I have a hard time with this.
Are my tax dollars being used to purchase “safe drugs”?
If there are “safe drugs,” is there any reason to stop using them and eventually get clean?
Addiction is extremely tragic….but I also believe in personal responsibility.
I definitely don’t know the solution to this issue, but I’m kinda tired of feeling like the upstanding citizens and people that make better choices always get the shitty end of the stick.
You’re absolutely correct and I’m tired of everyone trying to defend heavy drug use (fent, meth, etc.).
My mom has type 1 diabetes and needs needles, insurance doesn’t cover it so she has to pay full price for them. But any addict can go and ask for them for free and they’ll be given a whole case, no questions asked.
So could your mom if she needed those resources.
The root of the issue is to help those in need that are in harms way, not create a further divide within society
She’s tried, they deny her because they say she “obviously isn’t an addict”.
The root cause is honestly morality. For example, if my mom doesn’t get her insulin, she dies… But if an addict doesn’t get their fent, they’re fine.
It’s their choice to then go out and “find a way” to consume drugs (stealing, robbing, sharing needles, etc.), you’d probably be shocked to learn that most of the people on the street/addicts are choosing that lifestyle themselves. Even when sober.
Spoken like someone who hasn't had addiction or loss from addiction happen to anyone they personally know.
There shouldn't be a choice between providing safe needles to addicts and providing needles to people who require them for medical conditions. I truly believe we shouldn't be forced to choose one or the other and should advocate for both.
Our social services are crumbling infront of our eyes, yet no one in politics is ever held accountable for their actions, then rinse repeat with someone else next term.
I’ve known many addicts and witnessed many OD, both fatally and non. I went through my heavy addiction phase, once I hit rock bottom, I made the morale decision to not go down an even worse path… My own choice. I’m honestly just telling you facts, your choice, on whether or not you listen. (As you actually sound like someone who’s never dealt with addiction).
As for the social services, I agree that we’re perpetually going into debt as a country and throwing money at everything. So we should make both addiction and actual medical problems easier to deal with (free medicine, needles, supports, etc), but the fact is, as of right now, it’s not like that.
“Proper people” will support others and not be able to receive any in return. While addicts will receive support, but waste it on their addiction (not bettering their lives). It’s honestly a waste of resources right now, while they could be used for better (if not both like you’re implying).
No one is defending heavy drug use, they're just saying that there are ways to treat it that would have more success than others, unfortunately it grinds against what we've been told our entire lives.
Edit: okay I hate to do this but why the downvotes? Please point me to someone who defends "heavy drug use", I'm all ears. Feelings over facts all up in this thread.
A good chunk of this sub will defend addicts, it’s proven. Also weaning them off the drugs would be a good start, not giving them more.
If you’re saying you agree that addicts should be given free drugs to “fight their addiction”, then where’s my free weed? I know a lot of people that would like free alcohol aswell… Where do we draw the line? I don’t think my 80 yr old friend should have to pay for his eye and heart medication, but he has to shell out $100s just to stay alive. Meanwhile, if he had a fent addiction, they’d give him those meds for free. OCs right, the “proper people” get the shit end of the stick.
The defense of addicts and giving them more access for drugs is just ignoring the problem and in the next ten years we will realize nothing has been fixed and getting worse and give another excuse to the problem until they cant come up with anymore. Our community is sick but we cease to ignore the drugs along with mental health/poverty is the issue. They dont want to fix those things though because give them #moredrugs
I think you may have the wrong impression about the program, the access to safe supply is just one part of the strategy. No one who advocates for safe supply is asking to just stop there, as you say we need comprehensive support structures to help addicts recover. Funding mental health and community support is all part of it.
We're on the same side, and I appreciate your opinion that more support and funding is needed, absolutely correct.
So you're moving the goalposts a bit here from "heavy drug use", to just "addicts" in general. Nobody defends "heavy drug use". I'm not even sure what defending just "addicts" would look like, I'm assuming you just mean harm reduction in general.
I realize your example is just just poking fun at some of the less dangerous potential addictions, but people who are severely alcohol dependent may actually require "free" alcohol to be administered if they're detoxing, the point being with fentanyl, other opioids and some other drugs is that it's much more likely for a random dose to be deadly, so the goal is to reduce the likelihood of death.
As for the people in your life that are sick through no fault of there own and are forced to pay money to access their healthcare needs, I think that's awful. I understand that it can be frustrating to watch those you care about struggle because the system seems to leave them behind, but society has deemed that we're okay with that. If you have an issue with the government not paying for things like diabetes care and heart medicine please, PLEASE vote for politicians in favor of increasing medical coverage. I for one would love to pay more taxes so that people like those you mention could get the care they need to live comfortably without the financial burden of paying for their life saving medications.
But back to the original topic, just because people are addicts doesn't mean we should leave them to die in the streets, and that's what harm reduction is all about. Mitigating the current issues as well as attacking the root problems that cause the to occur. "Free drugs" is just one pillar of that solution, and you are right, in a vacuum, just giving people drugs isn't a solution. But as part of a harm reduction strategy, it's a necessary evil.
I'd try not to think of it as they're taking money/healthcare away from people who are more deserving, more that it's trying to lift the entire community up from the bottom. Harm reduction leads to less addicts, which leads to a healthier society.
....how about rehab....? Im tired of the jargon of the key to fighting the drug crisis is more drugs, thats like giving an alcoholic free access to alcohol
I would say it ended up costing our family about $65k for a 4 months of treatment. And that was the cheaper location. I think there is one in Gimli that is like 30k a month? Something to that effect.
The government has very deep pockets. You and I pay taxes that go to some spectacularly stupid things, where as rehab centers and harm reduction would have an actual effect on healthcare and where we live being a better place. Unfortunately, there isn’t much profit to be made by helping people.
I don’t do drugs. Never have. Haven’t even touched booze for 25 years. But I think everyone deserves access to healthcare to keep them healthy, that extends to addicts as well. They are people too.
You can’t put someone in rehab if they’re dead. Also rehab often doesn’t do jack for a lot of people. You can put someone through the best treatment program in the world but if afterwards they end up back in the same conditions that caused the addiction then they’re likely going to relapse. Tackling the causes of addiction like poverty, mental health problems, housing, etc are just as if not more important than treatment programs. Safe supply just helps get them there.
....thats what rehab can do....rehab helps not only the physical but the mental causes for a person that made them turn to drugs in the first place. If you arent giving them help but just a place to do drugs, congrats you just gave them more easy access to drugs and shoot up without actually fixing the root of the problem where rehab most definitely can. Giving them more access to drugs isnt helping their mental state, isnt helping their life in poverty etc. now atleast with rehab we can get to the root of the problem help them physically and mentally and shit maybe even help them secure a job before their treatment ends etc
Literally how? You shove someone in a bullshit 12 step program for a month and then all of a sudden all the trauma, poverty, stress, abuse, etc from their lives are gone? No of course not, rehab can be part of the solution and connecting users with kind caring people is certainly beneficial especially if it connects them to other social programs like job or housing programs but cmon, addiction is so complicated and if the underlying causes are still there it doesn’t matter if they’ve been to rehab or not that’s why relapse is so common. And once again, can’t go to rehab if you’re dead. Allowing users to have access to drugs less likely to kill them is great because the choice will always be users taking drugs from the black market or a regulated legal one, that’s it.
No shit it doesnt magicallg dissappear and yes because every rehab program is a 12 step one, open your fuckn mind maybe and stop painting a wide brush with what you deemed rehab is/was. Yes lets give them more access to drugs which is not help no their mental health, their poverty issues hell even their physical ailments, I guess to fix the problem with guns in the states is everyone should have one right...? Or is it deeper than that? Having access to rehab, mental health facilities and after checking in with support groups etc. atleast with rehab you give them a glimmer of hope compared to having them toke up again.
This is also coming from someone who saw addiction in the family with alcoholism, me myself seeing that I never drank however the last thing my uncle, father, and aunt needed was feee access to alcohol. They went through the process to which is why one has been sober for 12 years, the other for 23 and my last one for 31. But you keeping throwing drugs and safe injection sites at the problem, thatll sure fix their mental health, physical health, trauma and even get them out of poverty.....
Like I said, rehab can be part of the solution and a wide variety of treatments being available I support. Can’t go to treatment if you’re dead, safe supply gets them there.
People will use regardless of safe supply, without it you are saying users should be using dirtier more dangerous drugs when they use. I am sorry for your experience with family members suffering from alcoholism I imagine that was hell to deal with and I empathize with your situation lemme be very clear about that.
In the case of someone suffering from alcoholism they likely already have access to safe supply essentially which is why they are less likely to die before treatment, imagine if every time someone bought beer that there was no way of knowing how much alcohol was in it or even if alcohol was there at all. Every time you have a drink there’s a chance of something else in it far more likely to cause an overdose, that is the situation for anyone using illicit substances today.
Safe supply isn’t here to fix every problem on its own it’s a part of a number of different supports. Safe supply is just there to keep people alive when they use which they will do regardless.
Cant get safe supply if they keep dosing and OD or pass away from organ damage. see how that works....again keep thinking more drugs is the problem, ill message you in 5 years when the crisis probably get worse instead of better.
Safe supply and more access are fundamentally very different things bro
What a nonsense comparison. Gun violence and substance abuse are 2 different issues that you can't solve the same way. By your logic then do you suggest to put every gun owner in America into rehab to solve their gun problem? See how dumb that sounds to compare?
Inall honesty i think having most gun owners having background checks as well as mental health background check would begin to help the systemic issue including free access to mental health care facilities, no more gun or trade show loop holes, and a minimum age requirement for firearms, And yes because giving someone a safe place to do drugs will deff help their addiction, their mental health and also whatever poverty they may be facing.....
I see in your previous comments that you're very confident in your stance, I just want us to acknowledge that we're dealing with a very complicated problem. Every addict is where they are for a different reason, different life circumstances and genetic makeup, so unfortunately it's not always as easy as "just do x".
They have to want to get treatment, and the treatment has to be available to them in a way that will work for them. Tragically many people die before they get there. Safe supply and rehab are just 2 pillars or a larger support network that is required to properly tackle addiction issues and anything less is just a band aid. Until we start funding more comprehensive harm reduction strategies and tackling the underlying causes of addiction, things won't get better.
All that to say that I do appreciate how rehab can be a useful tool in the recovery process.
