Ley de Servicios Públicos Domiciliarios (Ley 142 de 1994)

Given the findings of previous research indicating that perceptions of risk of driving under the influence of a range of drugs differ according to personal drug experience, it was of interest to compare the driving- related risk perceptions of participants who reported using substances in the previous 12 months with those who did not. the proportions of users and non-users of each of the drugs who reported driving under the influence as being very risky or dangerous is presented in table 5.1

table 5.1: risk perceptions of users versus non-users

drug non-users very risky / dangerous (%) users very risky / dangerous (%) Alcohol 94.0 88.9 Cannabis 78.6 30.0 Methamphetamine 88.6 31.0 ecstasy 87.6 46.0 Cocaine 83.0 26.0 Lsd/hallucinogens 94.0 88.4 Ketamine 68.1 80.3 Ghb-type substances 84.7 76.5 prescription stimulants 44.5 18.5 benzodiazepines 64.2 44.4 Analgesics 56.0 30.4

Although the majority of both “drinkers” (n=6231) and “non-drinkers” (n=570) perceived driving under the influence of alcohol to be very risky/dangerous, a significantly higher proportion of the “non-drinkers” reported this to be the case (94.0 per cent) than did “drinkers” (88.9 per cent), with “drinkers” more likely to reported it as somewhat risky/dangerous than “non- drinkers” (10.5 per cent and 4.2 per cent, respectively; χ2 _{(2, 6799) = 34.0, p<0.001).}

the findings in relation to cannabis and stimulant drugs (that is, methamphetamine, ecstasy and cocaine) indicate considerable differences in perceptions of risk of users and non-users. In terms of cannabis, a significantly larger proportion of “non-cannabis- users” (n=5166) reported driving under the influence of cannabis to be very risky or dangerous than “cannabis-users” (n=1635; 78.6 per cent and 30.0 per cent, respectively), with “cannabis-users” more likely to perceive driving under the influence of cannabis as not at all risky than “non-cannabis-users” (14.7 per cent and 1.3 per cent, respectively; χ2 _{(2, 6799)=1657.67,}

p<0.001). similarly, a significantly larger proportion of “non-methamphetamine-users” (n=5906) reported driving under the influence of methamphetamine to be very risky or dangerous than “methamphetamine -users” (n=895; 88.6 per cent and 31.0 per cent, respectively), with “methamphetamine-users” more likely to perceive driving under the influence of

Figure 5.3: perceptions of risk/danger associated with

driving under the influence of prescription drugs (n=6801) Very risky/ dangerous somewhat risky/ dangerous not at all risky/ dangerous don’t know 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 per cen tage of r esp onden ts Analgesics benz odiaz epines prescr iption stimulan ts

methamphetamine as not at all risky than “non- methamphetamine-users” (18.0 per cent and 1.10 per cent, respectively; χ2 _{(3, 6798)=2508.35, p<0.001). In}

terms of cocaine, a significantly larger proportion of “non- cocaine-users” (n=6179) reported driving under the influence of cocaine to be very risky or dangerous than “cocaine-users” (n=622; 83.0 per cent and 26.0 per cent, respectively), with “cocaine-users” more likely to perceive driving under the influence of cocaine as not at all risky than “non-cocaine -users” (19.1 per cent and 1.2 per cent, respectively; χ2 _{(3, 6798)=1895.57,}

p<0.001). the findings were also comparable for ecstasy, with a significantly larger proportion of “non- ecstasy-users” (n=5744) reporting driving under the influence of ecstasy to be very risky or dangerous than “ecstasy-users” (n=1057; 87.6 per cent and 46.0 per cent, respectively), with “ecstasy-users” more likely to perceive driving under the influence of ecstasy as not at all risky than “non-ecstasy-users” (8.3 per cent and 1.0%, respectively; χ2 _{(3, 6798)=1680.23, p<0.001).}

the findings in relation to Lsd/hallucinogens and Ghb- type substances were comparable to alcohol, with the majority of both “users” and “non-users” reporting that driving under the influence of these drugs is very risky or dangerous. A significantly larger proportion of “non- Lsd/hallucinogens-users” (n=6433), however, reported driving under the influence of Lsd/hallucinogens to be very risky or dangerous than “Lsd/hallucinogens-users” (n=338; 94.0 per cent and 88.4 per cent, respectively), with “Lsd/hallucinogens-users” more likely to perceive driving under the influence of Lsd/hallucinogens as somewhat risky or dangerous than “non-Lsd/ hallucinogens-users” (7.0 per cent and 1.2 per cent, respectively; χ2 _{(3, 6798)=69.01, p<0.001). similarly,}

