Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

NFT: The children of the opioid crisis

Dunedin81 : 1/11/2017 8:57 am
Excellent and very moving WSJ piece about the children who suffer because of the addictions of their parents, and the very common scenario of grandparents being required to spend their retirement years filling the parental void. Sad stuff.
Link - ( New Window )
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
Heroin has been so deadly and under publicized.  
EricJ : 1/11/2017 9:37 pm : link
this drug is far more dangerous than guns for example.
RE: Heroin has been so deadly and under publicized.  
ctc in ftmyers : 1/11/2017 9:51 pm : link
In comment 13322172 EricJ said:
Quote:
this drug is far more dangerous than guns for example.


It's damn near a daily occurance down here.
Legalize cannabis  
Sgrcts : 1/11/2017 11:44 pm : link
And normalize medical uses if it. We have an amazing medicianal opportunity in front of us, and one of the by products of it will be a huge kick in the gut to the opiate industry, both legal and illegal.
why not just eradicate all pharmacy opioids?  
djm : 1/12/2017 9:59 am : link
start there. That shit does no one any good. Find another method to fight pain.
RE: This is much different than the crack epidemic  
Ron from Ninerland : 1/12/2017 10:26 am : link
In comment 13322101 weeg in the bronx said:
Quote:
Where the major problem wasn't the drug as much as the violence. 2000 murders a year in Nyc at the peak, hence the heavy police response. The opioid scourge is far more widespread, fast-paced smaller communities where police are incapable of a dressing the problem. The drugs also kill more than craic ever did. In the afrementioned book Dream Land (I second the recommendation) the author documents how the Mexican drug business model is to intentionally target small cities without established drug gangs, only sell to whites (Mexicans aren't fond of African Americans apparently) and avoid violence. The book also discusses the flawed medical and corrupt pharmaceutical cultures.


"I want to control drugs as a business to keep it respectable. I don't want it near big cities, I don't want out sold to African Americans. That's an infamnia. In my city we'd would keep the traffic to the white people, the rednecks. They're animals anyway so let the lose their souls"


Lots of crazy on this thread  
WideRight : 1/12/2017 10:28 am : link
One reason nothing is likely to change is because we have an incredibly wide range of opinions about what both the problems and the potential solutions are.
RE: why not just eradicate all pharmacy opioids?  
Greg from LI : 1/12/2017 10:31 am : link
In comment 13322446 djm said:
Quote:
start there. That shit does no one any good.


Bullshit. Somehow I managed to take Vicodin and Oxycodone in the past when I've had extremely painful injuries without becoming addicted to them. In fact, the vast majority of people who take them do not become addicts.
There has to be a happy medium, though  
jcn56 : 1/12/2017 10:47 am : link
I was also one of those who had a minor issue and was prescribed dozens of opioid painkillers. I doubt I needed anything that strong, and I certainly didn't need 36 of them.

I also tossed them to the screams and horrors of people I mentioned it to afterward. I shouldn't have received more than a handful (I'd say less than 2-3 days supply), and could likely have been prescribed something a lot less powerful.

It seems like whether accidental or intentional, the system is inadvertently creating/encouraging addiction where it might not have existed before.
RE: Legalize cannabis  
Dunedin81 : 1/12/2017 10:48 am : link
In comment 13322276 Sgrcts said:
Quote:
And normalize medical uses if it. We have an amazing medicianal opportunity in front of us, and one of the by products of it will be a huge kick in the gut to the opiate industry, both legal and illegal.


There are certainly arguments in favor of legalization or at least decriminalization, but what's the indication that there will be some sort of massive bite taken out of opioid/opiate use? Vermont has one of the worst heroin problems in the country and marijuana is almost ubiquitous in the state. If you've got data to the contrary I'm certainly willing to be convinced, but to me the arguments in favor of breaking down the barriers to marijuana use are more or less independent of the issues raised by this crisis.
At this point, there's more than enough justification  
jcn56 : 1/12/2017 10:57 am : link
to legalize marijuana that it might make sense to do so even if reduction of opioid use as a result is a longshot.
RE: There has to be a happy medium, though  
RobCarpenter : 1/12/2017 11:52 am : link
In comment 13322516 jcn56 said:
Quote:
I was also one of those who had a minor issue and was prescribed dozens of opioid painkillers. I doubt I needed anything that strong, and I certainly didn't need 36 of them.

