Adult smokers who shift to using to e-cigarettes may have more chances to improve health and well-being, according to new research from the 91探花.

The study monitored changes in health and social functioning among smokers at two stages in adulthood, age 30 and again at 39. Approximately one-third of smokers shifted to vaping some or all the time by age 39. This group reported better physical health, exercised more and had more active social engagement, the study found.

鈥淒espite the obvious risks to nonsmokers, e-cigarettes have the potential to play a health-promoting role in the lives of smokers,鈥� said study co-author Marina Epstein, a research scientist with the in the 91探花School of Social Work.

The , which recently published in Drug and Alcohol Dependence, drew from a larger longitudinal study, the Seattle Social Development Project, which in 1985 began following some 800 children as fifth-graders in Seattle elementary schools. The sample for the current study focused on 156 of those participants who reported smoking at age 30 and smoking or vaping at age 39.

E-cigarettes first appeared in the United States in the mid-2000s, right around the time the participants in the study sample turned 30. By 2018, . Vaping is especially popular among teens and young adults; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention identifies e-cigarettes as the most popular tobacco product among young people in the U.S., estimating that . Previous research, from and , found that adolescent and young adult vaping can lead to later cigarette use. “In this way, e-cigarettes have been a public health disaster,” said study lead author Rick Kosterman, a research scientist with the Social Development Research Group.

At the same time, while vaping carries certain risks 鈥� the aerosol contains nicotine, small amounts of heavy metals and other ultrafine and cancer-causing particles that can enter the lungs 鈥� the CDC considers them .

Given the common perception of e-cigarettes as a 鈥渉ealthier鈥� alternative, the researchers wanted to examine behavior among smokers who switch to e-cigarettes some or all the time as they approach midlife. The research team collected a series of accepted measures of healthy aging and well-being, such as overall physical and mental health, engaging in healthy behaviors and social activities, and education and income levels. They then surveyed participants, at ages 30 and 39, about this information and how often they engaged in certain activities.

Of the 156 study participants, 64% smoked only combustible cigarettes at age 39; 28% smoked and vaped; and 8% only vaped. Results from the surveys showed that more frequent vaping 鈥� relative to smoking 鈥� was associated with better physical health, more exercise, more active social engagement and higher socioeconomic status.

鈥淎lthough the study cannot show a causal relationship, we think that because e-cigarettes have less stigma, less odor and are less physically harmful, they may increase health-promoting opportunities among smokers. E-cigarette users may be more likely to be in settings that promote physical activity and have more opportunities to interact with nonsmokers,鈥� said Kosterman.

No association was found between switching to vaping and better mental health, less-frequent use of other substances such as alcohol, or whether one’s partner or closest peers smoke (though vapers’ broader social environment may be healthier).

Overall, the researchers stress that e-cigarettes still have substantial public health downsides, but this study shows that smokers who turn to vaping, whether occasionally or instead of cigarettes, may have more opportunities for healthier lifestyle choices. That doesn鈥檛 mean vaping is healthy, they say, but that for people who already smoke 鈥� and are unable to quit 鈥� it can be associated with other healthy routines.

The study was funded by the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute on Aging and the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Co-authors were Jennifer Bailey and J. David Hawkins of the Social Development Research Group.

For more information, contact Kosterman at rickk@uw.edu or Epstein at marinaep@uw.edu.

The legalization of marijuana for Washington state adults may be thwarting a steady downward trend in teen marijuana use, according to new research from the 91探花.

The longitudinal study of more than 230 teens and young adults finds that teens may be more likely to use marijuana following legalization 鈥� with the proliferation of stores and increasing adult use of the drug 鈥� than they otherwise would have been.

鈥淲hen we think about marijuana legalization, a worry is that underage use may go up,鈥� said , the study鈥檚 lead author and principal investigator with the Social Development Research Group in the 91探花School of Social Work. 鈥淓arly use and heavy use during adolescence can have a lot of negative health consequences, then and later in life, so we don鈥檛 want teen use to be going up.鈥�

Bailey notes that before marijuana legalization, rates of teen marijuana use and other drug use had both been decreasing over the last couple of decades.

The was published July 9 in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

Researchers examined whether marijuana legalization led to teen use of the drug, as well as teens鈥� perceptions that the drug is harmful. Controlling for age, sex, race and parent education of the participants, researchers found that kids who entered their teens more recently were less likely to report they’d used marijuana in the past year. For example, 11% of kids born before 2000 reported using marijuana over the past year at age 15, but only 5% of kids born after 2000 said they used marijuana at age 15.