a significantly larger proportion of “non-Ghb-type substance-users” (n=6662), reported driving under the influence of Ghb-type substances to be very risky or dangerous than “Ghb-type substance-users” (n=88; 84.7 per cent and 76.5 per cent, respectively), with “Ghb-type substance-users” more likely to perceive driving under the influence of Ghb-type substances as somewhat risky or dangerous than “non- Ghb-type substance-users” (15.7 per cent and 2.0 per cnet, respectively; χ2 _{(3,6798)=155.71, p<0.001).}

the findings in relation to ketamine are less consistent. Although the majority of both “users” and “non-users” reported driving under the influence of ketamine to be “very risky/dangerous”, a significantly larger proportion of “ketamine-users” (n=265) reported driving under the influence of ketamine to be very risky or dangerous than “non-ketamine-users” (n=6543; 80.3 per cent and 68.1 per cent, respectively). “Ketamine-users” were, however, more likely to perceive driving under the influence of ketamine as somewhat risky or dangerous than “non-ketamine -users” (12.3 per cent and 2.7 per cent, respectively; χ2 _{(3, 6798) =135.45, p<0.001). these}

findings may be attributed to the large proportion of “non-ketamine -users” responding “don’t know” to this question (28.2 per cent), as well as to the dissociative and psychedelic properties of the drug (which users would have experienced) that may increase the perception of risk associated with driving under the influence of ketamine.

finally, the perceptions of risk attributed to driving under the influence of pharmaceutical drugs of “users” and “non-users” were compared. In terms of prescription stimulants, a significantly larger proportion of “non- prescription stimulants-users” (n=6442) reported driving under the influence of prescription stimulants to be very risky or dangerous than “prescription stimulants-users” (n=359; 44.5 per cent and 18.5 per cent, respectively), with “prescription stimulants-users” more likely to perceive driving under the influence of prescription stimulants as “not at all risky” than “non- prescription stimulants-users” (28.7 per cent and 4.9 per cent, respectively; χ2 _{(3, 6798)=382.45, p<0.001). for}

benzodiazepines, a significantly larger proportion of “non-benzodiazepines-users” (n=5910) reported driving under the influence of benzodiazepines to be very risky or dangerous than “benzodiazepines-users” (n=891; 64.2 per cent and 44.4 per cent, respectively), with “benzodiazepines-users” more likely to perceive driving under the influence of benzodiazepines as not at all risky than “non- benzodiazepines-users” (7.5 per cent and 1.4 per cent, respectively; χ2 _{(3, 6798)=431.971, p<0.001).}

Lastly, a significantly larger proportion of “non-analgesics- users” (n=4539) reported driving under the influence of analgesics to be “very risky or dangerous” than “analgesics-users” (n=2262; 56.0 per cent and 30.4 per

cent, respectively), with “analgesics-users” more likely to perceive driving under the influence of analgesics as “not at all risky” than “non-analgesics-users” (8.4 per cent and 3.4 per cent, respectively; χ2 _{(3, 9798)=698.41, p<0.001).}

Summary of risk perceptions of users versus non-users

this data suggests that individuals who have used specific drugs are less likely to consider driving under the influence of them to be risky or dangerous. the differences in perceptions of risk of “users” and “non- users” were most marked in relation to cannabis, methamphetamine, cocaine and, to a lesser extent, ecstasy. further, although the majority of both alcohol and Lsd “users” and “non-users” reported that driving under the influence of these two drugs is very risky or dangerous, the trend in differences between the two groups remained consistent, with “non users” more likely to perceive driving under the influence as very risky or dangerous and “users” as somewhat risky or dangerous. the different pattern found for ketamine may be attributed to the large proportion of “non-ketamine- users” responding “don’t know” to this question (28.2 per cent), as well as to the dissociative and psychedelic properties of the drug (which users would have experienced) that may increase the perception of risk associated with driving under the influence of ketamine. the trend identified for the majority of illicit drugs was also consistent in terms of pharmaceutical drugs, with “users” of the three categories under consideration more likely to perceive driving under the influence to be “not at all risky or dangerous” than “non- users”, who, in turn, were more likely to consider driving under the influence to be “very risky or dangerous”.

Knowledge and perception of time following