Summer. 1987. Four albums are released to varying fanfare.

Guns N Roses: Appetite for Destruction (7/21), Michael Jackson: Bad (8/31) , Motley Crue: Girls, Girls, Girls (5/15), and Whitney Houston: Whitney (6/2).

If anyone would have guessed that all the original members of both the Crue and GnR would outlive both MJ and Whitney, I’m guessing they’re also lottery winners. In fairness, according to Behind the Music, Nikki Sixx died (twice) from Heroin OD but was revived; and Steven Adler is not exactly in “great shape”;

but you get the point.

How can this be? They have all had drug problems, albeit in varying stages of their careers. By all accounts, the lifestyles of these two factions differ remarkably. It got me thinking if the difference in lifestyle actually has anything to do with longevity. Is there a “sweet spot” in physical and psychological development where drug abuse is least impactful? An age where the rigors of alcohol and narcotics will do the least damage to the body? A harm reduction theory in which your body may even be able to recover from the effects of abuse and dependence?

I am in no way advocating the abuse of alcohol, narcotics, or any other substance. But I am suggesting that there is an age range where the body and mind are best equipped to handle the destructive nature of substance abuse.

Obviously, we run into a couple of problems.

First, there is the problem of mental and physical development. We don’t want young kids experimenting with or abusing drugs because adolescent brain function and development is much too important to be left to chance. Putting young adult brain and body development at risk is irresponsible and irrational. However, brain and body development is typically complete by early 20s, so I would suggest starting there. The other problem is that abusing drugs always poses a risk. Depending on a number of physical, hereditary, and external factors, some people will never be able to avoid negative outcomes or even death. The Len Bias story illustrates this point perfectly.

Secondly, while we can’t be sure of the history of drug abuse for both MJ and Whitney, it was widely reported that they both began abusing drugs later in their lives.

The sad irony is that typically we associate maturity with improved decision-making and risk adversity. While we may never know the real history of their drug abuse, for the purposes of this argument, let’s call it marginal. While we can’t ethically administer illicit drugs to anyone, let alone an age range sample, I’m sure there are enough subjects with self reported drug use and dependence at various stages of their lives to create a data set.

The third problem begs the question of a “sweet spot” entirely. Does drug use early in life simply prepare you for a lifetime of drug use? In the sense that your body builds a tolerance, is it just more tolerant of toxic substances if it turns out that you have used them for decades?

Or, like nicotine addiction and cigarette smoking, is there a harm reduction strategy at which your body can repair and rejuvenate itself to the point where the damage of abusing narcotics is non-existent?