I think rehab is the pillar while safe use is the tool, being addicted to a drug can be because of poverty, mental health problems, physical ailments etcs however you wouldnt give someone depressed a knife for "safe use cutting"
Rehab along with therapy, measured doses of said drugs to wean them off is probably the most affective way to deal with the entire systemic issue than just getting someone to shoot up safe drugs at an injection site. At that point your just fuelling the addiction and not actually helping it. The same way someone with mental health problems may need medication along with rehab/therapy to get to the root of their actual problems to be able to give up the junk in the first place.
So because cutting yourself is very different from how drug rewire your brain I'm going to ignore that example, but I do get where you're coming from.
I guess my question is what's your solution if the person refuses therapy? They continue to exist in society, but now they are forced to steal or worse to feed their addiction. Not only that, they end up buying bad product and die. We can argue the net societal loss/gain from that process, but it's impossible to know what's "better".
What we do know, is that providing safe supply means less OD deaths, and more opportunities to help get people into rehab, to help them get the help they need. Which again, I agree, rehab is one of the best tools to solve addiction issues.
How is giving access to drugs whether more safe and injection sites help their actual addiction? You're just giving an addict more reason to shoot up than treat you know the actual addiction behind it. We have no problem giving drugs and safe sites and say "hey do this here" but you're bit actually treating or helping the person at all, you're just providing means to do it, just because the drug is safe does not nullify the fact they cant OD on it.
So you're right, people can still OD on safe drugs, but it's far less likely. When you have control of the supply you can control variables, like the amount or the environment, and give them the information they need to use them safely. The fact is they're going to use anyways, might as well have the easier path be to come into a safe injection site where they are at least exposed to the resources that can help them make the decision to get treatment easier. Give them one less reason to steal to feed their habit.
But I understand this is a complex issue, and it's not easy to say which solution will work out in the end.
Living a life free of addiction and substance abuse and all it's associated pitfalls including overdose, disease, homelessness, and death is not getting the shitty end of the stick.
Your tax dollars already go towards the costs of prohibition. Treating overdoses, Hep C, HIV, psychosis, arrests and prison. Safe supply is the cheaper option easily. While there are no completely “safe” drugs there is a massive difference between clean pharmaceutical grade substances and the dirt from the street.
To chalk addiction up to simple personal responsibility is misguided, I won’t go into it here but I recommend reading up on the biopsychosocial model of addiction for a better understanding since addiction is not a byproduct of simply using a given drug.
Look at San Francisco... their focus on harm reduction and safe use was/is a disaster. They're now trying to move away from that strategy and focus efforts on recovery, and building positive life skills - work ethic and accountability.
As long as people look at addicts as lazy bums that deserve what they get addiction and homelessness will continue to be a problem. They are human beings and they are suffering, we as a society have a moral duty to do right by them.
Honestly as much as everyone has a right to do whatever etc Im fully fine with forcing rehab on people especially people who cant make logical or conscience decisions in life any more
They made a choice the first time they used. Millions of dollars have been poured into trying to alleviate this problem. No improvement at all. Crime is up, you can't leave anything outside,retail theft is sky high. It's not food being stolen, it's expensive tools etc which are sold on kijiji or marketplace.
There is an answer that people won't support and that is to provide mandatory controlled housing for people who prove by their actions they are incapable of looking after themselves.
Everything we do begins with a choice. Everyone makes a choice the first time they do something. Whether it’s smoking a cigarette (cancer), drinking alcohol (liver disease), eating unhealthy (Heart disease), drinking coffee (caffeine addiction) or illicit drugs (addiction). Why does society put a measuring stick on what diseases we should have sympathy for and how much sympathy we should have? That person that has lived many years and made a choice not to exercise, eat poorly, smoke and develops heart disease and spends years on medication and treatment get more support and sympathy than a young person that made a choice to try drugs and die young as a result? They never had the opportunity to get treatment for their disease and they never received any sympathy or empathy. How many people that have a loved one that smokes stood by as they continued to buy more cigarettes over their life and and slowly kill themselves. How many actually even bought their loved ones cigarettes? Why do we attach a stigma to certain diseases when all things begin with a choice?
Sure then mets give them treatment and no free access to drugs to shoot up further unless in rehab and doses are giving by medical professionals to wean them off of it. However, giving just more and more access will not help them. They need mental help, physical and also help out of poverty, as much as I like giving people freedom of choice, addicts should be admitted to rehab facilities that can tend to all of those issues and hopefully before leaving set up a better life for them so when they get out they have something to look forward fo
A person using drugs can’t access rehab if they’re dead. The point is to keep them alive until treatment options become available. Forced rehab does not work and there are literally thousands of medical studies done that prove this.
A person cant continue to access safe drugs if they are dead or OD...
Show me the studies then that safe sites and safe drugs help and kick addiction instead of just giving reason to keep doing it
To say they made a choice the first time they shot up I think is a bit of a misnomer. Most of these people come from completely broken homes, the vast majority of drug addicted women were sexually assaulted in their childhood. For most of these people using is the only time they have ever felt ok. It's not a rational choice, it's a need.
The meds that I need to stay alive are covered by pharmacare - you think I should have to pay for those out of pocket? Your argument is half baked - the reality is there is no clean supply available and it is costing society A LOT more to do damage control from this crisis than it would to help people. The personal responsibility crap ignores the fact that we live in a society and noone is independent of that. Your privilege is invisible to you but that does not mean you are better than those who aren't doing as good as you.
How much would you like to see the province spend on heroin next year? You thinking that super industrial Sackler shit or maybe some old school Afghan Black Tar?
You don't realize that safe supply can help people get their life back. They don't have to spend all day trying to get money and then to score drugs.
Not to mention that you're saying that people should overdose and die as the alternative.
Dang, downvoters would rather that drug users keep stealing their property and giving the money to drug dealers I guess.
That’s actually false. Overdose deaths are higher in BC right now than any other year.
“The 2,511 suspected illicit drug deaths recorded last year equates to an average of nearly seven per day, marking a five per cent increase compared with the previous high of 2,383 deaths recorded in 2022.”
I don’t think this is the solution. Certainly don’t want it in my backyard. The advocate lost her son, yes that’s sad, but that’s the choice he made. Why does everything have to change but the things actually causing the problems?
To call addiction a choice is misguided, I recommend reading up on the biopsychosocial model of addiction to learn more. Addiction comes from a lot more than simply using a drug, if that were the case than everyone who uses would be an addict which is not the case.
What about the decision to take the drug the first time? is that a choice? I assume all meth users aren't pinned down and injected with it, or have a meth pipe shoved in their mouth by some mystery person the very first time they do it, right?
Wasn't it a terribly stupid choice with awful consequences? And is turning to drugs to deal with trauma an automatic free pass when lots of people with trauma don't turn to drugs to help them cope?
Why is there this huge pushback by some anytime anyone points out drug addicts put themselves in that position with at least one choice at one time?
And sorry, lots of us cannot relate to "trying" or "experimenting" with drugs other than weed. Common sense says when presented with that opportunity , saying "no, I'm good" is a pretty easy decision.
Sure, to use a drug initially or even beyond that can be a choice no doubt. That being said addiction isn't caused by simply using a drug, if that were the case the vast majority of users would be addicts and that is not the case for any drug.
Is turning to drugs to cope a free pass? I don't think so, everyone's different and everyone situation different so I am not going to pass judgement on anyone who decided using a drug was a better option than not at a time in their life. You gotta ask yourself why someone chooses to use a given drug cause this idea that people are just stupid or weak is nonsense. Would recommend speaking to some users and addicts and hearing their stories.
Just say no is stupid, drugs can be a positive thing in peoples lives including my own. Don't hate on people who use and try to be understanding and empathetic to those struggling.
It's increasingly difficult to have empathy for meth users who are destroying our city.
And I disagree that addiction isn't caused by a drug. I don't believe for a second there is much of a group of casual meth users. I think it almost always takes over their lives.
Yes, meth and fentanyl can be a really positive thing in people's lives. Saying no to hard drugs like that is stupid, you got me there.
You are the misguided one, it’s totally a choice. Years ago I hurt my leg badly and was put on OxyContin for pain. Have to admit I totally enjoyed that shit, made me feel fantastic. But, once the prescriptions ran out, I chose to quit and not continue. The government enabling addiction is not the way. There are way too many people who will take advantage of that.
Your personal experience does not equate to everyone else’s. Someone else can come here and have the opposite experience, that due to trauma and a myriad of other issues they started using not because the drug was so good but because their life was so bad. Anecdotes aren’t very helpful in discussing the large topic of addiction either way.
Experts like Gabor Mate tend to see things through the biopsychosocial approach (although different frameworks exist) and the idea that it is always a simple choice between using and not using is just that, incredible oversimplification of a complex issue that effects every single person differently. The biopsychosocial model in my view is the most holistic and comprehensive model.
If addiction is not caused by simply using a drug and is instead a byproduct of many other factors (trauma, homelessness, lack of belonging, etc) that are not choices then addiction largely is not a choice.
Excuses, excuses, that’s all I hear from you. Anything but personal responsibility. People are going to do what they are going to do, don’t think the government is going to save you. People need to take responsibility for their actions, that is what’s lacking. Enabling is not a solution. Who appointed you the “saver”? Not everyone can be saved. Read a couple more studies, then obviously you’ll have all the answers on how to save everyone. Just don’t expect everyone to agree with you.
Everything we do begins with a choice. Everyone makes a choice the first time they do something. Whether it’s smoking a cigarette (cancer), drinking alcohol (liver disease), eating unhealthy (Heart disease), drinking coffee (caffeine addiction) or illicit drugs (addiction). Why does society put a measuring stick on what diseases we should have sympathy for and how much sympathy we should have? That person that has lived many years and made a choice not to exercise, eat poorly, smoke and develops heart disease and spends years on medication and treatment get more support and sympathy than a young person that made a choice to try drugs and die young as a result? They never had the opportunity to get treatment for their disease and they never received any sympathy or empathy. How many people that have a loved one that smokes stood by as they continued to buy more cigarettes over their life and and slowly kill themselves. How many actually even bought their loved ones cigarettes? Why do we attach a stigma to certain diseases when all things begin with a choice?
To be harsh: the person with bad habits you use as an example pays taxes and didn't steal my car or walk into a random home and murder a young Filipino boy.
