Philly- safe injection site for opiod users

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sooo let me see if I understand this ..... Money looted from working tax payers will be used to reanimate opiod zombies with Narcan, who will repay the favor by burglarizing the homes of the tax payers who paid to reanimate them.
 
Why solve problems when we can use them to stimulate the economy treating symptoms? Think of all the jobs and money spent running the injection sites.
 
Originally Posted By: Oldtom
Sooo let me see if I understand this ..... Money looted from working tax payers will be used to reanimate opiod zombies with Narcan, who will repay the favor by burglarizing the homes of the tax payers who paid to reanimate them.

I thank you!!! Drug use turns people into zombies.
 
Originally Posted By: UberArchetype
Why solve problems when we can use them to stimulate the economy treating symptoms? Think of all the jobs and money spent running the injection sites.


That's the rub right there. There isn't a solution.

Losing the "War" on drugs has changed a lot of policies.
 
Originally Posted By: Oldtom
Sooo let me see if I understand this ..... Money looted from working tax payers will be used to reanimate opiod zombies with Narcan, who will repay the favor by burglarizing the homes of the tax payers who paid to reanimate them.

That seems to be about the size of it. An ER nurse we know recounted about one guy they picked up OD'd in front of DD, after treatment in the ER a few hours later the picked him up again OD'd in a HD bathroom, after her shift ended he was back in that night.
What the heck is going on with these people and whats the answer? I can see in a small town with limited resources finding themselves in a real moral dilemma if a situation arose where there was say a bad accident that required all available resources then this guy pulls another stunt.

Is the answer to prioritize first come first served or let the dope fiend hang on til we have the ability or get a surrounding community service to handle him that may be too late? I don't know, thankfully I don't have to make that decision just some thoughts.
 
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
That's the rub right there. There isn't a solution.

That's quite the defeatist POV. Actually solving problems involves tracing them to their source, among other things. But nobody wants to admit the pharmaceutical industry is the biggest single factor poisoning our society right now - everything from peddling drugs to consumers on TV to insanely expensive cancer chemo drugs that don't work.

Opiates are just the currently obvious problem.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Oldtom
Sooo let me see if I understand this ..... Money looted from working tax payers will be used to reanimate opiod zombies with Narcan, who will repay the favor by burglarizing the homes of the tax payers who paid to reanimate them.


Just flat crazy to think the problem can be solved by enabling.
 
Last edited:
Almost every study ever conducted of programs such as "wet houses" where homeless people are allowed to store booze and drink, or in programs like in Portugal where heroin is given to addicts under strict supervision, etc, shows a huge decrease in overall taxpayer costs from reduced interventions by medical and security services. But ignorance, and knee-jerk assumptions, are bliss...

BTW, drug and alcohol use actually plummet as well...
 
The whole idea of a safe injection site is flawed. There is no rehabilitation, as has been mentioned it is enabling. The addicts now feel they can push the envelope of amounts taken because they are being monitored. They just do it again and again with no fear of death. I seems that serious addicts don't want to come off the high, but rather die in it.

People do drugs because they are fundamentally deficient in some area of their lives. Whether it's connection with others, with a supreme being or a general purpose in life, etc. If we really wanted to rehabilitate addicts we would look to treat the cause. Of course the addict would have to want to be rehabilitated to make a complete life change...and then, like an alcoholic stay away from drugs the remainder of their lives.

People should also be taught the serious side effects of drug use and addiction while they are young enough to understand. If people knew the real risks they would never start. People should be scared to do drugs, not intrigued by the notion. One can never know what is in the drugs they consume (unless they made it themselves), with fentanyl laced products everywhere the idea of being a recreational drug user are diminishing quickly.
 
Last edited:
Your tax dollars at work. Instead of improving roads and infrastructure we concentrate on social issues. Here in the Seattle area, not only are there safe zones but free needles and syringes and places to dispose of them. Go into the airport bathroom and needle containers are mounted on the walls. There are even options to transport druggies to the exchanges, all on our dime.

Meanwhile it takes 1.5 hours to go 20 miles.

It’s all bass ackwards.
 
Last edited:
As Nickdfresh alluded to, the safe injection site programs are clearly a big net benefit to society overall, and they've been used in many places for many years. So why does the problem seem to be getting worse?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: UberArchetype
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
That's the rub right there. There isn't a solution.

That's quite the defeatist POV. Actually solving problems involves tracing them to their source, among other things. But nobody wants to admit the pharmaceutical industry is the biggest single factor poisoning our society right now - everything from peddling drugs to consumers on TV to insanely expensive cancer chemo drugs that don't work.

Opiates are just the currently obvious problem.


It's a realistic POV.