I also tossed them to the screams and horrors of people I mentioned it to afterward. I shouldn't have received more than a handful (I'd say less than 2-3 days supply), and could likely have been prescribed something a lot less powerful.

It seems like whether accidental or intentional, the system is inadvertently creating/encouraging addiction where it might not have existed before.


+1 -- appropriate use has gotten lost in the entire discussion. Doctors were giving them out like candy.

The other piece I forgot to mention as a cause for the explosion in opioid use is when pain became the 'fifth vital sign'. AMA finally dropped it as a vital sign:
Link - ( New Window )
Maybe my doctors are unique  
Deej : 1/12/2017 11:57 am : link
and I've never had a pain management issue, but I've never had a doctor who gave out any medicine like candy. I think it does a disservice to many doctors to tar such such a noble profession like that. But maybe Im wrong -- who knows.
RE: Maybe my doctors are unique  
RobCarpenter : 1/12/2017 12:03 pm : link
In comment 13322672 Deej said:
Quote:
and I've never had a pain management issue, but I've never had a doctor who gave out any medicine like candy. I think it does a disservice to many doctors to tar such such a noble profession like that. But maybe Im wrong -- who knows.


I'm exaggerating -- I should have said that doctors are prescribing far more than needed b/c of pressure by patients as well as the idea that pain was a fifth vital sign. Prescribing of opioids increased dramatically after Oxycontin hit the market. And some doctors were bad actors and saw it as a money making opportunity.
RE: RE: This is much different than the crack epidemic  
weeg in the bronx : 1/12/2017 12:12 pm : link
In comment 13322486 Ron from Ninerland said:
Quote:
In comment 13322101 weeg in the bronx said:


Quote:


Where the major problem wasn't the drug as much as the violence. 2000 murders a year in Nyc at the peak, hence the heavy police response. The opioid scourge is far more widespread, fast-paced smaller communities where police are incapable of a dressing the problem. The drugs also kill more than craic ever did. In the afrementioned book Dream Land (I second the recommendation) the author documents how the Mexican drug business model is to intentionally target small cities without established drug gangs, only sell to whites (Mexicans aren't fond of African Americans apparently) and avoid violence. The book also discusses the flawed medical and corrupt pharmaceutical cultures.



"I want to control drugs as a business to keep it respectable. I don't want it near big cities, I don't want out sold to African Americans. That's an infamnia. In my city we'd would keep the traffic to the white people, the rednecks. They're animals anyway so let the lose their souls"



Good one Ron! Its crazy but these gusy were brilliant in their business model: They assume white communities = less violence and a more stable business. They fight competitors with price wars, not gun fights. They rotate in dealers from mexico for six months. Too savvy for these second or third tier city police departments.
As others have said  
HBart : 1/12/2017 12:35 pm : link
This is a problem the Feds largely created. It's all about the money - the DEA is farce as prohibition doesn't work and never has, but when you're the one benefitting from prohibition you get brainwashed and follow the money yourselves. I have a friend who runs a private foundation affiliated with the DEA who, on the one hand, is passionate about the need to educate kids and on the other hand admits - after decades fighting a war on its own people - that our approach is a farce.

Drug use and addiction are as buford noted a symptom of society. As the middle class gets hollowed out more and more the problem will increase. It can be treated as a health problem and a financial issue in terms of wealth inequality. Instead, we create a financial issue by spending billions in a silly war and create a crime problem from thin air.

Of course heroin users have used opoids. That's not proof that opoids are bad or even that drugs are bad. There's a natural (one might even say god given) reason that certain natural substances including cannibis, kratom, coca and opium have a calming and euphoric effect on our body - like other things, we take a good and natural thing and a) magnify its effects (eg heroin vs opium), b) seek to profit from it and c) those in power seek to control it.

I've had friends addicted to cocaine. I know lots of opioid users, and plenty of people who use kratom and cannibis. Nothing is close to being as destructive at an overall societal level than the most dangerous drug of all (according to most studies): alcohol.

When you make things illegal that people want to do (like recreational drugs) and have a legal but controlled option (opioids) of course people will flock to them.

