Or so says Slate's editor at large, Jack Shafer, in a recent article. He tears Newsweek a new one for its sensationalist (and some would say shoddy) cover story on methamphetamine. It's the best critique I've seen so far.

Some highlights:

if meth is America's most dangerous drug, how many people has it killed? Newsweek doesn't bother to explore the topic, perhaps because it's so hard to pin down...If meth is really the most dangerous drug, you'd think the magazine would have provided some sort of body count.
[snip]
In 1965, the federal government tried to reduce the flow of legal amphetamines into the black market by passing the Federal Drug Abuse Control Amendments, but the law had an unintended effect...By cutting the legal supply to a trickle, the government signaled to drug dealers--and would-be drug dealers--that they could collect substantial profits from an established clientele if they started manufacturing amphetamines.
[snip]
In the mid-1960s, just before the government declared war on amphetamines, the average user swallowed his pills, which were of medicinal purity and potency. Snorting and smoking stimulants was almost unheard of, and very few users injected intravenously. Today, 40 years later, snorting, smoking, and injecting methamphetamines of unpredictable potency and dubious purity has become the norm--with all the dreadful health consequences. If the current scene illustrates how the government is winning the war on drugs, I'd hate to see what losing looks like.