
consultations. However, there were diverse views concerning the exact nature of
interventions. Some participants argued for strategies that aimed at specific subgroups of
consumers (e.g., young people), while others were of the opinion that strategies should be
designed around particular patterns of use (e.g., ‘binge’ use). Some suggested focussing on
stages of use (e.g., “recreational” users, or those using occasionally) with others suggesting
that the different types of ATS indicated the need for drug specific interventions (e.g.,
ecstasy versus methamphetamine). A fifth categorisation was proposed in relation to the
various functions of particular drugs for consumers (e.g., people who use ATS to facilitate
workplace performance versus those who use ATS as part of a social activity). It was
acknowledged that any targeting of harm reduction strategies would need to take account