And it's a racket. My wife has to visit a doctor every month for a refill of vicodin because under new rules they can't be refilled like normal drugs and can only be prescribed in small quantifies. Think doctors don't want to see a useless visit (with associated fee) each month?
RE: RE: RE: This is much different than the crack epidemic  
RobCarpenter : 1/12/2017 12:35 pm : link
In comment 13322694 weeg in the bronx said:
Quote:
In comment 13322486 Ron from Ninerland said:


Quote:


In comment 13322101 weeg in the bronx said:


Quote:


Where the major problem wasn't the drug as much as the violence. 2000 murders a year in Nyc at the peak, hence the heavy police response. The opioid scourge is far more widespread, fast-paced smaller communities where police are incapable of a dressing the problem. The drugs also kill more than craic ever did. In the afrementioned book Dream Land (I second the recommendation) the author documents how the Mexican drug business model is to intentionally target small cities without established drug gangs, only sell to whites (Mexicans aren't fond of African Americans apparently) and avoid violence. The book also discusses the flawed medical and corrupt pharmaceutical cultures.



"I want to control drugs as a business to keep it respectable. I don't want it near big cities, I don't want out sold to African Americans. That's an infamnia. In my city we'd would keep the traffic to the white people, the rednecks. They're animals anyway so let the lose their souls"





Good one Ron! Its crazy but these gusy were brilliant in their business model: They assume white communities = less violence and a more stable business. They fight competitors with price wars, not gun fights. They rotate in dealers from mexico for six months. Too savvy for these second or third tier city police departments.


They also kept low volumes of the drugs, and they would drive around with balloons of the drugs in their mouth. If pulled over they'd swallow the balloons. And they didn't really have one 'head' -- it was a bunch of cells supplying drugs.

They'd also get help from addicts to set up in new towns where they didn't know anyone.
RE: RE: why not just eradicate all pharmacy opioids?  
BMac : 1/12/2017 12:37 pm : link
In comment 13322492 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 13322446 djm said:


Quote:


start there. That shit does no one any good.



Bullshit. Somehow I managed to take Vicodin and Oxycodone in the past when I've had extremely painful injuries without becoming addicted to them. In fact, the vast majority of people who take them do not become addicts.


Second that. I was placed on morphine for 5 years for chronic pain. I decided to stop on my own because of the overall negative effects. Was I addicted at that point...certainly. But by slowly reducing dosages taken, it really wasn't all that difficult to do.

I'm glad I did this for a number of reasons, but particularly because the current climate makes one feel like a criminal if prescribed opiates of any kind for pain relief.
RE: As others have said  
RobCarpenter : 1/12/2017 12:44 pm : link
In comment 13322742 HBart said:
Quote:
This is a problem the Feds largely created. It's all about the money - the DEA is farce as prohibition doesn't work and never has, but when you're the one benefitting from prohibition you get brainwashed and follow the money yourselves. I have a friend who runs a private foundation affiliated with the DEA who, on the one hand, is passionate about the need to educate kids and on the other hand admits - after decades fighting a war on its own people - that our approach is a farce.

Drug use and addiction are as buford noted a symptom of society. As the middle class gets hollowed out more and more the problem will increase. It can be treated as a health problem and a financial issue in terms of wealth inequality. Instead, we create a financial issue by spending billions in a silly war and create a crime problem from thin air.

Of course heroin users have used opoids. That's not proof that opoids are bad or even that drugs are bad. There's a natural (one might even say god given) reason that certain natural substances including cannibis, kratom, coca and opium have a calming and euphoric effect on our body - like other things, we take a good and natural thing and a) magnify its effects (eg heroin vs opium), b) seek to profit from it and c) those in power seek to control it.

I've had friends addicted to cocaine. I know lots of opioid users, and plenty of people who use kratom and cannibis. Nothing is close to being as destructive at an overall societal level than the most dangerous drug of all (according to most studies): alcohol.

When you make things illegal that people want to do (like recreational drugs) and have a legal but controlled option (opioids) of course people will flock to them.

And it's a racket. My wife has to visit a doctor every month for a refill of vicodin because under new rules they can't be refilled like normal drugs and can only be prescribed in small quantifies. Think doctors don't want to see a useless visit (with associated fee) each month?


Opioids are addictive, tolerance builds up, and overdose deaths are on the rise. These drugs need to be used carefully and cautiously. It's also in a completely different league than marijuana. Dreamland features a chapter about how the molecule itself is different than every other drug is because it cannot be reduced to water soluble glucose.

