Monday, September 29, 2008

NARCONON Drug Abuse Prevention Program Evaluation

NARCONON is a secular program based on the teachings and writings of L. Ron Hubbard. This program provides drug rehabilitation, eduation, and prevention services. The program provides a curriculum that is meant to be utilized in elementary, middle, and high school classrooms and is designed to supplement the school's core health and drug prevention curriculum. The link below presents a program evaluation of the NARCONON program. Let me know what you think.

Program Evaluation of NARCONON

55 comments:

Kristie R said...

The article regarding the NARCANON evaluation was extremely interesting. Not only was the program evaluated some of the information was found to be inaccurate and misleading. Some of the statements claimed that use of drugs created vitamin deficiences and other misleading information. It was interesting to see that in an evaluation materials given to clients (or students as the case may be) were also evaluated to determine their accuracy and effectiveness. The article also pointed out that some of the tactics utilized (like scare tactics) were even counterproductive.

Anonymous said...

The only main element that I believe is pertinent to this type of intervention is some sort of group therapy. I didn't read ALL the way to the bottom of what was stated so forgive me if my assumption that group therapy was not included in this approach was wrong. Group therapy is pertinent to the recovery of this population in that it allows addicts the opportunity to discuss their feelings - often feelings they have held within for a long time- about any random underlying issue that may be disturbing their life. Addiction is only a symptom of underlying unresolved life issues. Also, group therapy allows addicts to connect with and relate to other addicts at different times in the recovery process, which enstils hope for many. The other element to group therapy that I believe is so important to recovery is that group members that are on the same level as others in the group (as opposed to the group leader or therapist)often assist in pointing out when other members are in denial and can help other members realize certain things that the leader or therapist cannot simply because of the role that they are in. My main point here is that it is vital for recovering addicts to be allowed and assisted in dealing with unresolved issues and to talk about their feelings. I did however like the fact that this intervetion included a plan of action upon graduation. STACY C

Linda B said...

From a research perspective, it appears that the Narconon Drug Prevention program is unproven and is inappropriate to be used with schoo-age children. I appreciate the contribution of former drug addicts being willing to give of their time to prevent drug addiction. However, I think that the more appropriate area for this type of intervention is in addiction recovery, where viewing individuals that have successfully conquered addition inspire hope. I agree with the point that presenting former drug addicts to teenagers might send the inappropriate message that there is always a road back to normalcy after traveling the addiction road for a few years.

Linda B said...

Responding to Kristie R's remarks, it is scary to think about the number of presentations being provided to children with potentially misleading information. Children and teenagers could become very mistrusting of the whole anti-drug message, when they become aware of the unaccurate information being presented as a scare tactic.

Anonymous said...

I used to work in substance abuse, and I found this approach to be one of the most ridiculous things I have ever seen. The only positive aspect to it that I saw was the idea that they used recovering people to teach it, but that really made it even worse. The statements made were misleading at best and more often than not they were inaccurate. I really found the idea that you could get high now and use it later to re experience the high insane. I thought the program was irresponsible and was glad to see the study that showed it to be inaccurate. Donna A.

Anonymous said...

In response to Kristie's comment, I also found it interesting that the article also pointed out the scare tatics used and found that they were often counterproductive. I have never known of anyone being scared out of using alcohol or drugs. Donna A

jefN gadsden said...

Over 200 example educator thank you letters and student post-presentation praising the NDAP presentations and survey’s from 1,045 middle and high school students who reported positive drug knowledge and attitude one hour post-presentation. In other words, the schools and the students loved it and that’s good, the problem is the information is inaccurate. That shouldn't surprise anyone; the powers that be have been misinforming the public about drugs since their prohibition. I remember when I was in high school they tried to scare us with the old, “if you take acid you will have flashbacks for the rest of your life and you don’t want to be driving your family home from Grandma’s on Christmas Eve and trip out, wreak, and kill your children!” We now know that is incorrect along with other information like, “pot is a gateway drug.” Anyway, my point is we should cease misinforming people about drugs and drug use and try telling the truth. Here’s something else: at what point are we going to stop classifying everything as a drug (high fructose corn syrup, coffee, caffeine, tobacco, chocolate). Sorry, I got a little side-tracked. The program is ineffective and participant praise isn’t enough to classify it as evidence based. And if it lacks sufficient details to adhere to or can’t be replicated, then how are you going to it the same way twice? And why would you want to?

jefN gadsden said...