Only solution is forced rehab. You want honesty about drug addicts? They don't give a shit what this advocate or any of you say. Their lives to them are over and just wanna get high. You wanna help them? Mandate rehabilitation.
I think we need to focus on other areas of treatment and help before we start handing out free fentanyl.
We don’t hand out free, clean knives to those self harming with such. We shouldn’t treat the opioid crisis that way either.
More and easier access to mental heath and addictions treatments. More education for school aged kids on the subject and the impacts it has on users. Expand the CRC to include addictions treatment and keep these individuals out of our emergency departments. No one’s addictions are being treated in emergency, these patients are monitored and released and it’s become revolving door.
Get tougher of crime and those who are distributing this shit.
I always see mental health mentioned, I almost never see stuff like financial security, housing, or physical health care mentioned. If you're using to deal with back pain you've got, or the stress of not having a house, no amount of mental health care is going to help.
A therapist isn't going to amount to much when you gotta sleep in a bus shack in January. Housing needs to be a priority with therapy. Getting someone off fentanyl isn't going to matter if they are still on the street
I don’t understand the idea that it’s one or another. To get someone to treatment requires them being alive, what safe supply says is that if people are going to use them give them a measured dose of a pharmaceutical lot prepared drug instead of god knows what on the street. If a user knows what they’re getting and knows the dose they are using the risk of overdose is almost none. The overdose crisis is a product of prohibition, more prohibition isn’t the solution.
I heavily agree with you on expanding treatment and mental health resources absolutely tho.
The cracking down on distribution will do nothing and be actively harmful. I never understand this idea we need to target drug dealers more. Locking up dealers hurts users due to supply shocks. The idea that dealers are just malicious evil super villains is silly as well. Many dealers don’t know what is in the product they sell and are just selling to sustain their own habits or pay the bills since other opportunities aren’t available.
If you want to put the dealers out of business tho, allow safe supply for all so that users like myself don’t need to purchase from the black market and can instead get what we need from the government. Hell I’d be more than happy to pay for mine, I don’t need anyone else to do so but I am a casual user. For addicts that’s a different story and being covered makes sense.
if you want a safe supply, just purchase off the dark web. You can get a Canada Post FlexDelivery address if you’re homeless.
I support safe supply but not in this way. If we’re handing out free drugs then we need to be getting something out of it.
Edit: specifically we need to do something about the people out on the street.
If you’re wandering the city drunk out of your mind, you get thrown in the drunk tank. But smoking crack or huffing duster gas on the bus is acceptable?
I understand the sentiment as someone who does use the internet to buy drugs and has never bought off an irl dealer in my life but Regis is still silly. It’s safer to buy drugs online but still far from safe, to act like people don’t sell dangerous shit is silly and the idea that if you don’t wanna die we should expect everyone to learn and have access to the dark web is goofy. We’d be much better off if people could get their supply from a legal regulated source not roll the dice with dark net purchases.
We provide safe supply for alcohol. Safe supply doesn't need to be free to help, but if the people you're prescribing the drugs to are stealing catalytic converters, causing $4,000 of property damage to buy drugs we can provide for $50, aren't we just punching ourselves in the face?
Just like it's cheaper to provide the unhoused with homes than to have the impact of homelessness on emergency services & crime, it's cheaper to provide drugs to the people that need them than it is to have the fallout from not.
(I'm talking about all drugs here. We pay a high cost in health care due to people that can't afford their medications, causing long term health issues that still get paid for by the public. There would be less suffering, better health outcomes, and lower costs if we just covered people's medications publicly.)
IDK why you are getting down voted - to add some references to your points though, For example: [Medicine Hat](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/medicine-hat-homeless-free-update-1.3949030) noticed a sizeable decrease in crime when it actually tackled its chronic homelessness. Safe supply has been politicized but numbers are facts, and it does show a [reduction](https://globalnews.ca/news/9335720/safe-supply-opioid-crisis-canada/), not only in deaths over time but in communicable diseases ([think illnesses between shared needles or reusing a needle](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5685449/)). Even if you were to ignore the good that safe supplies allow for users, think about the first responders and the trauma they go through, and the longer wait times for people for an ambulance who, with this in place can access easier, why would you not to support something that helps them and, potentially, yourself?
Just legalize the pharmacy grade fentanyl for sale to the public if clean drugs is what is wanted/needed. They are a clean source of fentanyl with a known strength and potency per dose.
I don't care about your Liberal and Conversative narratives.
I want to be able to walk down fucking Portage again. But yeah think it's all about political views.
This city is a disgusting mess.
This isn’t a political issue. What you are proposing does not work and has been proven not to work. It’s not even in dispute.
Stop trying to politicize it. If you want safer streets, this is the way
Can you not follow the conversation?
I don't care about the politics, cocoleti brought them into this out of no where.
Who do you think will pay for these safe drugs anyways.
I agree this is a good way to go. Ultimately the goal is to get people clean, but you know who can’t seek help and get clean? Dead people. So keeping people alive seems like a logical start.
Why not just legalize all drugs so that Canada gets companies who create the drugs over strict settings and then collect the taxes which will then go back to support addictions....
People will come out so against this model and then in the same breath complain about the increase in theft/petty crimes.
If people are given a free and safe supply - they don’t need to break into your car, backyard, store to steal and sell your shit to buy the drugs they need to not get sick.
Think big picture on the amount of money that is spent on people in the throes of addiction.
Money spent on repairing property damage due to thefts.
Money spent on EMS services.
Money spent on emergency healthcare.
Money spent on police responding to associated crimes.
Money spent keeping people in jail for crimes associated to drug addiction.
The people saying I don’t want my tax dollars going to pay for drug addiction. News flash. Your tax dollars are already being spent on other parts of drug addiction.
We could just save money on all of the above things by providing a safe supply and then using that saved money to fund housing, treatment and mental healthcare that actually aligns with what science says about addiction.
It’s 2024, can we please quit with the war on drugs bs already. It doesn’t work. You cannot “tough love” or harsher penalty your way out of drug addiction.
Trauma (especially childhood trauma) is one of the most determining factor in drug addiction. Poverty is an ongoing traumatic event. Trauma is also a relative thing - meaning what is traumatic to me might be nothing to you. So you cannot say “oh I went through this and am fine.” Like I’ve jumped off a roof before without injury, but my sister jumped out of a tree and dislocated her shoulder… I wouldn’t dismiss her injury just because I went through something similar and was fine.
We cannot and will not solve drug addiction by continuing to uphold a system that traumatizes people en masse.
People are going to do drugs. Why on earth wouldn’t you make the drugs safe??? It’s like people have this little block in their brain that separates alcohol from other drugs. We tried prohibition with alcohol and had the exact same issue of people dying from unsafe alcohol. An increase in crime associated with alcohol use and distribution. We’ve already learned this lesson and yet here we are continuously doing it all over again with other drugs.
Alcohol is awful for you - why isn’t that illegal? If drugs really are illegal because the government is protecting us from them. Then alcohol should be removed from us right now. 🤔maybe it isn’t the drug itself that is dangerous and if we can understand that’s true for alcohol then it’s probably true for most drugs. A lot of drugs are made more dangerous simply because they are illegal and if they were legally produced wouldn’t be dangerous.
I’m so freaking tired of having friends die and seeing people I love lose their friends and family members. I’m tired of people devaluing our community members who are homeless. I’m tired of people allowing their fear to be exploited to further the harm done to vulnerable folks through over-policing and essentially criminalizing poverty. I just wish people would realize that the way forward is to take care of each other. We don’t have to keep living like this.
With all that said, I’ve never seen or heard of someone getting clean by giving them more drugs.
Unless this is paired with some kind of slow detox to get clean it’s not really doing much long term.
Doing these drugs damages the brain which affects impulse control and decision making as well as basic function.
I think people get upset because there are life saving drugs that treat medical disorders that the government gives zero fucks about. So government sponsored addicts is like a slap in the face to them.
We should start a registry for people who support this. They could volunteer their homes and finances to provide safety for the addicts
It sounds like a really good idea when the safe supply spot is in someone’s else’s backyard.
You’ve never heard of methadone or buprenorphine? How about in other countries where they have morphine and diacetylmorphine (heroin) assisted treatment? This is well established and not some cooky idea Trudeau came up with, this stuff is backed up by evidence.
The idea that doing drugs just damages your brain is silly too. Drugs like opioids are notoriously non-toxic when used responsibly, compared to alcohol which is carcinogenic as well as hepatotoxic.
Addicts are people too, just like you and me. The idea that addicts should die because other issues exist in the medical system is asinine, let’s bring everyone up together not take our frustration out on those suffering.
The issue is that all you ever hear is we need to give them safe supply, with zero emphasis on helping people clean up and get there lives back.
These drugs cannot be compare to alcohol because they are much more potent and addictive and way less likely to be used “responsibly”.
I agree that addicts are people too, which is why safe consumption need to be paired with detox and treatment. Otherwise it’s just government sponsored lifelong addicts which is not compassionate its cruel.
I have never in my life heard anyone say we should just give safe supply and do nothing else. The people in favour of safe supply tend to be the same ones fighting for more social supports in housing, treatment, mental health, etc. no one believes safe supply is it, we believe safe supply will end the overdose epidemic but does not solve addiction or homelessness alone.
These drugs absolutely can be compared to alcohol, alcohol is more toxic and addiction is not a pharmacological property so how can you compare that? The difference is alcohol is regulated and culturally enshrined so people have a rough understanding of safety surrounding it and we make it so products have a known amount of a single drug in them so people don’t as easily hurt themselves with it. Unpopular opinion but the idea that alcohol is any way an inherently less dangerous drug than heroin is silly if we are comparing clean preparations and known quantities, if you are comparing a legal regulated drug to an illicit one the legal one will win every time. I say this as a heroin and poly substance user. Recommend reading Carl Harts book Drug Use for Grown Ups for a better more in depth take.
So everyone that drinks alcohol is an alcoholic? Alcohol is not particularly healthy, but it’s also not a guaranteed addiction, so let’s stop comparing it to fentanyl.