But don't take my word for it on the addictive issue, from the attached article:

"Morphine and other opiates are addictive and have been drugs of abuse for thousands of years."
Link - ( New Window )
RE: RE: RE: RE: This is much different than the crack epidemic  
Dan in the Springs : 1/12/2017 2:05 pm : link
In comment 13322745 RobCarpenter said:
Quote:

They also kept low volumes of the drugs, and they would drive around with balloons of the drugs in their mouth. If pulled over they'd swallow the balloons. And they didn't really have one 'head' -- it was a bunch of cells supplying drugs.

They'd also get help from addicts to set up in new towns where they didn't know anyone.


Another strategy they use is to have their stash house in one state and exclusively deal in another, while only carrying small amounts at a time. This way if they're pulled over and caught with their drugs on them, their stash house stays safe. They simply provide as a home address a clean house near where they deal. Cops don't know to check the out of state house, and even the feds (DEA) often have trouble getting the jurisdiction to raid the stash house (which in addition to being out of state is often kept in another person's name).

My best friend growing up runs a DEA task force - he's got some amazing stories to tell. He lives most of the time in Guatemala and has jurisdiction to fly almost anywhere with his team to bust the cartel.
RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
Dan in the Springs : 1/12/2017 2:11 pm : link
In comment 13322535 jcn56 said:
Quote:
to legalize marijuana that it might make sense to do so even if reduction of opioid use as a result is a longshot.


I'm not opposed to legalization in certain locations, but I'm not ready to say it should be legal anywhere. Here's my concern.

Basically, MJ is a mind-altering drug. Under its influence we don't want certain professions to operate (pilot, surgeon, etc.). It may not have a negative influence on many, many, people and even industries. Heck, it may even be beneficial to some industries (screenwriter?).

My concern is that increasing availability will increase the total number of users, which in turn will lead to more Americans pursuing certain occupations and abandoning others.

In our global economy I don't think we win if the % of smokers goes over a certain number, and I don't know what that number is. I'm also not prepared to rush into finding out what it is.

To me the nice compromise is to let certain jurisdictions operate with recreational or medical marijuana. This way you are free to move and partake, as my niece just did.
RE: RE: As others have said  
HBart : 1/12/2017 2:12 pm : link
In comment 13322770 RobCarpenter said:
Quote:
In comment 13322742 HBart said:


Quote:


This is a problem the Feds largely created. It's all about the money - the DEA is farce as prohibition doesn't work and never has, but when you're the one benefitting from prohibition you get brainwashed and follow the money yourselves. I have a friend who runs a private foundation affiliated with the DEA who, on the one hand, is passionate about the need to educate kids and on the other hand admits - after decades fighting a war on its own people - that our approach is a farce.

Drug use and addiction are as buford noted a symptom of society. As the middle class gets hollowed out more and more the problem will increase. It can be treated as a health problem and a financial issue in terms of wealth inequality. Instead, we create a financial issue by spending billions in a silly war and create a crime problem from thin air.

Of course heroin users have used opoids. That's not proof that opoids are bad or even that drugs are bad. There's a natural (one might even say god given) reason that certain natural substances including cannibis, kratom, coca and opium have a calming and euphoric effect on our body - like other things, we take a good and natural thing and a) magnify its effects (eg heroin vs opium), b) seek to profit from it and c) those in power seek to control it.

I've had friends addicted to cocaine. I know lots of opioid users, and plenty of people who use kratom and cannibis. Nothing is close to being as destructive at an overall societal level than the most dangerous drug of all (according to most studies): alcohol.

When you make things illegal that people want to do (like recreational drugs) and have a legal but controlled option (opioids) of course people will flock to them.

And it's a racket. My wife has to visit a doctor every month for a refill of vicodin because under new rules they can't be refilled like normal drugs and can only be prescribed in small quantifies. Think doctors don't want to see a useless visit (with associated fee) each month?



Opioids are addictive, tolerance builds up, and overdose deaths are on the rise. These drugs need to be used carefully and cautiously. It's also in a completely different league than marijuana. Dreamland features a chapter about how the molecule itself is different than every other drug is because it cannot be reduced to water soluble glucose.