Kristie is correct, the article was interesting, but what's even more interesting is that the state of California allows the program in their school systems to lie to the students and they "love it." Then one contemplates the descent of this world and the basket in which we travel. It's hard to scare someone that believes they are invincible.

T M Morgan said...

To me, it is scary that this program was utilized in so many schools even though it had inaccurate and misleading information in it. It makes me wonder how many other programs are being used in our schools that are inaccurate or ineffective. As parents, we trust the school systems to educate our children and we are not there with them every day. It makes me nervous not knowing what kind of things my kids are being exposed to at school.

scarlett holt said...

I found the NARCANON evaluation to be interesting. As I read through the evaluation, I understood where the concerns of the evaluators were coming from, but overall, I felt that the program as supplemental to a school program could be effective. The common theme that I noticed as a point of criticism was a lack of evidence-base to offer accuracy of materials and information presented. Perhaps if the program could offer where/how the information was obtained it would gain more support from schools. Also, the use of "ex-addicts" as presenters was a concern. It is common for counselors to head groups for adolescent and adult programs to be recovering addicts themselves (Bradford, etc...). It would be beneficial for the NARCANON presenters to note this or to attempt to obtain sources from other programs to support this. Additionally, developmental appropriateness was mentioned. Common sense should guide most through this issue. The issue of "scare tactics" was also mentioned. Perhaps if the presenters would use the statements that the evaluators are referring to as attention-grabbers here and there,these statements would not have been viewed in such a negative light. I do not feel that they should be all together eliminated, as with teens it is sometimes beneficial to use dramatics... maybey not as much as these presenters. Finally, the use of normative perceptions was noted. This probably could be eliminated or altered, as privacy issues may effect the response rate. That is what I think of the evaluation.
Scarlett H.

scarlett holt said...

Re: kristie r

I also found the evaluation to be interesting. I liked that the evaluators were able to point out that some of the information was misleading and/or inaccurate (due to thier credentials and experience). I too found it impressing that the materials to be distributed were looked over,rather than just the presentation/program itself.
Scarlett H.

Anonymous said...

Conteria Williams, original post to the Narconon Drug Abuse Prevention Program
The knowledge and research material that is provided in this article is very outstanding. I had no ideal that there was any such program available to our children and especially starting in elementary school throughout high school. Through reading this material I was glad to see that the only individuals who are able to teach this material are trained professionals, which reminded me of Social Workers and how important it is to be competent in your area of expertise. Therefore, just knowing that the program is operated on such a professional level, would allow me as a parent to feel comfortable that the material that is presented is going to be done correctly.

Anonymous said...

Conteria Williams, comment to Kristie R.

I also noticed that within the article there were different inputs about just how accurate the information was and whether or not it was going to be helpful to the children in the long run. I personally feel that this is a great program, because just like anything else there is always clinches to work out. But I feel that if the program is given a chance to prove itself, just like Social Worker has to do, it can provide good outcome.

Anonymous said...

After reading the article, I wondered how many schools that utilize the services of Naconon Drug Prevention Program (NDAP) requested an evaluation of the program as the California Department of Education did as it is a huge responsibility on behalf of the education department to review the accuracy of information before presentation. In addition to the misleading and inaccurate information provided by NDAP, I would consider the effectiveness associated with the student’s ability to relate solely to adults, the identification of “an addict “as opposed to alcohol and drug use, the developmental and cognitive level of the presentation, and the point made regarding exaggeration or untruths which can discredit both the NDCP’s presentation and the school’s existing prevention program. EBP would definitely be a logical approach to seek a companion prevention program that would be consistent with and complement the existing school based prevention program to obtain their desired outcome.

LDW

Anonymous said...

In response to Kristie’s mention of scare tactics in the article, it may be effective with young children but many times discredits the educator and can encourage children to prove you wrong by means of developing or increasing behaviors.

LDW

Anonymous said...

RESPONSE
In response to Kristie R: I agree that the article was interesting (anytime you have something linked to Tom Cruise can be unpredictable) and that some of the information was inaccurate and misleading. However, I am not surprised. One thing about the field of substance abuse is that it seems to be filled with half truths and inaccuracies. Do they sometimes work? The answer is yes. Do many people also become sober on their own without professional intervention? The answer is still yes…evidence indicates this. The bottom line with any intervention is that we owe it to our clients to present factual information and not resort to gimmicks and scare tactics and insult their intelligence.