That finding goes along with the general downward trend in teen substance use. But it was after accounting for this trend that the effect of legalization showed up, Bailey said. Controlling for the year when kids were born, teens interviewed after voter approval in 2012 of nonmedical marijuana were several times more likely to report they鈥檇 used marijuana in the past year. Bailey thinks this means that marijuana legalization may be working against the decreases in teen substance use seen in the recent past.

The new findings differ slightly from other showing that rates of underage marijuana use are holding steady or dropping a little after legalization. 91探花researchers say this may reflect methodology. The 91探花study was able to account for long-term trends in teen drug use by following kids born between 1989 and 2002 for 15 years and comparing kids who were teenagers before legalization to those who were teenagers after legalization. Other studies have used school-based or optional surveys to assess a larger population at once, and have not always accounted for long-term trends.

Those methods supply important information too, Bailey said. They just reflect a different angle on the issue. Broader, point-in-time surveys don鈥檛 look at individual change.

鈥淭hey can only see how a whole state changes over time,鈥� Bailey said. 鈥淒ata like ours let you look at individuals and how drug use and behavior change over time, and then we can relate that to changes in policy.鈥�

The participants in the 91探花research are some of the children of participants in a larger and older longitudinal study: the Seattle Social Development Project. That study has followed hundreds of people 鈥� since they were fifth-graders in Seattle elementary schools in the 1980s 鈥攖o evaluate an assortment of conditions, behaviors and life choices. The results from interviews with 233 of their children, pre- and post-marijuana legalization, were included in this new study.

Child participants ranged in age from 1 to 13 years old when the study began in 2002; marijuana use was assessed from ages 10 to 20. Researchers found that children in the sample entering their teens more recently were more likely to perceive the drug as harmful. For example, 69% of 15-year-olds born before 2000 said regular marijuana use is harmful, but 77% of 15-year-olds born after 2000 said using marijuana regularly is harmful. Bailey attributes this to years of drug prevention and education efforts in schools and communities.

The study did not, however, find an overall association between marijuana legalization and teens鈥� perceived harm from the drug. It could be that changing societal attitudes drive changes in marijuana laws, the authors noted, rather than that changing laws drive perceptions.

Researchers study the perception of harm because people are more likely to engage in a behavior they see as relatively risk-free, Bailey said. In the 1960s and 1970s, for instance, there was a generally low perception of harm from many drugs, and usage was higher than it was in subsequent decades, when perceived harm increased.

鈥淧eople generally like to take care of themselves. They don鈥檛 typically do things that carry risk of harm. Throughout the decades that we鈥檝e been tracking marijuana use, this highly correlates with whether someone will use or not,鈥� she said.

The 91探花study also found no connection between marijuana legalization and teen cigarette smoking; the use of one substance often goes with the other, Bailey said. Teen smoking nationwide has , which has been to higher taxes, greater restrictions and widespread public health marketing. Researchers are watching closely to see whether affect declines in teen smoking rates.

Similar studies in other states where marijuana has been legalized 鈥� the participants in this study lived almost exclusively in Washington state 鈥� could provide further evidence of links between laws and behavior, Bailey said. Currently, nearly a dozen states permit the sale of marijuana for nonmedical use; an additional 22 states allow the drug for medical purposes only.

Nonetheless, the 91探花findings can help inform prevention messages targeting teens and marijuana, Bailey said.

鈥淎 teen usage rate that holds steady isn鈥檛 good enough if it would normally be going down. We need to devote more attention to prevention of adolescent use in the context of legalization because we want to keep the decreases we鈥檝e been seeing before legalization was implemented,鈥� Bailey said.

The study was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Co-authors were and of the 91探花Social Development Research Group; Sabrina Oesterle, formerly of the Social Development Research Group, now at Arizona State University; Joseph Roscoe of the University of California, Berkeley; and Karl Hill of the University of Colorado Boulder.

For more information, contact Bailey at jabailey@uw.edu.

.

Youth programs designed to prevent drug use and delinquency and support healthy development can reap lasting benefits not only for participants, but also for their future kids, according to a decades-long study by the University of Colorado and the 91探花.