But don't take my word for it on the addictive issue, from the attached article:

"Morphine and other opiates are addictive and have been drugs of abuse for thousands of years." Link - ( New Window )


No argument at all.

Because something is addictive it doesn't mean it should be illegal. Should it be used carefully? Sure.

But as an example, many people have turned to Kratom. because of the difficulty in getting opioids now and because frankly it's more benign. There's limited evidence of addictive potential, virtually no evidence of harm to speak of. But the DEA figured out people were using it, and tried to classify it as schedule 1 a few months ago. Why? All about the money and control.

Thankfully they got stopped in their tracks because hundreds of thousands petitioned to white house to intervene.
RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
Sgrcts : 1/12/2017 2:25 pm : link
In comment 13322946 Dan in the Springs said:
Quote:
In comment 13322535 jcn56 said:


Quote:


to legalize marijuana that it might make sense to do so even if reduction of opioid use as a result is a longshot.



I'm not opposed to legalization in certain locations, but I'm not ready to say it should be legal anywhere. Here's my concern.

Basically, MJ is a mind-altering drug. Under its influence we don't want certain professions to operate (pilot, surgeon, etc.). It may not have a negative influence on many, many, people and even industries. Heck, it may even be beneficial to some industries (screenwriter?).

My concern is that increasing availability will increase the total number of users, which in turn will lead to more Americans pursuing certain occupations and abandoning others.

In our global economy I don't think we win if the % of smokers goes over a certain number, and I don't know what that number is. I'm also not prepared to rush into finding out what it is.

To me the nice compromise is to let certain jurisdictions operate with recreational or medical marijuana. This way you are free to move and partake, as my niece just did.


You aren't increasing availability to something as readily available as Cannabis. Also, no one who really wants to be a pilot or a doctor is going to not become one because they would prefer to smoke, nor should them smoking when they aren't working be any kind of issue.
RE: RE: Legalize cannabis  
Sgrcts : 1/12/2017 2:31 pm : link
In comment 13322518 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
In comment 13322276 Sgrcts said:


Quote:


And normalize medical uses if it. We have an amazing medicianal opportunity in front of us, and one of the by products of it will be a huge kick in the gut to the opiate industry, both legal and illegal.



There are certainly arguments in favor of legalization or at least decriminalization, but what's the indication that there will be some sort of massive bite taken out of opioid/opiate use? Vermont has one of the worst heroin problems in the country and marijuana is almost ubiquitous in the state. If you've got data to the contrary I'm certainly willing to be convinced, but to me the arguments in favor of breaking down the barriers to marijuana use are more or less independent of the issues raised by this crisis.


There are studies that show states with medicinal Cannabis have lower opiate fatality rates. I've attached one.

Also, there are many reasons why we haven't seen even close to the maximum efficacy of Cannabis as a medicine, or in this case pain killer. Most importantly, since its schedule 1, we are unable to study it and create the most efficient pain killing combination. Cannabis is a VERY complicated plant, there are literally hundreds of different chemicals(cannabanoids, terpenes and flavonoids) that create an entourage effect. If we can't study it, it's impossible to create the most efficient version of it for pain killing.

Another issue is most doctors still prefer to prescribe Opiates to Cannabis, even though Cannabis doesn't come with all the dangers Opiates do. There's a few reasons for that, including fear of he federal government and lack of knowledge about its benefits.

I encourage anyone interested to read Dr Sunjay Gupta writings or his shows on Cannabis. He was once a front line anti cannabis guy, and has now become one of its most prominent and vocal proponents.
Opiate OD And Cannabis - ( New Window )
RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
BMac : 1/12/2017 3:52 pm : link
In comment 13322946 Dan in the Springs said:
Quote:
In comment 13322535 jcn56 said:


Quote:My concern is that increasing availability will increase the total number of users.


Anywhere that drugs (yes, all drugs, including heroin, cocaine, etc) have been legalized have, without fail, experienced falling addiction/use rates with the attendant reduction in crime and disease. See Portugal, Great Britain, Switzerland, specific locations in Canada.
RE: RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
Dan in the Springs : 1/12/2017 4:00 pm : link
In comment 13322969 Sgrcts said:
Quote:

You aren't increasing availability to something as readily available as Cannabis. Also, no one who really wants to be a pilot or a doctor is going to not become one because they would prefer to smoke, nor should them smoking when they aren't working be any kind of issue.