ORIGINAL POAT
I think the panel of reviewers was well qualified to conduct the critique of this program; at least their credentials suggest this. What they found is probably similar to other programs treating drug and alcohol abuse. One disturbing finding is that the credentials of Mr. Hubbard and the others involved are a mystery. Also, the author of some of the material is not listed. However, Mr. Hubbard does appear to cite himself as a source. One first thing that strikes me is when it claims that Narconon is a secular program, but is based on the writings of the founder of the Scientology religion, L. Ron Hubbard. I would imagine there are some similarities between the two and the drug treatment material is not void of his spiritual insights. The program did not alter their presentations to reach the appropriate age groups. They used a one-size-fits-all method which is wrong. They found the program to be full of medical and scientific inaccuracies. There were misleading statements and inferences. The authors or credentials were not identified. It does not reveal whether the materials underwent any kind of scientific scrutiny. Overall, I think this intervention is inappropriate on many levels. I am also surprised that it was used in a school as part of their curriculum. Could this program actually help someone in a different environment? Probably so. It is not evidenced-based and there is most likely not very many state or federally funded programs that would support this. On the other hand, AA is not either. As with many things, there may be some nuggets of value. Take what you can and leave the rest. The propaganda does not appear to have reached the level of Reefer Madness though.
Matt G. (gadsden)

Tiffiney Brittingham said...

Narconon Drug Prevention Program could have it pros and cons. It could completely scare school children away from drugs or it could give them the idea that if they did drugs, it is possible to recover. I don't know if scare tactics are the way to go for drug awareness. However, no matter the pros and cons of the program the results are a fact, the program was ineffective.

Tiffiney Brittingham said...

I agree with almost all the comments. The article was interesting. I can't believe that a lot of the presentations to the children were misleading. Although the idea of the program was meaningful, it really didnt help children to receive false information and using the scare tactic strategy hardly ever works.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Linda B. I was very concerned with the fact that some of NDAP's information is inaccurate information and contains misleading statements. The adolescent stage is a very improtant time in a child's life and this type of program is definately needed, but the information needs to be accurate and easily absorbed by the youth. I did like the fact that former drug users were involved as long as they are willing to share their personal story of addiction and how it negatively affected their life. It is also VERY important that children be encouraged to ask questions after the presentation. Robin G.-Gadsden

SWilliams said...

Jeff, I have to agree with you about the powers that be, misinforming the public. I’ve seen too many people that are in positions of power that have good intentions; however, they are easily influenced. There are lot of people/agencies that have their own agenda to push, accurate or inaccurate, and they don’t care who or what happens as long as they get what they want. In this situation, like some others, it’s our children and adolescents that are caught in the crosshairs and the ones that will ultimately suffer.

SWilliams said...

The only thing that I could say after reading this article was WOW… There were so many different red flags about his program. I think that allowing children to hear about the dangers of drugs from recovering addicts can be a good thing; however, to rely on this as the sole deterrent is a poor choice. I can’t believe that the California School System would allow this program in their schools. When a program has this many different aspects that are not researched based, I have issues. How does this program expect to be effective when they don’t approach the children with developmentally appropriate language about drugs? Then there is the issue of the many different misleading and inaccurate information about the effects and dangers of drugs. Let’s face it now days; our children are more educated than some adults. Some of the children who are given this presentation could have already search the internet or found other resources and know that they are being told inaccurate information. Where are the social workers, teachers, medical professionals, law enforcement, etc., that are trained professionals and have accurate knowledge about the effects of drugs. They should be the ones presenting the information, not “trained ex addicts.” Another red flag, the program trained these “ex addicts.” I have to say that I’m glad that the students and teachers who wrote in thank you letters enjoyed the program, although I have to wonder if they were just glad to get out of class for that time period.

David L. said...

The article pertaining to the Narconon Drug Abuse Prevention Program was interesting to read. I can respect the efforts made in the school system to attempt to prevent drug abuse issues, but I’m not convinced that school age children will clearly understand the premise. Honestly, what raised a red flag to me was the issue of the NDAP materials not addressing the developmental characteristics and cognitive levels of the student learners. Moreover, I cannot understand how a curriculum can be established without taking into consideration the developmental and cognitive factors that are involved with the client.
David L.

