Oldal 56 [56]
54 = USING INTERPRETATIVE PHENOMENOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
perienced problems with SC use). In addition, people who use SCs recreation¬
ally or who are not in treatment may understand their experiences differently.
An additional important limitation is that our study participants had assumed
but were unable to confirm that they had been using SCs. Therefore, the ex¬
periences may vary depending on whether they had actually been using SC
or maybe another substance, e.g., URB-579 (see (Nakajima et al., 2013)) or
various other chemicals that have been found on synthetic cannabis products
(Castaneto et al., 2014; Dresen et al., 2010).
The narratives of drug use experience (such as drug “taking over” or “hi¬
jacking” personality) reflect the subjective views of the respondents, and this
may be in part a result of the treatment setting, as well. Further research to
explore the experiences of people who use SCs and not in treatment for drug
problems is suggested. During the interviews, the participants of this study
solely focused on the effects of the drug use, so an additional limitation of the
study is the absence of information how other factors, such as individual
factors, and biopsychosocial, social, and cultural contexts might shape the
effects and harms of SC use. An additional limitation could be the absence
of reports of other drug experiences which were not as emphatic in the ac¬
counts as experiences of SC use.
The importance of other factors in the examination of drug use is increas¬
ingly being recognized on research on other drugs. Duff (2007) used the word
“assemblage” to describe drug use as an act that is a network with many per¬
sons and highlighted the context’s impact on drug use practice and experience.
The framework of “risk environment” developed by Rhodes (2009) describes
drug harms as products of social situations and environments in which indi¬
viduals participate. These suggest the shift of responsibility for drug harms
and the focus of harm reduction from the individual alone to social and
political institutions which have a role in harm production. In Hungary, there
is a noticeable growth of new psychoactive substance use, while availability
of harm reduction services is very limited (Gyarmathy et al., 2016; Rácz, Csák,
et al., 2016).
3.5. CONCLUSIONS
Our study suggests that the comparison of SCs to cannabis may be misleading:
many people who use SCs, smoke them as an available alternative for cannabis
and/or other drugs, but the use of SCs is often associated with more negative
experiences (that are different from other drug experiences). Due to the rapid
development of effects, participants had difficulties interpreting or integrating
their experiences. Since these experiences are mostly unknown and unpre¬
dictable, a forum where people who use the drug could share their experiences