Really?

What if I changed this to the following: "No one who really wants to be a NFL Pro Bowl Safety is going to not become one because they would prefer to smoke..."

I beg to differ. Certain careers require an extreme amount of discipline, focus and sacrifice for a long period of time, sacrifices that have to begin in your adolescence, and while there is no really good research about the long-term effects of smoking MJ on adolescent discipline, focus and sacrifice, there's a TON of anecdotal evidence about it.

I teach in an alternative HS, and I see a lot of talented kids who come in as 8th graders with big dreams and visions. Some of them have more than enough talent and they all have enough opportunity to make something great for themselves. For many of them, MJ is a stumbling block. Not just because it's illegal, although that is an issue. It just changes their approach to life in a way that's a lot more mellow and relaxed than what is required to get into the ultra-competitive fields they find interesting pre-MJ. I don't know for sure that expanding access to legal MJ would increase the number who partake, and admitted to that earlier. I'm only worried that it might, and can't see a good reason to take that risk.
I'm all about legalizing anything and everything  
Greg from LI : 1/12/2017 4:03 pm : link
But the claims that pot cures everything and is the most miraculous wonderdrug of all time do make me roll my eyes.
RE: RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
Dan in the Springs : 1/12/2017 4:04 pm : link
In comment 13323055 BMac said:
Quote:

Anywhere that drugs (yes, all drugs, including heroin, cocaine, etc) have been legalized have, without fail, experienced falling addiction/use rates with the attendant reduction in crime and disease. See Portugal, Great Britain, Switzerland, specific locations in Canada.


My biggest concern isn't related to addiction, use, crime or disease. My biggest concern is with adolescent experimentation and the impact that will have on a society's ability to compete long-term.

I perhaps could have been a little clearer about that earlier.

In education...  
Dan in the Springs : 1/12/2017 4:12 pm : link
we see all government entities right now doing all they can to encourage more students to get more deeply involved in STEM education (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math). This is because the economy of the future is going to require many more experts in these fields.

Go check out the computer or robotics lab after hours at your local jr./high school. See the stoners there? How about the math team?

There may be some, but not many. It seems to me that once a young person becomes engaged in smoking weed with any kind of regularity they basically lose the focus, drive, discipline, determination that it takes to excel in these fields.

I believe that adult users have different needs, and that includes college students. Once they've practiced the discipline needed for academic success it seems the effect of regular MJ smoking is minimal. But if that interest starts up too early, it's a real problem.

IMO time will tell whether it's having any kind of impact in places where it's been legalized. Why not wait and see how this plays out first? In 20 years a generation will have passed, and if there is little/no evidence of societal damage then I'll be okay with it.
RE: RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
pjcas18 : 1/12/2017 4:23 pm : link
In comment 13323055 BMac said:
Quote:
In comment 13322946 Dan in the Springs said:


Quote:


In comment 13322535 jcn56 said:


Quote:My concern is that increasing availability will increase the total number of users.



Anywhere that drugs (yes, all drugs, including heroin, cocaine, etc) have been legalized have, without fail, experienced falling addiction/use rates with the attendant reduction in crime and disease. See Portugal, Great Britain, Switzerland, specific locations in Canada.


This is very misleading.

Canada has NOT made "drugs (yes, all drugs)" legal. What they did was allow doctors to medically prescribe prescription grade heroin to already addicted users when traditional addiction treatment has not proven effective, under the care and supervision of a physician. They did not legalize heroin for recreational use. This policy only began 3 months ago, so no idea how you can there are falling addiction rates. Is there a different policy you are referring to? I'm not an expert, so that's definitely possible, please provide a link so I can educate myself.

Additionally, I'm not sure the program the UK implemented was very different from what Canada approved this past fall.

the UK has been doing this for decades and I think it's like I said, misleading to say addiction rates have fallen. They're still addicts, only getting it via prescription (in a controlled and monitored manner) vs the street and not any recreational user can get it from what I've read. The number of heroin addicts in the UK is dropping, especially among younger generations, but I don't think anyone attributes it to this program which has been around for decades.
RE: RE: RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
BMac : 1/12/2017 4:49 pm : link
In comment 13323069 Dan in the Springs said:
Quote:
In comment 13323055 BMac said:


Quote:



Anywhere that drugs (yes, all drugs, including heroin, cocaine, etc) have been legalized have, without fail, experienced falling addiction/use rates with the attendant reduction in crime and disease. See Portugal, Great Britain, Switzerland, specific locations in Canada.



