|
qkkl posted:Government policies have clearly not worked. It's time to legalize opiods and allow capitalists to profit from them. Overdose deaths will drop ten-fold within two years because keeping your customer alive is profitable. No, capital must not be allowed to enter the market. There should be no profit motive in the provision of drugs. We've already seen the harm this has done with alcohol and tobacco, and we might soon see it with marijuana, and arguably the only reason those substances should remain as regulated free markets is that there are qualitative differences between brands/products beyond the active chemicals. Albino Squirrel posted:Oh hey so there's some clinics in Vancouver that provide prescription heroin, as well as prescription hydromorphone, to be used in combination with safe injection sites. So the drugs are free, designed to be injected, and of known potency. The concept is frequently referred to as SIOAT (Supervised Injectable Opioid Agonist Therapy). Really? That's cool and good (not the part about Alberta being dreadful, the other bit).
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2018 04:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 23:27 |
|
|
fishmech posted:Retail weed's been going in the US for a while now, nothing bad has happened from it. Yeah, I don't think it's going to be a collapse of society thing by any means, but I think it's valid to have concerns about people making profits from addictive products -- weed, booze, tobacco, gambling, or anything else that can cause problems like that. As a big fan of all of those except weed*, I struggle with the conflict between wanting those things to be available and dealing with the social harms they can cause. * I think weed legalization is great and I support anyone who wants to use it, but I'm still not allowed to use it even after general legalization, so it's not a personal thing for me like it is with the others.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2018 04:53
|
|
|
What should be done about the issues around safe injection sites? We've had one opened up reasonably near me, and there are apparently issues with property crime in the area, since addicts still can't get their drugs for free. I think either the drugs should be freely provided (probably a hard sell) or safe injection sites should be so numerous that they are unable to concentrate any negative effects in a specific area. Honestly, I have a hard time with the centralization of services provided to addicts. Putting everything in one place concentrates the harmful externalities of addiction, and it allows too many people to simply wash their hands of the problem and ignore it because it's no longer near them. And what happens when someone tries to get clean? They're established in an area with a huge concentration of addicts and dealers! How the gently caress is that going to work? This stuff needs to be at the nice shiny mall in the suburbs as much as on skid row, both because there are still addicts there, and also because, gently caress you, you don't get to ignore the problems in our society and make it someone else's problem.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2019 05:42
|
|
|
KingEup posted:What issues? https://globalnews.ca/news/4903800/crime-spike-report-calgary-supervised-consumption-site-resources/ Crime is going up. And it's not necessarily the drug addicts causing the problems -- in many cases, they are the victims, and dealers are taking advantage of them. As the article points out, it's still a service that needs to exist, but we shouldn't just accept the increase in crime as a natural consequence. We all accept that poverty and addiction have negative externalities, I hope, and anything that serves to concentrate those social ills in one area is going to be harmful.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:In the Boston area, they need to open several safe injections sites at once in different parts of the state. The second Boston opens one up, all the other towns around them (and other cities in the Northeast) will pull a Guliani and send their addicts here. Spreading the services out, in theory, would help spread the the concentration. Exactly; the concentration is the problem. I'm not saying Not In My Back Yard, I'm saying, "Yes, But In Everybody's Back Yard." No single community should bear the full weight of addiction, homelessness and poverty while other areas get to ignore the problem. It didn't work with housing projects, why would we assume it can work with supervised consumption sites?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2019 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 23:27 |
|
|
Albino Squirrel posted:I'm losing about 4 patients a month to ODs (up here in Canada). I've lost patients I've known for years. Covid won't burn me out but this might As a fellow Canadian: what do we do about it? Personally, as a layperson, I'm in favour of full legalization and safe/cheap supply. I've had friends and family die from overdoses, and at the same time I've had friends who've been hosed around for legitimate pain relief waiting for a surgery the needed, to the point they made a scene and said "I don't give a gently caress anymore, if you're worried I'm abusing the pills, come and count my loving pills at 3AM any day of the week, count the pills if you're worried I'm a drug seeker, just give me the loving medication I need." He's since got the surgery and weaned off the painkillers, he said it was hell but better than continuing to take them, for what it's worth. Alcoholics drink hand sanitizer if they can't get booze, opiate addicts do dangerous things if they can't get a supply. Harm reduction simply makes sense to me, because honestly I'd rather my cousin was dependent on opiates that he could get from a clinic or whatever... than loving dead, which he is, because he died from an overdose.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2021 07:03
|
|