The research focuses on a program called Raising Healthy Children, which the UW鈥檚 monitored in several Seattle elementary schools in the 1980s. The program was among the first to test the idea that problem behaviors could be prevented with specialized training for teachers, parents and young children.

Lead author , a professor of psychology and neuroscience at CU Boulder and director of the , first got involved with the study while a professor at the UW.

鈥淭his is the first published study to show that a broadly implemented, early childhood prevention program can have positive effects on the next generation,鈥� said Hill. 聽“Previous studies have shown that childhood interventions can demonstrate benefits well into adulthood. These results show that benefits may extend into the next generation as well.”

The , part of a longitudinal study known as the Seattle Social Development Project, is published June 8 in JAMA Pediatrics.

For the study, researchers assessed children whose parents had participated in , created by 91探花social work professors聽听补苍诲听, founders of the Social Development Research Group. 聽聽The lessons, for use by parents and teachers, focused on enhancing children鈥檚 opportunities for forming healthy bonds in grades 1 through 6 and providing them with social skills and reinforcements.聽Set in 18 public elementary schools in Seattle, the program was among the first to test the idea that problem behaviors could be prevented with specialized training for teachers, parents and young children.

鈥淭eachers were taught how to better manage their classrooms, parents were taught to better manage their families, and kids were taught how to better manage their emotions and decision making,鈥� said Hill.

Previous studies have shown that by age 18 those who had gone through the program demonstrated better academic achievement than non-participants and were less likely to engage in violence, substance use or unsafe sex. By their 30s, they had gone further in school, tended to be better off financially, and scored better on mental health assessments.

Beginning in 2002, the researchers started following the first-born children of program participants via questionnaires for their teachers and parents. Beginning when the children were 6 years old, they also conducted annual interviews.

A total of 182 kids were studied for the new paper, including 72 whose parents had gone through the program and 110 whose parents had not.

Those whose parents had participated in Raising Healthy Children had fewer developmental delays in the first five years of life, fewer behavior problems, fewer symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder 鈥� or ADHD 鈥� and better cognitive, academic and emotional maturity in the classroom. They were also significantly less likely to report using drugs or alcohol as a teenager.

鈥淲e already know that if you can prevent kids from getting involved in the criminal justice system, engaging in underage drinking and drug use, and experiencing depression and anxiety, you can save governments and families a lot of money,鈥� said co-author , assistant director of the Social Development Research Group at the UW. 鈥淥ur results suggest these programs, by delivering cross-generational effects, may be working even better than we thought.鈥�

Children whose parents had gone through the program in the 1980s also showed less 鈥渙ppositional defiance鈥� and 鈥渆xternalizing behaviors鈥� 鈥� two common precursors to serious violence later in life 鈥� said Hill. This suggests such interventions could play a role in stemming the tide of school violence.

The researchers caution that the study was a non-randomized controlled trial conducted in only one region of the country, and needs to be replicated before broad conclusions can be drawn. But amid a pandemic, when youth depression and anxiety are on the rise while budgets are being slashed and lawmakers may have a tendency to place prevention at a lower priority, Hill hopes the findings send a message.

鈥淏y investing in kids now and continuing to invest in them, we could be making generations to come more resilient for when the next national emergency comes around,鈥� said Hill.

The study was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse. In addition to Hawkins and Catalano, co-authors from the 91探花Social Development Research Group are principal investigator and project director . Additional authors were , an emeritus professor in the 91探花College of Education, and Christine Steeger of the University of Colorado.

For more information, contact Bailey at jabailey@uw.edu or Hill at karl.hill@colorado.edu.

Adapted from a University of Colorado news release.

What defines a 鈥済ood life鈥� in your 30s?

The exact answer probably depends on the person, but most people could agree on some general themes: good physical and mental health, solid relationships, and a steady job or good education. Being financially responsible and involvement in your community or civic life also help make life better.

Now 91探花 researchers have found that that 鈥済ood life鈥� in adulthood can start in grade school, by teaching parents and teachers to build stronger bonds with their children, and to help children form greater attachments to family and school. In a study of more than 800 adults throughout their 30s 鈥� a group the researchers have followed since they were fifth-graders at Seattle elementary schools in 1985 鈥� the people who reported better health and socioeconomic status were, consistently, those whose parents and teachers had received lessons aimed at building stronger bonds with their children decades ago.

