I think that's my final point. Without a firm belief that any data I present will be acceptable, it's not really worth my time and trouble to acquire hard to find data for an internet argument.
If you want to see how bad the meth problem is in Southwest Missouri, you can easily see for yourself by driving through some of the town around Springfield.
This isn't made up by people looking to pad their pockets, it isn't hyped to promote new laws. It isn't being overblown.
But then myself and all the other people who live out here in the midst of it are unreliable sources.
Sorry I live in AZ I don't know which organizations gather useful data about Missouri, you live there, you figure it out. Refusing to present data to back up your point and trying to blame the other person is just chickening out.
I'm not driving through any part of Missouri, and even if I did that would be purely annecdotal and the plural of annecdote is not now nor has it ever been fact.
It is made up by people looking to pad their pockets, it is hyped and that hype HAS promoted new laws. The speed thing gets overblown every few years, this is the fourth time I can remember the news splashing horror stories about meth taking over the country, they were wrong the first three times, the pattern says they're wrong again.
Again the plural of annecdote isn't fact. So you've seen some nasty things in your time, maybe you're just an unlucky person, maybe you're drawn to nasty things. I've seen some nasty things in my time too, I don't assume they're the norm because the data available says they aren't.
discostu named two possibilities: "a medical organization who's working the data in a way that's sane, a recovery organization that's not tightly associated with AA (who is famous for cooking data every chance the get)." So stop dodging and start supporting your claim.