David L. said...

Linda, I agree with your statement about using former drug abuser with school-age children. I do believe this style of prevention would be effective in addiction recovery programs, but I do not know if this would not be a form of validation in a young mind of a school age student. However, when working with younger children we have to find creative ways to effectively prevent and intervene with issues such as drug/substance abuse.
David L.

Anonymous said...

I personally didn't find this program to be beneficial in substance abuse recovery. Having worked in substance abuse, I can't see how this program could bring lasting results. Also, I found it to be misleading and inaccurate on even more issues than stated in the article. Further more, the idea of little or no group therapy, information only or using scare tactics to help addicts is ridiculous in my opinion.
Faye

Anonymous said...

Yes, and way to go Donna! Having worked with Donna in substance abuse, I certainly agree with her. This program in my opion is irresponsible and ridiculous! This is just how I feel and what I have seen in the area.
Faye

Stu J. said...

I am pleased to learn of the initiative and se it brought to the public school system in much of California. I can appreciate the value of prior drug users presenting information, but am surprised by the requirement for such presenters. I appreciate the broad-based reach to elementary, middle, and hig school students. I appreciate the review of the program as well.

Stu J. said...

In reply to Linda b, I can well imagine that materials used were pre-screened by the California school system and wonder to what extent this may have influenced the integrity of information presented? Obviously I do not know this, but it is imaginable.

chadknight said...

This evaluation was really disturbing. I really hope that students in California are not still exposed to this program. The intervention used scare tactics and presented a ton of inaccurate information. How is that supposed to "prevent" anything. The school system administrators who praised the program are probably former "war on drugs" proponents. If we know these things don't work, why do we keep doing them? On a personal note, I do know someone who went to a NARCONON rehab center in California and has been clean for many years since. Go figure.

chadknight said...

In response to Kristie: I couldn't belive the program's statements about vitamin deficiencies either. I found it hard to believe that a school system would allow such curriculum to be presented to their students.

T M Morgan said...

I am acually learning quite a bit from some of the posts...who knew that acid wouldn't make you trip years later? There really is a lot of misinformation out there when it comes to drugs. We end up believing what we are taught in school and unless we come across contradictory information later on, those faulty beliefs stick with us into adulthood.

Walter L. said...

Walter L. said... a large percentage of the information presented in this article held no scientific proof. The Doctors and PHD's were unknown and they have no other writings. We must understand this program was written by L. Ron Hubbard. Faith-base organizations rely on their faith to bring about change.

Walter L. agrees with t.m. morgan how would the california state school board allow unproven and inappropriate information to be presented to school age children.

Anonymous said...

This article points out some of the flaws of this program. It is scary to think that the inaccuracies noted were being taught to school kids. A program such as this should have ongoing literature evaluation that would have caught some of the problems. While I am not well versed in substance abuse treatment, I wonder what the real impact is on the school children. I can remember having prisoners come to my elementary school and talk with us about staying out of trouble, but did it have an impact. I know the schools don't do that anymore. Scare tactics definitely should not be used with the program. Not sure the school children are able to "grasp" that concept yet.
Angel-Tuscaloosa

Anonymous said...

Regarding Donna A
Scare tactics are often counter productive-totally agree. Tell an elementary age child that they can die from caffeine and they may take it to the extreme. The whole message about drug use can get lost because of a scare tactic.
Angel-Tuscaloosa

Gina Smith said...

Original:

After seeing many progam evaluations that are positive, it was somewhat refreshing to see that the process can detect inaccuracy and ineffectiveness in various programs that are presented to our society. Also, it should serve as a reminder that certain programs may get rave reviews, but careful scrutiny of the information presented is needed.

Gina Smith said...

Response:

As I read over the responses to this assignment, I find myself agree with the majority. Someone should have checked the facts that were to be presented before allowing the presentation to occur. I think that using recovering addicts as presenters would be a good thing, if information was presented that shows they are the exception, not the norm, when it comes to drug and alcohol abusers. I am not sure of the statistics, but believe that there are many more non recovering addicts than recovering. I don't really believe in the "scared straight" approach and think that presenting real facts and truth would be much more effective.

Tysie Baker said...