The researchers know of no other study of a program provided during elementary school that has followed participants for this long. Participants in the longitudinal study, known as the Seattle Social Development Project, have responded to surveys over the years about health, , even the . Such research requires participants who will stick with a study over a big stretch of their lives, and nearly 90% of them have done just that.聽The sample has about equal numbers of males and females, half are racial minorities, and about half had experienced poverty in childhood.

The latest study involved coming up with broad measures of health and functioning in adulthood, surveying participants on specific issues related to those measures, and comparing participants whose teachers and parents received the bonding interventions during elementary school with those who didn’t.

鈥淭hese early elementary-school interventions seek to make kids鈥� current lives better both in and out of school,鈥� said , a principal investigator with the Social Development Research Group, part of the 91探花School of Social Work. 鈥淏ut can we actually get kids on a different life trajectory that lasts beyond elementary school? In fact, we found enduring effects, where they鈥檙e having an overall better experience in adulthood.鈥�

The prevention curriculum, called , was created by 91探花social work professors and . The lessons, for use by parents and teachers, focused on enhancing children’s opportunities for forming healthy bonds in grades 1 through 6 and providing them with social skills and reinforcements. Teachers and parents of children in some classrooms of the 18 participating Seattle elementary schools used the curriculum in the 1980s, while those in other classrooms did not have access to it.

Many of the concepts are teaching tools and parenting tips that are well-known today: reinforcing positive behaviors; setting expectations for making responsible choices; and promoting positive social interaction at school through group projects and seating arrangements. Table groups in the classroom facilitate cooperation and learning from one another, for example, while at home, parents can 鈥渃atch鈥� their child being good and offer praise. With older children, parents can discuss issues such as smoking so that standards for healthy behavior are established before the teen years.

For the published in late spring in Prevention Science, Kosterman devised a list of nine measurable aspects of life for people in their 30s: physical health; mental health; health maintenance behaviors (such as exercise and sleep); low sex-risk behavior; low rates of substance abuse; friendships and relationships; socioeconomic status (income, education, homeownership); responsibility (employment, managing finances); and civic engagement. The team then used surveys and in-person physical evaluations to determine participants鈥� health and successful functioning in adult life.

In a comprehensive test of effects that combined all nine indicators of a healthy and successful adult life, those from intervention classrooms when in elementary school reported significantly better outcomes than those from comparison classrooms through their 30s. Specific areas of significant improvement included fewer symptoms of mental health disorders, more engagement in health maintenance behaviors, and overall better health and socioeconomic success. On the remaining measures, the intervention group scored better on each one, though not as dramatically, compared with the control group.

It鈥檚 hard to attribute results that manifest decades later directly to the curriculum, said Hawkins, a co-author on the new study. But the changed behaviors of their teachers and parents during the elementary grades likely had a snowball effect, leading to positive relationships and responsible decision-making in adulthood.

鈥淲e worked to build healthier relationships 鈥� we call it social bonding 鈥� between teachers and students, and parents and children. The larger question was, if we do all these things, will it turn into a prosocial, healthy lifestyle?鈥� Hawkins said. 鈥淲e didn鈥檛 know we would see these results so much later in life.鈥�

In analyzing the data, researchers examined factors that tend to negatively affect health outcomes: whether a child grew up in poverty, was raised by a single parent, or born to a teenager. Participants who were born to a mother under age 20 were found to have a substantially lower quality of life on several of the measures, especially in the areas of socioeconomic status, physical health and substance abuse. The intervention effects the researchers found persisted even after controlling for these effects of being born to a teen mother.

鈥淭he most important thing we鈥檝e learned is to provide opportunities for kids to have positive social involvement,鈥� Hawkins said.聽 鈥淢ake sure your kids have the opportunity to engage with you as a parent. Play with them, hold them; don鈥檛 just sit on your phone when you鈥檙e with them.

鈥淲hen kids feel bonded to you, they鈥檙e less likely to violate your expectations. And you are likely to be setting them up to have better lives long into the future.鈥�

Kosterman and his team have applied for funding to conduct further research on the group, now in their mid-40s, in midlife. “More studies are needed that test childhood interventions and follow participants through the 30s and beyond,” Kosterman added, “but we are encouraged that these findings suggest that lasting change for important outcomes is possible.”

The study was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse. In addition to Catalano, other co-authors on the study were of the 91探花Social Development Research Group; , emeritus professor in the 91探花College of Education; and of the University of Colorado, Boulder.

For more information, contact Kosterman at rickk@uw.edu or 206-543-4546.