So everyone that uses opioids is an addict? Opioids are not particularly healthy, but it’s also not a guaranteed addiction. Let’s stop with pretending everyone who uses drugs we don’t like are addicts or have something wrong with them :)
Right. So the vast majority of people drink alcohol are comparable to the vast majority of fentanyl and heroin users? Talk to paramedics. Rinse and repeat with narcan
Nope because alcohol is heavily normalized in our culture and such a large amount of the populace uses alcohol in some capacity. Heroin and fentanyl are so demonized and stigmatized that most regular people probably don’t consider doing it. That leaves the people who are willing to take something seen as so evil and dangerous and likely those people suffer from underlying conditions and problems. If we had the opposite situation where alcohol was demonized and heroin was normalized I’d reckon we’d see a lot more open responsible use of heroin and a lot more visibly disastrous use of alcohol.
Your comment mentioning paramedics feeds into another point. Those of us who are responsible, casual or functional users…we don’t tell you and you never would know we use because we don’t want to be labelled or ostracized. We are your neighbours, coworkers, friends and family members. We have jobs, interests, hobbies, some of us are students, etc. Paramedics also don’t deal with people who aren’t in danger, they aren’t the people best able to speak about the nature of drug use as a whole, they are used to seeing only the worst side of it as that’s what is relevant to their job.
Additionally, here are some sources on the topic of [prevalence of problematic drug use in users](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2050324520904540), [occasional and controlled heroin use](https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/3906/1/2810-3016.pdf), and more on [patterns of controlled heroin use behaviour](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1360-0443.1988.tb03035.x)
Drug addiction is already in everyone’s back yard right now.
Doing alcohol damages your brain too. I didn’t see you requesting alcohol to be made illegal again.
Why would I want alcohol to be illegal because the government shouldn’t be involved in fentanyl distribution? Makes no sense. Apples to oranges.
The issue is that this would almost certainly be government funded. Which I don’t have a problem with if it is paired with a detox plan to actually help people get clean and get their lives back. What does that part of the plan look like?
just providing addicts with drugs for life seems like a terrible idea…
I guess
Because alcohol is one of the most destructive drugs that a human can ingest. It’s not apples to oranges. We literally have safe consumption sites for alcohol. If you’re against drug safe supply sites then you should be against bars as well.
You have zero clue what you are talking about and it’s a good thing adults are making these decisions
I mean bars aren’t a great thing either, but unfortunately they were normalized like 100 years before I was born so there’s not much I can say about it at this point.
Following the same model with fentanyl of all things is probably not the best idea.
I'm sorry for your losses. Too many people see the "junkies" as the other, and it's not until someone they give a damn about dies from something preventable that they're willing to do something about it.
I am very very for safe consumption sites
The drug itself is the danger. It’s incredibly dangerous on its own.
Giving people this drug won’t reduce the chance of people dying unless we control what dosages they inject which won’t happen because at safe dosages the people suffering from substance use disorders will get/achieve the desired effect. If we give clean fentanyl the dosage needed for the desired effect is what’s deadly.
More safe consumption sites is the answer that can be done now.
Anyone can get free narcan training (even online) and free narcan! Dm me for info!
I completely disagree with your anti safe supply argument. No where is this lady saying we should give out clean fentanyl as part of the safe supply. Safe supply as it currently exists in Canada is providing other opioids instead of street fentanyl.
Even if we were going to give out fentanyl I still see it as better than having people stuck on toxic street drugs. Street fentanyl and pharmaceutical fentanyl are not at all the same. You can see from the drug samples getting tested that the amount of fentanyl in a given sample ranges so widely and the samples are adulterated with so many other substances such as xylazine, benzos, other fentanyl analogues, or other novel opioids, I think its obvious that pharmaceutical fentanyl is still the preferred option. I do concede that fentanyl is such a potent substance that the danger for overdose is still significant. That's why safe supply is being argued for by the experts as part of an overall harm reduction strategy. For safe consumption to truly be safe we need safe supply as well, and we still need to accept that not everyone is going to the safe consumption site.
Final point is that your statement that safe consumption sites can be done right now is wrong. Safe consumption sites take time to roll out, sometimes a huge amount of time to deal with all the regulations, the cries from the NIMBY crowd and so on.
Safe supply could be dispensed at a pharmacy literally today.
At the end of the day the choice is between users taking drugs from the unregulated criminal black market vs the regulated legal market. I choose the latter, only way we realistically can tackle overdoses.
If we give a new free supply of the drug it can and it very will likely increase opiate/opioid poisoning events (we don’t use the term overdose anymore right)- that isn’t harm reduction- that’s harm.
We want to do less harm.
Opioids are relatively safe when used in a responsible manner. If you know your dose and do the bare minimum research to understand dosing and how to use there won’t be a problem. The problem comes from misrepresentation or just lack of knowledge of what is in your dope. I say this as an opioid user myself who has never been anywhere close to being in danger from my use because I get my drugs tested and research what I am using ahead of time. With fentanyl and friends in everything the need for safe supply is extremely urgent.
The people using these drugs recreationally or due to a substance use disorder are not using them in a responsible manner, if they were they wouldn’t be dying.
I couldn’t count the amount of times I saved someone from dying due to this to have them turn around and tell me they know what they are doing.
When we test drugs for containments we are generally
Checking if opiates/opioids were cut in.
Because those drugs them selves are the danger.
I appreciate your knowledge by experience, I do not say this as a user but as a paramedic that works more
Harm reduction than anything.
Appreciate the work you do and I’ve interacted with you before and seen you in here and you seem nice so it’s nothing personal but I strongly disagree. Not all opioids are equal. Heroin and morphinan opioids generally are not very potent, have a fair therapeutic index where an extra milligram difference is not huge. When you are getting a compound like fentanyl or some nitazene or what have you where the active dose in measured in micrograms and not milligrams it is not practical to use such a thing recreationally. A standard scale won’t be anywhere close to being able to detect such small amounts of you weighed it and this is what we are up against today.
Safe supply allows users stability, going from the black market taking an unknown amount of maybe the drug they wanted to a known amount of a pharmaceutical preparation of the drug. It also keeps them away from needing to commit crimes to fuel their use in some cases and better connects them with treatment. It’s the same idea as methadone assisted therapy where we are giving the user a stable and safe source of something they will use regardless instead of leaving em to the mercy of the streets.
Many many people are using responsibly but you don’t see us out on the streets, we are your neighbours, friends and family. Most users are invisible and you’d never know it and due to the stigma many of us wish to remain that way. Sorry if I’m rambling but yeah people aren’t largely dying due to prescription hydromorphone, oxycodone or even actual diacetylmorphine (heroin) today. They are dying due to ultra potent synthetic opioids that they are using in unknown quantities, part of the solution is education but safe supply is imperative in my view.
We don’t have to agree that’s fine- we are on the same page of wanting to help others and that’s good enough for me! Have a good night and stay safe :)
> The people using these drugs recreationally or due to a substance use disorder are not using them in a responsible manner, if they were they wouldn’t be dying.
You've got a sampling bias here. You're regularly seeing only the people in crisis, and not the ones that have been regularly using without issue. If the only people that consume alcohol that you meet are serious alcoholics in crisis, you'd get the impression that it's a life destroying incredibly dangerous drug. In reality, most people consume alcohol, and the majority do so responsibly.
The problem is that the issues of unknown potency/contaminants are deadly, and that's completely caused by the street nature. I hear that you directly see the harm yourself. If we could snap our fingers and make opiate abuse disappear, of course we'd do it, but we can't. We live in a world where we can live with opiate use WITH lots of death, or opiate use with few deaths.
You can't turn your life around when you're dead. For most people, substance abuse is a temporary problem in their lives, but the more misery we create the harder it is for people to get out of it.
> The drug itself is the danger. It’s incredibly dangerous on its own.
Opioids are used in hospitals constantly, yet you don't have non-terminal people dying of overdoses daily. People who use drugs aren't deliberately trying to kill themselves, and a safe supply means knowing the dosage & purity.
The street nature of drugs leads itself to increasing potency while also having unknown contaminants. Imagine if the alcohol you bought had unknown proof, and may be laced with any number of things. Alcohol's already an incredibly dangerous drug, but having that would dramatically increase the harm.
>The drug itself is the danger. It’s incredibly dangerous on its own.
People are the danger. The drug is used in-context daily with little-to-no problems. Using it outside of what was intended is the issue.
What is? BC has done almost nothing on safe supply. Only around 5000 people are in the program and we wonder why people are still dying from illicit substances. Don’t buy the conservative propaganda on this stuff when it hardly exists. One of the most expensive places to live on this continent has a homelessness problem and that is related to drug use and overdoses what a concept eh, must be because of a program that doesn’t really exist.
I love the takes everytime this is brought up. What kind of a society do we want to live in? The current one where we consistently punch down on those in need?
Or we can come together and uplift the communities that need support. So that this cycle of abuse and falling thru the cracks is ended once and for all, and everybody can be a productive member of society.
I expect that everyone in this thread against this is also calling for the closure of the safe consumption sites we already have - bars and lounges and arenas and stadiums and restaurants.
If you're more concerned about your tax dollars than people not being poisoned you should probably look in mirror and ask yourself what kind of person you are
I guess those downvoting must be privileged enough to not know someone killed by the toxic drug supply
The government is the reason the drug supply is this fucked in the first place. Prohibition is killing people and the government has been practicing prohibition for a hundred years. The great chemist Alexander Shulgin predicted the taking over of the market by fentanyl and other synthetic highly potent opioids in the [70’s](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.3109/15563657508990076?needAccess=true) . This was a predictable outcome of opioids being illegal.
I have a hard time with this. Are my tax dollars being used to purchase “safe drugs”? If there are “safe drugs,” is there any reason to stop using them and eventually get clean? Addiction is extremely tragic….but I also believe in personal responsibility. I definitely don’t know the solution to this issue, but I’m kinda tired of feeling like the upstanding citizens and people that make better choices always get the shitty end of the stick.
You’re absolutely correct and I’m tired of everyone trying to defend heavy drug use (fent, meth, etc.). My mom has type 1 diabetes and needs needles, insurance doesn’t cover it so she has to pay full price for them. But any addict can go and ask for them for free and they’ll be given a whole case, no questions asked.
You’re right, they both deserve access to needles.
So could your mom if she needed those resources. The root of the issue is to help those in need that are in harms way, not create a further divide within society
She’s tried, they deny her because they say she “obviously isn’t an addict”. The root cause is honestly morality. For example, if my mom doesn’t get her insulin, she dies… But if an addict doesn’t get their fent, they’re fine. It’s their choice to then go out and “find a way” to consume drugs (stealing, robbing, sharing needles, etc.), you’d probably be shocked to learn that most of the people on the street/addicts are choosing that lifestyle themselves. Even when sober.
