Abstract
Prevention of substance abuse is often seen as a positive health policy per se. Several examples are given, however, where large preventive measures in the field of substance abuse did not show the intended result; some were even associated with the opposite of the intended effects. Thus, the usual standards of evidence-based medicine should also be applied to prevention, and preventive activities in the field of substance abuse should be evaluated for their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Counter-arguments to this position are discussed.