Grant numbers: R01DA033956, 1R01DA024411, 1R01DA09679

When Washington voters legalized marijuana in 2012, many parents found themselves with a new teachable moment.

Though illegal for anyone under 21, the drug presented a dilemma similar to alcohol: Retailers sold it, people openly consumed it 鈥� sometimes to excess 鈥� and parents themselves struggled with how to talk to their kids about their own use, past or present.

Unlike with alcohol, research on the health and developmental effects of marijuana . And the law鈥檚 complexity, along with the accessibility of marijuana products and stores, has left parents thinking more deliberately about how and why to set some ground rules.

Most parents agree that marijuana should be off-limits to children and teenagers, but they want information and advice from trustworthy sources, said , a research scientist with the 91探花鈥檚 . Those findings come from a published online Jan. 16 in the Journal of Child and Family Studies, by Eisenberg and a team of researchers.

鈥淲hat I heard a lot of parents saying is, essentially, ‘I can tell my kids not to use it, but I just don’t know how to enforce and reinforce that message,鈥欌�� Eisenberg said. 鈥淧arents are having a hard time reconciling societal norms with personal norms. Society has become more permissive, but at home, most parents don鈥檛 want their children to use marijuana. It鈥檚 a challenge that leaves them feeling like they don鈥檛 know what to do.鈥�

To that end, parents said they want guidance, she added.

鈥淧arents are eager to learn, and open to materials and programs that can help them. They鈥檙e open to factual, unbiased, scientific information, and they want to know how to talk to their kids,鈥� Eisenberg said.

Based on focus group interviews with 54 adults, the study examined parents鈥� attitudes and challenges around marijuana use. Researchers grouped parents according to the ages of their children and by their own usage of marijuana during the past year (as measured by a prior confidential survey); those who had used during the past year, to any degree, were in one group, and those who had not were in another. That separation was designed to better identify differences in how these groups parent; participants were not told anything about other group members鈥� marijuana use.

Yet, in both groups, there were common themes that emerged which can be useful in delivering educational and prevention-oriented messages, Eisenberg said.

For parents, talking to kids about marijuana can mean many things: explaining its risks and effects, deciding on rules and consequences, and choosing whether to share their own history. Researchers didn鈥檛 offer answers 鈥� that wasn鈥檛 their role, or the purpose of the study 鈥� but parents appeared to appreciate hearing from each other, Eisenberg said.

Among the challenges parents discussed were adequate and appropriate consequences for breaking house rules, while a few parents of older kids, especially in the user-groups, described a harm-reduction approach, such as discussing with their teens how to use marijuana safely. Parents who chose this strategy said that while they didn鈥檛 want their children to use marijuana, they figured that if the children were going to try it anyway, they might as well educate them.

What makes the issue so thorny is the relatively rapid legal and cultural change around marijuana, said , a co-author of the study from the Social Development Research Group. While marijuana has become even more available since these interviews were conducted in 2014, parents鈥� questions are unlikely to have changed.

鈥淚n many ways, parenting around marijuana use is similar to that of alcohol use, since they鈥檙e both legal for adults,鈥� Kosterman said. 鈥淎 key difference is where I think parents and society in general have accepted that some people can become dependent on alcohol and it can ruin people鈥檚 lives if used in excess. Parents and kids aren鈥檛 so clear about risks of marijuana use 鈥攍ike the potential for misuse or effects on adolescent brains.

“We are still learning about the risks of teen marijuana use, as well as potential medical uses.”

The study鈥檚 conclusion points to how parents might seek answers, whether through community-oriented drug prevention programs or through information from health care providers, public health agencies or school programs.

鈥淭he fact that parents in this study openly asked for guidance highlights an opportunity for the prevention science community to work with medical professionals, schools and policymakers to fulfill this vital need at a critical time of policy transition in the United States,鈥� the authors wrote.

Alongside this study of parenting practices is a companion study by the same research team, forthcoming in the Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, about parent perceptions of teens鈥� exposure to marijuana use following legalization in Washington state.

The parents who agreed to participate in both studies came from a longitudinal study the research group 聽launched in the 1980s called the Seattle Social Development Project. The focus group sample was 39 percent white, 37 percent African American, 17 percent Asian American and 7 percent Native American. Of these groups, approximately 5 percent were Latino.