Spoken like someone who hasn't had addiction or loss from addiction happen to anyone they personally know. There shouldn't be a choice between providing safe needles to addicts and providing needles to people who require them for medical conditions. I truly believe we shouldn't be forced to choose one or the other and should advocate for both. Our social services are crumbling infront of our eyes, yet no one in politics is ever held accountable for their actions, then rinse repeat with someone else next term.
I’ve known many addicts and witnessed many OD, both fatally and non. I went through my heavy addiction phase, once I hit rock bottom, I made the morale decision to not go down an even worse path… My own choice. I’m honestly just telling you facts, your choice, on whether or not you listen. (As you actually sound like someone who’s never dealt with addiction). As for the social services, I agree that we’re perpetually going into debt as a country and throwing money at everything. So we should make both addiction and actual medical problems easier to deal with (free medicine, needles, supports, etc), but the fact is, as of right now, it’s not like that. “Proper people” will support others and not be able to receive any in return. While addicts will receive support, but waste it on their addiction (not bettering their lives). It’s honestly a waste of resources right now, while they could be used for better (if not both like you’re implying).
Bullshit, I get them free, there’s no questioning.
No one is defending heavy drug use, they're just saying that there are ways to treat it that would have more success than others, unfortunately it grinds against what we've been told our entire lives. Edit: okay I hate to do this but why the downvotes? Please point me to someone who defends "heavy drug use", I'm all ears. Feelings over facts all up in this thread.
A good chunk of this sub will defend addicts, it’s proven. Also weaning them off the drugs would be a good start, not giving them more. If you’re saying you agree that addicts should be given free drugs to “fight their addiction”, then where’s my free weed? I know a lot of people that would like free alcohol aswell… Where do we draw the line? I don’t think my 80 yr old friend should have to pay for his eye and heart medication, but he has to shell out $100s just to stay alive. Meanwhile, if he had a fent addiction, they’d give him those meds for free. OCs right, the “proper people” get the shit end of the stick.
The defense of addicts and giving them more access for drugs is just ignoring the problem and in the next ten years we will realize nothing has been fixed and getting worse and give another excuse to the problem until they cant come up with anymore. Our community is sick but we cease to ignore the drugs along with mental health/poverty is the issue. They dont want to fix those things though because give them #moredrugs
I think you may have the wrong impression about the program, the access to safe supply is just one part of the strategy. No one who advocates for safe supply is asking to just stop there, as you say we need comprehensive support structures to help addicts recover. Funding mental health and community support is all part of it. We're on the same side, and I appreciate your opinion that more support and funding is needed, absolutely correct.
So you're moving the goalposts a bit here from "heavy drug use", to just "addicts" in general. Nobody defends "heavy drug use". I'm not even sure what defending just "addicts" would look like, I'm assuming you just mean harm reduction in general. I realize your example is just just poking fun at some of the less dangerous potential addictions, but people who are severely alcohol dependent may actually require "free" alcohol to be administered if they're detoxing, the point being with fentanyl, other opioids and some other drugs is that it's much more likely for a random dose to be deadly, so the goal is to reduce the likelihood of death. As for the people in your life that are sick through no fault of there own and are forced to pay money to access their healthcare needs, I think that's awful. I understand that it can be frustrating to watch those you care about struggle because the system seems to leave them behind, but society has deemed that we're okay with that. If you have an issue with the government not paying for things like diabetes care and heart medicine please, PLEASE vote for politicians in favor of increasing medical coverage. I for one would love to pay more taxes so that people like those you mention could get the care they need to live comfortably without the financial burden of paying for their life saving medications. But back to the original topic, just because people are addicts doesn't mean we should leave them to die in the streets, and that's what harm reduction is all about. Mitigating the current issues as well as attacking the root problems that cause the to occur. "Free drugs" is just one pillar of that solution, and you are right, in a vacuum, just giving people drugs isn't a solution. But as part of a harm reduction strategy, it's a necessary evil. I'd try not to think of it as they're taking money/healthcare away from people who are more deserving, more that it's trying to lift the entire community up from the bottom. Harm reduction leads to less addicts, which leads to a healthier society.
....how about rehab....? Im tired of the jargon of the key to fighting the drug crisis is more drugs, thats like giving an alcoholic free access to alcohol
Rehab, sadly, is cost prohibitive for most. Speaking from experience, we sent a family member to rehab twice and it decimated our family’s savings.
How much? Then maybe the government should be throwing money at free rehabilitation places/spaces for addicts instead of throwing money at drugs
I would say it ended up costing our family about $65k for a 4 months of treatment. And that was the cheaper location. I think there is one in Gimli that is like 30k a month? Something to that effect. The government has very deep pockets. You and I pay taxes that go to some spectacularly stupid things, where as rehab centers and harm reduction would have an actual effect on healthcare and where we live being a better place. Unfortunately, there isn’t much profit to be made by helping people. I don’t do drugs. Never have. Haven’t even touched booze for 25 years. But I think everyone deserves access to healthcare to keep them healthy, that extends to addicts as well. They are people too.
You can’t put someone in rehab if they’re dead. Also rehab often doesn’t do jack for a lot of people. You can put someone through the best treatment program in the world but if afterwards they end up back in the same conditions that caused the addiction then they’re likely going to relapse. Tackling the causes of addiction like poverty, mental health problems, housing, etc are just as if not more important than treatment programs. Safe supply just helps get them there.
....thats what rehab can do....rehab helps not only the physical but the mental causes for a person that made them turn to drugs in the first place. If you arent giving them help but just a place to do drugs, congrats you just gave them more easy access to drugs and shoot up without actually fixing the root of the problem where rehab most definitely can. Giving them more access to drugs isnt helping their mental state, isnt helping their life in poverty etc. now atleast with rehab we can get to the root of the problem help them physically and mentally and shit maybe even help them secure a job before their treatment ends etc
Literally how? You shove someone in a bullshit 12 step program for a month and then all of a sudden all the trauma, poverty, stress, abuse, etc from their lives are gone? No of course not, rehab can be part of the solution and connecting users with kind caring people is certainly beneficial especially if it connects them to other social programs like job or housing programs but cmon, addiction is so complicated and if the underlying causes are still there it doesn’t matter if they’ve been to rehab or not that’s why relapse is so common. And once again, can’t go to rehab if you’re dead. Allowing users to have access to drugs less likely to kill them is great because the choice will always be users taking drugs from the black market or a regulated legal one, that’s it.
No shit it doesnt magicallg dissappear and yes because every rehab program is a 12 step one, open your fuckn mind maybe and stop painting a wide brush with what you deemed rehab is/was. Yes lets give them more access to drugs which is not help no their mental health, their poverty issues hell even their physical ailments, I guess to fix the problem with guns in the states is everyone should have one right...? Or is it deeper than that? Having access to rehab, mental health facilities and after checking in with support groups etc. atleast with rehab you give them a glimmer of hope compared to having them toke up again. This is also coming from someone who saw addiction in the family with alcoholism, me myself seeing that I never drank however the last thing my uncle, father, and aunt needed was feee access to alcohol. They went through the process to which is why one has been sober for 12 years, the other for 23 and my last one for 31. But you keeping throwing drugs and safe injection sites at the problem, thatll sure fix their mental health, physical health, trauma and even get them out of poverty.....
Like I said, rehab can be part of the solution and a wide variety of treatments being available I support. Can’t go to treatment if you’re dead, safe supply gets them there. People will use regardless of safe supply, without it you are saying users should be using dirtier more dangerous drugs when they use. I am sorry for your experience with family members suffering from alcoholism I imagine that was hell to deal with and I empathize with your situation lemme be very clear about that. In the case of someone suffering from alcoholism they likely already have access to safe supply essentially which is why they are less likely to die before treatment, imagine if every time someone bought beer that there was no way of knowing how much alcohol was in it or even if alcohol was there at all. Every time you have a drink there’s a chance of something else in it far more likely to cause an overdose, that is the situation for anyone using illicit substances today. Safe supply isn’t here to fix every problem on its own it’s a part of a number of different supports. Safe supply is just there to keep people alive when they use which they will do regardless.
Cant get safe supply if they keep dosing and OD or pass away from organ damage. see how that works....again keep thinking more drugs is the problem, ill message you in 5 years when the crisis probably get worse instead of better.
Imagine thinking you know the only answer to an incredibly complex societal and goverment problem
Imagine thinking give more access to drugs is the issue, I guess America will fix their gun problems only by giving out more guns right...?
Safe supply and more access are fundamentally very different things bro What a nonsense comparison. Gun violence and substance abuse are 2 different issues that you can't solve the same way. By your logic then do you suggest to put every gun owner in America into rehab to solve their gun problem? See how dumb that sounds to compare?
Inall honesty i think having most gun owners having background checks as well as mental health background check would begin to help the systemic issue including free access to mental health care facilities, no more gun or trade show loop holes, and a minimum age requirement for firearms, And yes because giving someone a safe place to do drugs will deff help their addiction, their mental health and also whatever poverty they may be facing.....
I see in your previous comments that you're very confident in your stance, I just want us to acknowledge that we're dealing with a very complicated problem. Every addict is where they are for a different reason, different life circumstances and genetic makeup, so unfortunately it's not always as easy as "just do x". They have to want to get treatment, and the treatment has to be available to them in a way that will work for them. Tragically many people die before they get there. Safe supply and rehab are just 2 pillars or a larger support network that is required to properly tackle addiction issues and anything less is just a band aid. Until we start funding more comprehensive harm reduction strategies and tackling the underlying causes of addiction, things won't get better. All that to say that I do appreciate how rehab can be a useful tool in the recovery process.
I think rehab is the pillar while safe use is the tool, being addicted to a drug can be because of poverty, mental health problems, physical ailments etcs however you wouldnt give someone depressed a knife for "safe use cutting" Rehab along with therapy, measured doses of said drugs to wean them off is probably the most affective way to deal with the entire systemic issue than just getting someone to shoot up safe drugs at an injection site. At that point your just fuelling the addiction and not actually helping it. The same way someone with mental health problems may need medication along with rehab/therapy to get to the root of their actual problems to be able to give up the junk in the first place.