The Narconon Drug Abuse Prevention Program Evaluation has a long way to go in order to prove its effectiveness. It seems that the program has some valid points that would provide valuable information to students or those who are currently in a drug rehabilitation program. What seemed amazing to me was that the information provided informed those in the program about the affects that drugs, alcohol, and tobacco has on the body. Although, there was not any evaluation used that would promote this study being effective from a research point of view, it does however offer information to assist those battling addictions of drugs, alcohol and nicotine. I believe it is wise to use this program as a preventive method.

Tysie Baker said...

I agree with Jeff, the article is very interesting, but it is amazing that the California School System would allow for this information being taught in the school system. It is imperative that they revisit this program immediately and find a more suitable programs (that would target drug use) to be taught in the school system.

amyh-gadsden said...

This approach appeared to be very inappropriate. The statements made were misleading and could often cause confusion with children. There are so many things children are faced with in this day that the wrong information regarding such an important subject could be very damaging to them. I was glad to see the study showed it to be inaccurate.

amyh-gadsden said...

In response to TM Morgan: I also agree that is was upsetting that this prgram was used in so many schools even though it had inaccurate and misleading information in it. It is important for the school systems to educate our children with information that has been proven to be accurate due to so much misleading information on the internet and everywhere else.

Sara S. said...

Original posting

Well,
I hope I don’t get myself in trouble on this blog. I have some serious issues with this NARCONON program. I am usually skeptical of anything that Ron L. Hubbard does, especially if it has to do with Scientology. I think I have a problem with the way some of the information is presented in the program because I have such an extensive medical background. I have always been taught, and I believe, that there is a chemical problem in the brain that can lead to drug and alcohol abuse. I also believe that these conditions are medical problems and need to be treated medically. I am all for holistic treatments if they are proven to be safe and effective, but as far as drug and alcohol detox it needs to be done the correct way with medical supervision. I think the main issue I have with the information is one that is stated in the article, that a lot of the information is “over generalized or exaggerated”.

Sara S. (Tuscaloosa)

Sara S. said...

Response Posting

In response to Donna A’s comment,
I completely agree with you that this program is ridiculous. It doesn’t seem to be founded on any evidence based practice. It seems to me like that Ron L. Hubbard guy just decided to make some stuff up and present it as fact. This is misleading and scary! I found it interesting that you said recovering addicts teaching the courses actually made it worse. This was an interesting article to read and I, like you, am glad it showed this program to be inaccurate.

Sara S. (Tuscaloosa)

amanda said...

I am shocked that a program that has inaccurate and misleading information would be acceptable. Makes you wonder how many other programs out there are inaccurate or misleading? The program is taught to school aged children in one to eight sessions. The sessions are taught by recovering drug addicts. I think that could be a good and bad thing. You do not want the children to think "well he is ok, so if i use drugs for just a little while, then i will be fine as well". However, the story may touch several children and keep the from ever trying their first drug. I think the program has a good message, however. you should not be allowed to use inaccurate information when working with people, especially children.
Amanda H

amanda said...

I agree with Amy H. This misleading information could confuse children. The children need to know the difference between prescribed drugs and illegal drugs.

Anonymous said...

This was a very interesting article and one that concerned me because it was conducted by ex-users. The only reason I say that is because if there are kids in the audience who currently use or thinking about using, they may listen to the stories and say, "you used and survived so can I". The misleading information and scare tactics were also a concern. I truely believe in drug education for our children so they can be aware of what to look for, be trained to say no, understand consequences and receive training from qualified trainers who can provide accurate information. I admire anyone who has come through an addiction and able to abstain but their presentations may be more appropriate for those currently receiving drug treatment.
C. Paulk

Anonymous said...

Re: Linda B's comments
I agree with Linda that the presenters were not appropriate for school age children but should share their experiences and how they overcame their addictions with those currently in a drug treatment program.
C. Paulk

Karen P said...