Big pharma is a big problem for sure, but even if major reductions are made, can we really eliminate pain killers entirely? People do need them for post surgery and injuries.

If we don't eliminate them entirely, then we're right back to square one.

Say we could snap a finger and make it go away. Then what? Back to the heroin, cocaine, etc. The former likely supporting ISIS.

Where foreign borne drugs are concerned, we've literally tried everything, including military action.

We solve this problem only by convincing third world residents that it's better to be a peasant picking through a garbage pile than living in a mansion with 12 Lamborghinis parked out front. And also convincing drug addicts here to stop buying drugs.

Those two are insurmountable issues. We don't even have ideas that sound good for solving them.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Big pharma is a big problem for sure, but even if major reductions are made, can we really eliminate pain killers entirely? People do need them for post surgery and injuries.

They why are they so easily obtained for off-label abuse?
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
If we don't eliminate them entirely, then we're right back to square one.

It's not a simple black/white no-alternative situation.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Say we could snap a finger and make it go away. Then what? Back to the heroin, cocaine, etc. The former likely supporting ISIS.

You are starting to scratch the surface.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Where foreign borne drugs are concerned, we've literally tried everything, including military action.

You can't stop economic competition with wars and the military. That was clearly obvious from the start. But alot of money sure was made proving the point, wasn't it?
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Those two are insurmountable issues. We don't even have ideas that sound good for solving them.

The only thing insurmountable is the political will to address the problem rationally, without regard to special interests. Drug abuse will continue to be a big problem as long as the pharmaceutical and alcohol industries remain in competition with the black market. And that is the way it will stay as long as things continue to remain just barely tenable and the profits flow in.

It's called the status-quo. Nothing new here.
 
Last edited:
There is something missing here: Any hint of an alternative.

If I'm wrong, explain how?

Prohibition? That didn't work.


Prescription pills get out because patients are sent home with them and pick them up themselves. They're free range.

Could we stop it? Sure. We'd just have to keep everyone in the hospital and administer the drugs until no longer needed. We'd have to force insurance companies to treat people instead of doping them to cover up the problem. We'd have to cure diseases and other ailments that cause chronic pain.

Long story short? Money that nobody is able or willing to give up. Also, doing what is not currently possible.

But even then, foreign and domestic grown drugs will still rule the streets. Lot of money to drop just to end up back at the drawing board.


If you some ideas, let's hear them.
 
Just about anything done to mitigate the opiod crisis is a bandaid. The root cause is the destruction of the family by caused by the need for both adults to work outside the home to support the family. All the couples who have children, then divorce. A child raised by a single parent, often is raised in poverty. Yah, yah, people change and that sweet young thing, you made babies with is no longer any fun to live with. Too bad, you played, now you pay. When you have children, it is your responsibility to nurture and raise them. Not leave them to raised in poverty just because you and your partner fell out of love.

As for the opiod crisis, read Hillbilly Elegy
 
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Almost every study ever conducted of programs such as "wet houses" where homeless people are allowed to store booze and drink, or in programs like in Portugal where heroin is given to addicts under strict supervision, etc, shows a huge decrease in overall taxpayer costs from reduced interventions by medical and security services. But ignorance, and knee-jerk assumptions, are bliss...

BTW, drug and alcohol use actually plummet as well...


this^^^.

But I can't see that as becoming a policy as it would actually reduce overall government spending and shift the cash flows away from law enforcement and prison industry. It's easier to label it as "enabling" and retain the current situation.
 
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Prescription pills get out because patients are sent home with them and pick them up themselves.

The reason they "get out" is because pharma companies were allowed to deceive doctors about the dangers for decades. Then many discovered they could get rich pretty quick feeding habits - the more the merrier. Only problem was it finally started getting out of hand for some reason(?). That's just one small facet of Big Pharma's scheme to capitalize on healthcare.

Enter big government. (Please don't lock the thread. This is purely analytical observation - not stumping for anybody.) So the Feds finally decided to start clamping down a few years ago.
Even some states are presently suing the Pharmas over this. It's much harder to get the good, clean opiates, even legitimately now. But guess what? the path of least resistance is followed to heroin and black market varieties of things like Chinese-manufactured Fentanyl with no known quality control. It's a textbook case of unintended consequences. Say goodbye to more lead singers.
 
Here's my opinion:

1) You still have to pay to cleanup needles thrown around public area, and it is not cheap. People don't want to see needles visually so leaving them alone is not an option (if you are a politician).

2) It is better to steer addicts away from area with families and kids (playground) so if they are doing stuff they don't "influence" the younger ones. Keep the site around industrial area instead of residential, it will be less impact to the property price.

I'm against recreational drugs but I'd leave the decision of injection site to people living there. Some ideologies like prohibition and abstinence never work despite being good ideas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top