My biggest concern isn't related to addiction, use, crime or disease. My biggest concern is with adolescent experimentation and the impact that will have on a society's ability to compete long-term.

I perhaps could have been a little clearer about that earlier.


No indication of that as any sort of verifiable factor.
RE: RE: RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
BMac : 1/12/2017 4:50 pm : link
In comment 13323092 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
In comment 13323055 BMac said:


Quote:


In comment 13322946 Dan in the Springs said:


Quote:


In comment 13322535 jcn56 said:


Quote:My concern is that increasing availability will increase the total number of users.



Anywhere that drugs (yes, all drugs, including heroin, cocaine, etc) have been legalized have, without fail, experienced falling addiction/use rates with the attendant reduction in crime and disease. See Portugal, Great Britain, Switzerland, specific locations in Canada.



This is very misleading.

Canada has NOT made "drugs (yes, all drugs)" legal. What they did was allow doctors to medically prescribe prescription grade heroin to already addicted users when traditional addiction treatment has not proven effective, under the care and supervision of a physician. They did not legalize heroin for recreational use. This policy only began 3 months ago, so no idea how you can there are falling addiction rates. Is there a different policy you are referring to? I'm not an expert, so that's definitely possible, please provide a link so I can educate myself.

Additionally, I'm not sure the program the UK implemented was very different from what Canada approved this past fall.

the UK has been doing this for decades and I think it's like I said, misleading to say addiction rates have fallen. They're still addicts, only getting it via prescription (in a controlled and monitored manner) vs the street and not any recreational user can get it from what I've read. The number of heroin addicts in the UK is dropping, especially among younger generations, but I don't think anyone attributes it to this program which has been around for decades.


Better take another look at the facts.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
pjcas18 : 1/12/2017 4:52 pm : link
In comment 13323116 BMac said:
Quote:
In comment 13323092 pjcas18 said:


Quote:


In comment 13323055 BMac said:


Quote:


In comment 13322946 Dan in the Springs said:


Quote:


In comment 13322535 jcn56 said:


Quote:My concern is that increasing availability will increase the total number of users.



Anywhere that drugs (yes, all drugs, including heroin, cocaine, etc) have been legalized have, without fail, experienced falling addiction/use rates with the attendant reduction in crime and disease. See Portugal, Great Britain, Switzerland, specific locations in Canada.



This is very misleading.

Canada has NOT made "drugs (yes, all drugs)" legal. What they did was allow doctors to medically prescribe prescription grade heroin to already addicted users when traditional addiction treatment has not proven effective, under the care and supervision of a physician. They did not legalize heroin for recreational use. This policy only began 3 months ago, so no idea how you can there are falling addiction rates. Is there a different policy you are referring to? I'm not an expert, so that's definitely possible, please provide a link so I can educate myself.

Additionally, I'm not sure the program the UK implemented was very different from what Canada approved this past fall.

the UK has been doing this for decades and I think it's like I said, misleading to say addiction rates have fallen. They're still addicts, only getting it via prescription (in a controlled and monitored manner) vs the street and not any recreational user can get it from what I've read. The number of heroin addicts in the UK is dropping, especially among younger generations, but I don't think anyone attributes it to this program which has been around for decades.



Better take another look at the facts.


Do you have a link? Below is one link about the Canadian Heroin "legalization" from September.
Link - ( New Window )
More  
pjcas18 : 1/12/2017 4:59 pm : link
Here is a link from druglibrary.org (Schaffer library of drug policy) about legalization efforts in many countries, this is what they say about UK:

Quote:


A. Great Britain

With the report of a government commission known as the Brain Committee of 1964, England instituted a policy whereby doctors could prescribe heroin so long as they followed certain treatment criteria.47 Previously in England, doctors could prescribe heroin much like any other opiate (such as morphine). This allowed a few unscrupulous doctors to sell ungodly amounts of heroin to members of the black market.48 Consequently, it was believed that if heroin were offered at medical clinics according to stringent rules and regulations, addicts would come to these clinics to seek treatment and eventually would overcome their habit.