The study on parenting practices was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Additional authors were , a postdoctoral researcher at the 91探花School of Social Work and an affiliate at Colorado State University;聽 and , of the Social Development Research Group; and of USC.

###

For more information, contact Eisenberg at neisen@uw.edu.

Grant numbers: R01DA023089, R01DA033956

Neighborhoods with greater poverty and disorganization may play a greater role in problem drinking than the availability of bars and stores that sell hard liquor, a 91探花-led study has found.

While there is evidence for the link between neighborhood poverty and alcohol use, the new twist 鈥� that socioeconomics are more powerful environmental factors than even access to the substance itself 鈥� suggests that improving a neighborhood’s quality of life can yield a range of benefits.

“Is there something about the neighborhood itself that can lead to problems? As we learn more about those neighborhood factors that are relevant, then this might point to population-level strategies to modify or improve the environments where people live,” said , a research assistant professor in the Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences.

A common way to think of such broader changes is the “” theory of maintaining neighborhoods to deter crime. In other words, implementing programs, services or clean-up efforts to improve a neighborhood could help attain another goal: reducing problem drinking.

The 91探花 was published online May 8 in the Journal of Urban Health.

In examining the combination of multiple neighborhood factors on alcohol use, 91探花researchers turned to an ongoing research study of adults the university’s has followed for decades. They interviewed more than 500 of the adults in the study, who were first identified as fifth-graders in Seattle elementary schools and now live throughout King County. In this neighborhood study, 48 percent of participants were women; people of color made up nearly 60 percent of respondents.

Researchers determined the U.S. Census Block Group (a geographic area of roughly 1,000 people) of each participant鈥檚 residence, along with demographic data tied to that area and the number of locations that sold hard alcohol there. Participants also answered a series of questions about their alcohol consumption and their perceptions of their neighborhood.

This information allowed researchers to classify neighborhoods according to poverty level, alcohol availability (location of bars and liquor stores) and “disorganization,” which included factors such as crime, drug selling and graffiti.

The ability to consider a number of neighborhood characteristics simultaneously and to identify patterns of how these characteristics grouped together to form distinct neighborhood types made this study different from others that might focus on the impact of, say, poverty alone, Rhew said.

And while poverty and disorganization often are assumed to go hand-in-hand, that’s not always the case, added study co-author , a research scientist in the 91探花School of Social Work. A socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhood might also be highly organized, with strong leaders, a sense of identity and various programs and services for residents. At the same time, a low-poverty neighborhood might be highly disorganized, with a lack of resources or sense of community, or a few streets with more trouble than others.

In this study, researchers found that residents of neighborhoods primarily characterized by high poverty and disorganization tended to drink twice as much in a typical week as those in other types of neighborhoods. Binge-drinking 鈥� generally defined as more than four drinks at a time for women, five for men 鈥� occurred in these high-poverty, highly disorganized communities about four times as frequently as in other types of neighborhoods. These findings are consistent with previous research indicating that people in lower income neighborhoods may be at greater risk for alcohol-related problems, Rhew said.

What’s different, Rhew and Kosterman agreed, is the fact that neighborhoods characterized by greater alcohol availability showed no increased alcohol use among residents 鈥� suggesting that socioeconomic factors may pose a greater risk for substance abuse.

“On its face, the connection between poverty and disorganization and alcohol use may not be all that surprising, but when you find that this connection may be even more important than the location of bars and liquor stores, then it’s those characteristics of a neighborhood that we want to pay attention to,” Kosterman said.

Researchers pointed to an important change that has occurred since their original data was collected: in 2011 privatizing liquor sales. The went from a little more than 300 state-run stores to some 1,500 pharmacies, grocery stores and warehouse clubs.

“People who utilize the outlets aren’t just people from the neighborhood. We see stronger evidence of the link between where alcohol is sold and other problems such as violence, crime, and drinking and driving, but not necessarily consumption,” he added.

The ability, thanks to recent funding, to overlay neighborhood data with the longitudinal Seattle Social Development Project 鈥� the study of 808 individuals begun in 1985 鈥� presents opportunities for future analyses of a variety of behaviors and circumstances, the researchers said.

The other co-author was Jungeun Olivia Lee at the USC School of Social Work. This study was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

###

For more information, contact Rhew at 206-221-1897 or rhew@uw.edu, or Kosterman at 206-543-4546 or rickk@uw.edu.

Grant numbers: RO1DA033956, RO1DA09679