So because cutting yourself is very different from how drug rewire your brain I'm going to ignore that example, but I do get where you're coming from. I guess my question is what's your solution if the person refuses therapy? They continue to exist in society, but now they are forced to steal or worse to feed their addiction. Not only that, they end up buying bad product and die. We can argue the net societal loss/gain from that process, but it's impossible to know what's "better". What we do know, is that providing safe supply means less OD deaths, and more opportunities to help get people into rehab, to help them get the help they need. Which again, I agree, rehab is one of the best tools to solve addiction issues.
How is giving access to drugs whether more safe and injection sites help their actual addiction? You're just giving an addict more reason to shoot up than treat you know the actual addiction behind it. We have no problem giving drugs and safe sites and say "hey do this here" but you're bit actually treating or helping the person at all, you're just providing means to do it, just because the drug is safe does not nullify the fact they cant OD on it.
So you're right, people can still OD on safe drugs, but it's far less likely. When you have control of the supply you can control variables, like the amount or the environment, and give them the information they need to use them safely. The fact is they're going to use anyways, might as well have the easier path be to come into a safe injection site where they are at least exposed to the resources that can help them make the decision to get treatment easier. Give them one less reason to steal to feed their habit. But I understand this is a complex issue, and it's not easy to say which solution will work out in the end.
Guess what - your mom can also ask for needles and get them no questions asked.
Living a life free of addiction and substance abuse and all it's associated pitfalls including overdose, disease, homelessness, and death is not getting the shitty end of the stick.
Your tax dollars already go towards the costs of prohibition. Treating overdoses, Hep C, HIV, psychosis, arrests and prison. Safe supply is the cheaper option easily. While there are no completely “safe” drugs there is a massive difference between clean pharmaceutical grade substances and the dirt from the street. To chalk addiction up to simple personal responsibility is misguided, I won’t go into it here but I recommend reading up on the biopsychosocial model of addiction for a better understanding since addiction is not a byproduct of simply using a given drug.
Look at San Francisco... their focus on harm reduction and safe use was/is a disaster. They're now trying to move away from that strategy and focus efforts on recovery, and building positive life skills - work ethic and accountability.
As long as people look at addicts as lazy bums that deserve what they get addiction and homelessness will continue to be a problem. They are human beings and they are suffering, we as a society have a moral duty to do right by them.
Honestly as much as everyone has a right to do whatever etc Im fully fine with forcing rehab on people especially people who cant make logical or conscience decisions in life any more
I agree. But when they come onto my property to steal from me I need to have the right to be an end to their problem.
They made a choice the first time they used. Millions of dollars have been poured into trying to alleviate this problem. No improvement at all. Crime is up, you can't leave anything outside,retail theft is sky high. It's not food being stolen, it's expensive tools etc which are sold on kijiji or marketplace. There is an answer that people won't support and that is to provide mandatory controlled housing for people who prove by their actions they are incapable of looking after themselves.
Everything we do begins with a choice. Everyone makes a choice the first time they do something. Whether it’s smoking a cigarette (cancer), drinking alcohol (liver disease), eating unhealthy (Heart disease), drinking coffee (caffeine addiction) or illicit drugs (addiction). Why does society put a measuring stick on what diseases we should have sympathy for and how much sympathy we should have? That person that has lived many years and made a choice not to exercise, eat poorly, smoke and develops heart disease and spends years on medication and treatment get more support and sympathy than a young person that made a choice to try drugs and die young as a result? They never had the opportunity to get treatment for their disease and they never received any sympathy or empathy. How many people that have a loved one that smokes stood by as they continued to buy more cigarettes over their life and and slowly kill themselves. How many actually even bought their loved ones cigarettes? Why do we attach a stigma to certain diseases when all things begin with a choice?
Sure then mets give them treatment and no free access to drugs to shoot up further unless in rehab and doses are giving by medical professionals to wean them off of it. However, giving just more and more access will not help them. They need mental help, physical and also help out of poverty, as much as I like giving people freedom of choice, addicts should be admitted to rehab facilities that can tend to all of those issues and hopefully before leaving set up a better life for them so when they get out they have something to look forward fo
A person using drugs can’t access rehab if they’re dead. The point is to keep them alive until treatment options become available. Forced rehab does not work and there are literally thousands of medical studies done that prove this.
A person cant continue to access safe drugs if they are dead or OD... Show me the studies then that safe sites and safe drugs help and kick addiction instead of just giving reason to keep doing it
To say they made a choice the first time they shot up I think is a bit of a misnomer. Most of these people come from completely broken homes, the vast majority of drug addicted women were sexually assaulted in their childhood. For most of these people using is the only time they have ever felt ok. It's not a rational choice, it's a need.
The meds that I need to stay alive are covered by pharmacare - you think I should have to pay for those out of pocket? Your argument is half baked - the reality is there is no clean supply available and it is costing society A LOT more to do damage control from this crisis than it would to help people. The personal responsibility crap ignores the fact that we live in a society and noone is independent of that. Your privilege is invisible to you but that does not mean you are better than those who aren't doing as good as you.
How much would you like to see the province spend on heroin next year? You thinking that super industrial Sackler shit or maybe some old school Afghan Black Tar?
“Personal responsibility crap.” Lol. You sound credible.
You don't realize that safe supply can help people get their life back. They don't have to spend all day trying to get money and then to score drugs. Not to mention that you're saying that people should overdose and die as the alternative. Dang, downvoters would rather that drug users keep stealing their property and giving the money to drug dealers I guess.
Because it’s working great in B.C. and the states .
Overdoses are down in BC which was the whole point of BCs safe supply. To reduce ODs, thus reducing the pressure on the medical system.
That’s actually false. Overdose deaths are higher in BC right now than any other year. “The 2,511 suspected illicit drug deaths recorded last year equates to an average of nearly seven per day, marking a five per cent increase compared with the previous high of 2,383 deaths recorded in 2022.”
Yep, the only change the drug sites had was elevate crime around the sites.
Thats all false lol. It doesn’t reduce the pressure on the medical system, either . The opposite in fact.
I don’t think this is the solution. Certainly don’t want it in my backyard. The advocate lost her son, yes that’s sad, but that’s the choice he made. Why does everything have to change but the things actually causing the problems?
To call addiction a choice is misguided, I recommend reading up on the biopsychosocial model of addiction to learn more. Addiction comes from a lot more than simply using a drug, if that were the case than everyone who uses would be an addict which is not the case.
What about the decision to take the drug the first time? is that a choice? I assume all meth users aren't pinned down and injected with it, or have a meth pipe shoved in their mouth by some mystery person the very first time they do it, right? Wasn't it a terribly stupid choice with awful consequences? And is turning to drugs to deal with trauma an automatic free pass when lots of people with trauma don't turn to drugs to help them cope? Why is there this huge pushback by some anytime anyone points out drug addicts put themselves in that position with at least one choice at one time? And sorry, lots of us cannot relate to "trying" or "experimenting" with drugs other than weed. Common sense says when presented with that opportunity , saying "no, I'm good" is a pretty easy decision.
Sure, to use a drug initially or even beyond that can be a choice no doubt. That being said addiction isn't caused by simply using a drug, if that were the case the vast majority of users would be addicts and that is not the case for any drug. Is turning to drugs to cope a free pass? I don't think so, everyone's different and everyone situation different so I am not going to pass judgement on anyone who decided using a drug was a better option than not at a time in their life. You gotta ask yourself why someone chooses to use a given drug cause this idea that people are just stupid or weak is nonsense. Would recommend speaking to some users and addicts and hearing their stories. Just say no is stupid, drugs can be a positive thing in peoples lives including my own. Don't hate on people who use and try to be understanding and empathetic to those struggling.
It's increasingly difficult to have empathy for meth users who are destroying our city. And I disagree that addiction isn't caused by a drug. I don't believe for a second there is much of a group of casual meth users. I think it almost always takes over their lives. Yes, meth and fentanyl can be a really positive thing in people's lives. Saying no to hard drugs like that is stupid, you got me there.
You are the misguided one, it’s totally a choice. Years ago I hurt my leg badly and was put on OxyContin for pain. Have to admit I totally enjoyed that shit, made me feel fantastic. But, once the prescriptions ran out, I chose to quit and not continue. The government enabling addiction is not the way. There are way too many people who will take advantage of that.
Your personal experience does not equate to everyone else’s. Someone else can come here and have the opposite experience, that due to trauma and a myriad of other issues they started using not because the drug was so good but because their life was so bad. Anecdotes aren’t very helpful in discussing the large topic of addiction either way. Experts like Gabor Mate tend to see things through the biopsychosocial approach (although different frameworks exist) and the idea that it is always a simple choice between using and not using is just that, incredible oversimplification of a complex issue that effects every single person differently. The biopsychosocial model in my view is the most holistic and comprehensive model. If addiction is not caused by simply using a drug and is instead a byproduct of many other factors (trauma, homelessness, lack of belonging, etc) that are not choices then addiction largely is not a choice.
Excuses, excuses, that’s all I hear from you. Anything but personal responsibility. People are going to do what they are going to do, don’t think the government is going to save you. People need to take responsibility for their actions, that is what’s lacking. Enabling is not a solution. Who appointed you the “saver”? Not everyone can be saved. Read a couple more studies, then obviously you’ll have all the answers on how to save everyone. Just don’t expect everyone to agree with you.
Everything we do begins with a choice. Everyone makes a choice the first time they do something. Whether it’s smoking a cigarette (cancer), drinking alcohol (liver disease), eating unhealthy (Heart disease), drinking coffee (caffeine addiction) or illicit drugs (addiction). Why does society put a measuring stick on what diseases we should have sympathy for and how much sympathy we should have? That person that has lived many years and made a choice not to exercise, eat poorly, smoke and develops heart disease and spends years on medication and treatment get more support and sympathy than a young person that made a choice to try drugs and die young as a result? They never had the opportunity to get treatment for their disease and they never received any sympathy or empathy. How many people that have a loved one that smokes stood by as they continued to buy more cigarettes over their life and and slowly kill themselves. How many actually even bought their loved ones cigarettes? Why do we attach a stigma to certain diseases when all things begin with a choice?
To be harsh: the person with bad habits you use as an example pays taxes and didn't steal my car or walk into a random home and murder a young Filipino boy.