I think that this article magnifies the importance of examining and evaluating the efficacy and integrity of programs and services offered, in this case to our children. This article revealed the potential dangers associated with providing information that is not accepted or recognized as medically and scientifically accurate, is misleading or exaggerated, and is not age appropriate. Additionally, many of the presenters (trainers) are reformed drug addicts, which I definitely agree can provide the wrong impression to developing, school-aged children. I don’t know much about the research or writing of L. Ron Hubbard, so I guess I am curious about what makes him an expert on drug rehabilitation, education, and prevention. I think what bothered me most about the program was its extensive use of reformed drug addicts as presenters (trainers), and the negligence of not utilizing age appropriate program materials, particularly since this program was targeting elementary, middle, and high school students. Don’t get me wrong, I think there are opportune times when personal testimonies and/or advice from someone that has survived or recovered from a certain traumatic experience or deviant behavior can and should be used. However, the circumstances and the audience must be assessed for appropriateness. Additionally, how do you effectively train and promote understanding to elementary, middle, and high school students using the same developmental level of information (e.g., handouts, videos, etc…)? These are just 2 of the problems I saw with the program. Fortunately, an evaluation of this program was conducted to highlight some major problems surrounding its use in the California Education System.

Karen P said...

Response to Chad:

Chad, “disturbing” is an ideal word to use to describe what was discovered from evaluating this program. I can’t recall if the article mentioned how long the NARCONON program had been used, but it would have behooved this educational system to have conducted a detailed and thorough critique and evaluation of all the facets of this program, including its successes and/or failures within other school systems.


Karen P.

nikkig said...

In response to Kristie R,
It's not so far fetched that some of the "scare tactics" used in NARCANON wer counterproductive. There has been lots of research done that shows that many of the scared straight programs are not conducive to long term positive results.

nikkig said...

What sticks out for me about the NARCONON is the emphasis placed on it as a supplement to the school's already established drug prevention program. There was nothing to directly address how or if the program is to be used in schools who do not already have a drug prevention program in place.
So who is this program to serve and benefit? What demographic does it reach?

bekkah_s said...

Narconon seems to be a flawed program for educating about drug use/abuse. As CHKRC pointed out, there are several flaws and biases of the program. I think that Narconon's treatment techniques could be dangerous for a heavy drug user who is trying to detox. Because the program is not led by professional personnel, it is concerning that there might be deaths as a result of their treatment techniques. Although some people seem to really feel that they benefit from spiritual based programs, I think that these programs can be dangerous if not combined with professional expertise.
I think that this program could also be inappropriate for some age groups. I am curious to know what grades are targeted for this presentation. I think that it could be quite scary for a child to hear an adult using drugs talk about how they almost died several times if they are not old enough to understand the concept of death. I think that it could also be traumatic for young children who have a loved one who is using drugs to see a testimony from a recovering addict who is being dramatic about their experience.

bekkah_s said...

I agree with Donna A.'s comments about the recovering addicts who serve as teachers. I think that it might be helpful for older teenagers and adults struggling with addiction to hear from someone who has experienced addiction. However, it would depend upon the message to whether or not it could be considered a useful and appropriate tool.

Taylor said...

Quite honestly, when I read this article I couldn’t help but notice my own personal biases. At first, when I began to read the sentence “Narconon is a secular program...” I thought to myself “wow good for them”… but then when I finished reading the sentence “… based on the research and writings of L Ron Hubbard, who also founded the Scientology religion.” I thought “hmmm... I don’t know about this.” I think as social workers it is important for us to be aware of our personal biases and address them so that we may provide the most effective services for or clients. For example, in this situation I realized my own personal opinion of L Ron Hubbard and the Scientology religion should not affect my opinion of this article, so I continued to read. However, I do think it is important to note that my initial skepticism was in some way validated later on in the article regarding the program’s inaccurate and misleading presentation of information.

Taylor said...

I agree and disagree with Jeff from Gadsden. I too am tired of everything being classified as a drug. I do not think that something should be considered a drug just because some people over indulge in it (i.e. chocolate and high fructose corn syrup). However, on a side note, I do think “pot” is a gateway drug and I think it has led a lot of people down slippery slopes into serious addictions. Some ( or even many) people who “smoke pot” may not chose to experiment with other drugs, but several people who are addicted to serious narcotics starting their drug exploratioms with marijuana.

Debbie Walker said...

The study regarding the effectiveness of NDAP revealed that the much of the materials used in the program were inaccurate and misleading. These students deserve better! I hope that the results of the study have helped the providers of the prevention services to search out for evidence-based interventions/educational materials.

Debbie Walker said...

I agree with Kristie I could not believe that this evaluation revealed the amount of inacurate information offered to adolecents participating in this program.