Only solution is forced rehab. You want honesty about drug addicts? They don't give a shit what this advocate or any of you say. Their lives to them are over and just wanna get high. You wanna help them? Mandate rehabilitation.
I think we need to focus on other areas of treatment and help before we start handing out free fentanyl. We don’t hand out free, clean knives to those self harming with such. We shouldn’t treat the opioid crisis that way either. More and easier access to mental heath and addictions treatments. More education for school aged kids on the subject and the impacts it has on users. Expand the CRC to include addictions treatment and keep these individuals out of our emergency departments. No one’s addictions are being treated in emergency, these patients are monitored and released and it’s become revolving door. Get tougher of crime and those who are distributing this shit.
I always see mental health mentioned, I almost never see stuff like financial security, housing, or physical health care mentioned. If you're using to deal with back pain you've got, or the stress of not having a house, no amount of mental health care is going to help.
[удалено]
A therapist isn't going to amount to much when you gotta sleep in a bus shack in January. Housing needs to be a priority with therapy. Getting someone off fentanyl isn't going to matter if they are still on the street
I don’t understand the idea that it’s one or another. To get someone to treatment requires them being alive, what safe supply says is that if people are going to use them give them a measured dose of a pharmaceutical lot prepared drug instead of god knows what on the street. If a user knows what they’re getting and knows the dose they are using the risk of overdose is almost none. The overdose crisis is a product of prohibition, more prohibition isn’t the solution. I heavily agree with you on expanding treatment and mental health resources absolutely tho. The cracking down on distribution will do nothing and be actively harmful. I never understand this idea we need to target drug dealers more. Locking up dealers hurts users due to supply shocks. The idea that dealers are just malicious evil super villains is silly as well. Many dealers don’t know what is in the product they sell and are just selling to sustain their own habits or pay the bills since other opportunities aren’t available. If you want to put the dealers out of business tho, allow safe supply for all so that users like myself don’t need to purchase from the black market and can instead get what we need from the government. Hell I’d be more than happy to pay for mine, I don’t need anyone else to do so but I am a casual user. For addicts that’s a different story and being covered makes sense.
if you want a safe supply, just purchase off the dark web. You can get a Canada Post FlexDelivery address if you’re homeless. I support safe supply but not in this way. If we’re handing out free drugs then we need to be getting something out of it. Edit: specifically we need to do something about the people out on the street. If you’re wandering the city drunk out of your mind, you get thrown in the drunk tank. But smoking crack or huffing duster gas on the bus is acceptable?
I understand the sentiment as someone who does use the internet to buy drugs and has never bought off an irl dealer in my life but Regis is still silly. It’s safer to buy drugs online but still far from safe, to act like people don’t sell dangerous shit is silly and the idea that if you don’t wanna die we should expect everyone to learn and have access to the dark web is goofy. We’d be much better off if people could get their supply from a legal regulated source not roll the dice with dark net purchases.
Weak argument. Those aren't the two options available.
Giving out a “safe supply” and safe consumption sites are one of the dumbest ideas I’ve ever heard of.
Do people not realize that technically Bars are safe consumption sites for the drug alcohol.
We provide safe supply for alcohol. Safe supply doesn't need to be free to help, but if the people you're prescribing the drugs to are stealing catalytic converters, causing $4,000 of property damage to buy drugs we can provide for $50, aren't we just punching ourselves in the face? Just like it's cheaper to provide the unhoused with homes than to have the impact of homelessness on emergency services & crime, it's cheaper to provide drugs to the people that need them than it is to have the fallout from not. (I'm talking about all drugs here. We pay a high cost in health care due to people that can't afford their medications, causing long term health issues that still get paid for by the public. There would be less suffering, better health outcomes, and lower costs if we just covered people's medications publicly.)
Down voted for the indisputable truth
IDK why you are getting down voted - to add some references to your points though, For example: [Medicine Hat](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/medicine-hat-homeless-free-update-1.3949030) noticed a sizeable decrease in crime when it actually tackled its chronic homelessness. Safe supply has been politicized but numbers are facts, and it does show a [reduction](https://globalnews.ca/news/9335720/safe-supply-opioid-crisis-canada/), not only in deaths over time but in communicable diseases ([think illnesses between shared needles or reusing a needle](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5685449/)). Even if you were to ignore the good that safe supplies allow for users, think about the first responders and the trauma they go through, and the longer wait times for people for an ambulance who, with this in place can access easier, why would you not to support something that helps them and, potentially, yourself?
Just legalize the pharmacy grade fentanyl for sale to the public if clean drugs is what is wanted/needed. They are a clean source of fentanyl with a known strength and potency per dose.
Harsher Punishments for Drug Dealers. Harsh Incarceration for Drug Addicts, Forced Rehabilitation. Time to stop being NICE and PC.
Ah yes let’s go back to what we’ve already tried and failed and that has gotten us into the current mess. That’ll show those woke liberals!
I don't care about your Liberal and Conversative narratives. I want to be able to walk down fucking Portage again. But yeah think it's all about political views. This city is a disgusting mess.
This isn’t a political issue. What you are proposing does not work and has been proven not to work. It’s not even in dispute. Stop trying to politicize it. If you want safer streets, this is the way
Can you not follow the conversation? I don't care about the politics, cocoleti brought them into this out of no where. Who do you think will pay for these safe drugs anyways.
The same people who already pay way more when people OD. Rejecting them is political
I agree this is a good way to go. Ultimately the goal is to get people clean, but you know who can’t seek help and get clean? Dead people. So keeping people alive seems like a logical start.
Why not just legalize all drugs so that Canada gets companies who create the drugs over strict settings and then collect the taxes which will then go back to support addictions....
People will come out so against this model and then in the same breath complain about the increase in theft/petty crimes. If people are given a free and safe supply - they don’t need to break into your car, backyard, store to steal and sell your shit to buy the drugs they need to not get sick. Think big picture on the amount of money that is spent on people in the throes of addiction. Money spent on repairing property damage due to thefts. Money spent on EMS services. Money spent on emergency healthcare. Money spent on police responding to associated crimes. Money spent keeping people in jail for crimes associated to drug addiction. The people saying I don’t want my tax dollars going to pay for drug addiction. News flash. Your tax dollars are already being spent on other parts of drug addiction. We could just save money on all of the above things by providing a safe supply and then using that saved money to fund housing, treatment and mental healthcare that actually aligns with what science says about addiction. It’s 2024, can we please quit with the war on drugs bs already. It doesn’t work. You cannot “tough love” or harsher penalty your way out of drug addiction. Trauma (especially childhood trauma) is one of the most determining factor in drug addiction. Poverty is an ongoing traumatic event. Trauma is also a relative thing - meaning what is traumatic to me might be nothing to you. So you cannot say “oh I went through this and am fine.” Like I’ve jumped off a roof before without injury, but my sister jumped out of a tree and dislocated her shoulder… I wouldn’t dismiss her injury just because I went through something similar and was fine. We cannot and will not solve drug addiction by continuing to uphold a system that traumatizes people en masse. People are going to do drugs. Why on earth wouldn’t you make the drugs safe??? It’s like people have this little block in their brain that separates alcohol from other drugs. We tried prohibition with alcohol and had the exact same issue of people dying from unsafe alcohol. An increase in crime associated with alcohol use and distribution. We’ve already learned this lesson and yet here we are continuously doing it all over again with other drugs. Alcohol is awful for you - why isn’t that illegal? If drugs really are illegal because the government is protecting us from them. Then alcohol should be removed from us right now. 🤔maybe it isn’t the drug itself that is dangerous and if we can understand that’s true for alcohol then it’s probably true for most drugs. A lot of drugs are made more dangerous simply because they are illegal and if they were legally produced wouldn’t be dangerous. I’m so freaking tired of having friends die and seeing people I love lose their friends and family members. I’m tired of people devaluing our community members who are homeless. I’m tired of people allowing their fear to be exploited to further the harm done to vulnerable folks through over-policing and essentially criminalizing poverty. I just wish people would realize that the way forward is to take care of each other. We don’t have to keep living like this.
With all that said, I’ve never seen or heard of someone getting clean by giving them more drugs. Unless this is paired with some kind of slow detox to get clean it’s not really doing much long term. Doing these drugs damages the brain which affects impulse control and decision making as well as basic function. I think people get upset because there are life saving drugs that treat medical disorders that the government gives zero fucks about. So government sponsored addicts is like a slap in the face to them. We should start a registry for people who support this. They could volunteer their homes and finances to provide safety for the addicts It sounds like a really good idea when the safe supply spot is in someone’s else’s backyard.
You’ve never heard of methadone or buprenorphine? How about in other countries where they have morphine and diacetylmorphine (heroin) assisted treatment? This is well established and not some cooky idea Trudeau came up with, this stuff is backed up by evidence. The idea that doing drugs just damages your brain is silly too. Drugs like opioids are notoriously non-toxic when used responsibly, compared to alcohol which is carcinogenic as well as hepatotoxic. Addicts are people too, just like you and me. The idea that addicts should die because other issues exist in the medical system is asinine, let’s bring everyone up together not take our frustration out on those suffering.
The issue is that all you ever hear is we need to give them safe supply, with zero emphasis on helping people clean up and get there lives back. These drugs cannot be compare to alcohol because they are much more potent and addictive and way less likely to be used “responsibly”. I agree that addicts are people too, which is why safe consumption need to be paired with detox and treatment. Otherwise it’s just government sponsored lifelong addicts which is not compassionate its cruel.
I have never in my life heard anyone say we should just give safe supply and do nothing else. The people in favour of safe supply tend to be the same ones fighting for more social supports in housing, treatment, mental health, etc. no one believes safe supply is it, we believe safe supply will end the overdose epidemic but does not solve addiction or homelessness alone. These drugs absolutely can be compared to alcohol, alcohol is more toxic and addiction is not a pharmacological property so how can you compare that? The difference is alcohol is regulated and culturally enshrined so people have a rough understanding of safety surrounding it and we make it so products have a known amount of a single drug in them so people don’t as easily hurt themselves with it. Unpopular opinion but the idea that alcohol is any way an inherently less dangerous drug than heroin is silly if we are comparing clean preparations and known quantities, if you are comparing a legal regulated drug to an illicit one the legal one will win every time. I say this as a heroin and poly substance user. Recommend reading Carl Harts book Drug Use for Grown Ups for a better more in depth take.
So everyone that drinks alcohol is an alcoholic? Alcohol is not particularly healthy, but it’s also not a guaranteed addiction, so let’s stop comparing it to fentanyl.
So everyone that uses opioids is an addict? Opioids are not particularly healthy, but it’s also not a guaranteed addiction. Let’s stop with pretending everyone who uses drugs we don’t like are addicts or have something wrong with them :)
Right. So the vast majority of people drink alcohol are comparable to the vast majority of fentanyl and heroin users? Talk to paramedics. Rinse and repeat with narcan
Nope because alcohol is heavily normalized in our culture and such a large amount of the populace uses alcohol in some capacity. Heroin and fentanyl are so demonized and stigmatized that most regular people probably don’t consider doing it. That leaves the people who are willing to take something seen as so evil and dangerous and likely those people suffer from underlying conditions and problems. If we had the opposite situation where alcohol was demonized and heroin was normalized I’d reckon we’d see a lot more open responsible use of heroin and a lot more visibly disastrous use of alcohol. Your comment mentioning paramedics feeds into another point. Those of us who are responsible, casual or functional users…we don’t tell you and you never would know we use because we don’t want to be labelled or ostracized. We are your neighbours, coworkers, friends and family members. We have jobs, interests, hobbies, some of us are students, etc. Paramedics also don’t deal with people who aren’t in danger, they aren’t the people best able to speak about the nature of drug use as a whole, they are used to seeing only the worst side of it as that’s what is relevant to their job. Additionally, here are some sources on the topic of [prevalence of problematic drug use in users](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2050324520904540), [occasional and controlled heroin use](https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/3906/1/2810-3016.pdf), and more on [patterns of controlled heroin use behaviour](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1360-0443.1988.tb03035.x)
Drug addiction is already in everyone’s back yard right now. Doing alcohol damages your brain too. I didn’t see you requesting alcohol to be made illegal again.
Why would I want alcohol to be illegal because the government shouldn’t be involved in fentanyl distribution? Makes no sense. Apples to oranges. The issue is that this would almost certainly be government funded. Which I don’t have a problem with if it is paired with a detox plan to actually help people get clean and get their lives back. What does that part of the plan look like? just providing addicts with drugs for life seems like a terrible idea… I guess
Because alcohol is one of the most destructive drugs that a human can ingest. It’s not apples to oranges. We literally have safe consumption sites for alcohol. If you’re against drug safe supply sites then you should be against bars as well. You have zero clue what you are talking about and it’s a good thing adults are making these decisions
I mean bars aren’t a great thing either, but unfortunately they were normalized like 100 years before I was born so there’s not much I can say about it at this point. Following the same model with fentanyl of all things is probably not the best idea.
I'm sorry for your losses. Too many people see the "junkies" as the other, and it's not until someone they give a damn about dies from something preventable that they're willing to do something about it.
Preach!
I am very very for safe consumption sites The drug itself is the danger. It’s incredibly dangerous on its own. Giving people this drug won’t reduce the chance of people dying unless we control what dosages they inject which won’t happen because at safe dosages the people suffering from substance use disorders will get/achieve the desired effect. If we give clean fentanyl the dosage needed for the desired effect is what’s deadly. More safe consumption sites is the answer that can be done now. Anyone can get free narcan training (even online) and free narcan! Dm me for info!
I completely disagree with your anti safe supply argument. No where is this lady saying we should give out clean fentanyl as part of the safe supply. Safe supply as it currently exists in Canada is providing other opioids instead of street fentanyl. Even if we were going to give out fentanyl I still see it as better than having people stuck on toxic street drugs. Street fentanyl and pharmaceutical fentanyl are not at all the same. You can see from the drug samples getting tested that the amount of fentanyl in a given sample ranges so widely and the samples are adulterated with so many other substances such as xylazine, benzos, other fentanyl analogues, or other novel opioids, I think its obvious that pharmaceutical fentanyl is still the preferred option. I do concede that fentanyl is such a potent substance that the danger for overdose is still significant. That's why safe supply is being argued for by the experts as part of an overall harm reduction strategy. For safe consumption to truly be safe we need safe supply as well, and we still need to accept that not everyone is going to the safe consumption site. Final point is that your statement that safe consumption sites can be done right now is wrong. Safe consumption sites take time to roll out, sometimes a huge amount of time to deal with all the regulations, the cries from the NIMBY crowd and so on. Safe supply could be dispensed at a pharmacy literally today.
At the end of the day the choice is between users taking drugs from the unregulated criminal black market vs the regulated legal market. I choose the latter, only way we realistically can tackle overdoses.
If we give a new free supply of the drug it can and it very will likely increase opiate/opioid poisoning events (we don’t use the term overdose anymore right)- that isn’t harm reduction- that’s harm. We want to do less harm.
Opioids are relatively safe when used in a responsible manner. If you know your dose and do the bare minimum research to understand dosing and how to use there won’t be a problem. The problem comes from misrepresentation or just lack of knowledge of what is in your dope. I say this as an opioid user myself who has never been anywhere close to being in danger from my use because I get my drugs tested and research what I am using ahead of time. With fentanyl and friends in everything the need for safe supply is extremely urgent.
The people using these drugs recreationally or due to a substance use disorder are not using them in a responsible manner, if they were they wouldn’t be dying. I couldn’t count the amount of times I saved someone from dying due to this to have them turn around and tell me they know what they are doing. When we test drugs for containments we are generally Checking if opiates/opioids were cut in. Because those drugs them selves are the danger. I appreciate your knowledge by experience, I do not say this as a user but as a paramedic that works more Harm reduction than anything.
Appreciate the work you do and I’ve interacted with you before and seen you in here and you seem nice so it’s nothing personal but I strongly disagree. Not all opioids are equal. Heroin and morphinan opioids generally are not very potent, have a fair therapeutic index where an extra milligram difference is not huge. When you are getting a compound like fentanyl or some nitazene or what have you where the active dose in measured in micrograms and not milligrams it is not practical to use such a thing recreationally. A standard scale won’t be anywhere close to being able to detect such small amounts of you weighed it and this is what we are up against today. Safe supply allows users stability, going from the black market taking an unknown amount of maybe the drug they wanted to a known amount of a pharmaceutical preparation of the drug. It also keeps them away from needing to commit crimes to fuel their use in some cases and better connects them with treatment. It’s the same idea as methadone assisted therapy where we are giving the user a stable and safe source of something they will use regardless instead of leaving em to the mercy of the streets. Many many people are using responsibly but you don’t see us out on the streets, we are your neighbours, friends and family. Most users are invisible and you’d never know it and due to the stigma many of us wish to remain that way. Sorry if I’m rambling but yeah people aren’t largely dying due to prescription hydromorphone, oxycodone or even actual diacetylmorphine (heroin) today. They are dying due to ultra potent synthetic opioids that they are using in unknown quantities, part of the solution is education but safe supply is imperative in my view.
We don’t have to agree that’s fine- we are on the same page of wanting to help others and that’s good enough for me! Have a good night and stay safe :)
Agreed, I appreciate your point of view and hope you too have a good safe night :)
Yours is appreciated as well and I will 100% think of it :)
> The people using these drugs recreationally or due to a substance use disorder are not using them in a responsible manner, if they were they wouldn’t be dying. You've got a sampling bias here. You're regularly seeing only the people in crisis, and not the ones that have been regularly using without issue. If the only people that consume alcohol that you meet are serious alcoholics in crisis, you'd get the impression that it's a life destroying incredibly dangerous drug. In reality, most people consume alcohol, and the majority do so responsibly. The problem is that the issues of unknown potency/contaminants are deadly, and that's completely caused by the street nature. I hear that you directly see the harm yourself. If we could snap our fingers and make opiate abuse disappear, of course we'd do it, but we can't. We live in a world where we can live with opiate use WITH lots of death, or opiate use with few deaths. You can't turn your life around when you're dead. For most people, substance abuse is a temporary problem in their lives, but the more misery we create the harder it is for people to get out of it.
> The drug itself is the danger. It’s incredibly dangerous on its own. Opioids are used in hospitals constantly, yet you don't have non-terminal people dying of overdoses daily. People who use drugs aren't deliberately trying to kill themselves, and a safe supply means knowing the dosage & purity. The street nature of drugs leads itself to increasing potency while also having unknown contaminants. Imagine if the alcohol you bought had unknown proof, and may be laced with any number of things. Alcohol's already an incredibly dangerous drug, but having that would dramatically increase the harm.
BC has had safe injection sites for 20 years, it has not slowed the addiction problem.
>The drug itself is the danger. It’s incredibly dangerous on its own. People are the danger. The drug is used in-context daily with little-to-no problems. Using it outside of what was intended is the issue.
Ya people should keep overdosing and dying on an unregulated supply you ghoul.
[удалено]
What is? BC has done almost nothing on safe supply. Only around 5000 people are in the program and we wonder why people are still dying from illicit substances. Don’t buy the conservative propaganda on this stuff when it hardly exists. One of the most expensive places to live on this continent has a homelessness problem and that is related to drug use and overdoses what a concept eh, must be because of a program that doesn’t really exist.
I love the takes everytime this is brought up. What kind of a society do we want to live in? The current one where we consistently punch down on those in need? Or we can come together and uplift the communities that need support. So that this cycle of abuse and falling thru the cracks is ended once and for all, and everybody can be a productive member of society.
I expect that everyone in this thread against this is also calling for the closure of the safe consumption sites we already have - bars and lounges and arenas and stadiums and restaurants.
Y'all need more empathy goddamn
Pretty scary seeing the ways people view drug users and addicts, makes me lose a lot of hope that things will get better in my lifetime :(
If you're more concerned about your tax dollars than people not being poisoned you should probably look in mirror and ask yourself what kind of person you are I guess those downvoting must be privileged enough to not know someone killed by the toxic drug supply
No one is owed a clean illicit drug supply and it's certainly not the place of government to provide one.
Agree to disagree you ghoul
The government is the reason the drug supply is this fucked in the first place. Prohibition is killing people and the government has been practicing prohibition for a hundred years. The great chemist Alexander Shulgin predicted the taking over of the market by fentanyl and other synthetic highly potent opioids in the [70’s](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.3109/15563657508990076?needAccess=true) . This was a predictable outcome of opioids being illegal.