As of 1983, however, England began to phase out these programs of clinically supplied heroin in favor of methadone treatment.49 Why? First, according to the reputable British physician journal Lancet, the number of addicts increased 100% between 1970 and 1980.50 A disproportionate number of these new addicts were between the ages of sixteen and seventeen.51 Second, only twenty percent of all of the addicts in England belonged to the clinical programs.52 At first blush, this fact seems strange - why would addicts choose not to participate in a program wherein they get free methadone? The answer probably lies in the fact that methadone does not produce the high that heroin does. Also, addicts probably did not care for the mandatory treatment and rehabilitation facets of the clinical programs. Whatever the reason, by 1985 England had 80,000 heroin addicts, the vast majority of whom wen not in treatment.53

A third reason why England began to abolish its clinical heroin program was the fact that not only were there few people, in them, but the programs themselves did not work. According to the British Medical Journal, more addicts left the program because of criminal convictions than because of treatment.54 Fourth, even with the clinical programs, heroin addicts had a death rate twenty-six times the average population. Finally, even when the programs were in operation, Scotland Yard had to increase its narcotics division 100% in order to cope with the increased crime rate.56

To summarize, the British experience with decriminalized heroin in the clinical context was a dismal failure. When experts from British Columbia were debating whether to create a similar program, they made the following conclusions that are so important as to deserve to be quoted at length:

While some success is claimed in terms of reducing the incidence of young users, the following findings have also been noted:

1) The British approach has failed to attract a majority of addicts;

2) Many registered addicts continue to turn to illicit sources of

drugs;

3) Many registered addicts do not decrease their dosage over time;

4) Many registered addicts continue to be involved in criminal activity;

5) Many registered addicts are chronically unemployed or do not earn enough to look after themselves;

6) The death rate of registered addicts is much higher than that of the general population and may be higher than that of North American addicts;

7) Since 1960, there has been a dramatic increase in the English addict population;

8) The black market for heroin continues to thrive;

9) Law enforcement appears to remain a necessary, costly and complex control measure.

In view of the above, it is felt that the application of the British approach to British Columbia would present serious dangers.57
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
Dan in the Springs : 1/12/2017 5:07 pm : link
In comment 13323113 BMac said:
Quote:

No indication of that as any sort of verifiable factor.


Acknowledged already. Also - cannot confirm that it isn't a factor, right?

No solid research actually exists as far as I can find, and so I revert to anecdotal evidence, of which there is plenty.

Got any evidence to the contrary of your own?
RE: I'm all about legalizing anything and everything  
Sgrcts : 1/12/2017 6:00 pm : link
In comment 13323066 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
But the claims that pot cures everything and is the most miraculous wonderdrug of all time do make me roll my eyes.


Big difference between cures everything and has efficacy for an incredible number of symptoms and conditions. So many of our pharmaceuticals are plant based, so why would it be surprising that Cannabis could be so beneficial?
Sgrcts  
Dunedin81 : 1/12/2017 7:13 pm : link
That is certainly positive, and discussing prescriptions alone might be relevant, but the data stops in 2010 and I would suggest that the conclusions might require some updating with the mushrooming of heroin and related deaths in Vermont and the rest of the Northeast.
RE: RE: I'm all about legalizing anything and everything  
Dunedin81 : 1/12/2017 7:16 pm : link
In comment 13323184 Sgrcts said:
Quote:
In comment 13323066 Greg from LI said:


Quote:


But the claims that pot cures everything and is the most miraculous wonderdrug of all time do make me roll my eyes.



Big difference between cures everything and has efficacy for an incredible number of symptoms and conditions. So many of our pharmaceuticals are plant based, so why would it be surprising that Cannabis could be so beneficial?


My wife suffers from chronic pain disorders, if the state of the law was different we would certainly consider her trying a course of therapy. However, I agree with Greg that this dogged insistence that marijuana is a wonder drug is remarkably annoying.
RE: More  
BMac : 1/12/2017 7:49 pm : link
In comment 13323124 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
Here is a link from druglibrary.org (Schaffer library of drug policy) about legalization efforts in many countries, this is what they say about UK:



Quote:




A. Great Britain

With the report of a government commission known as the Brain Committee of 1964, England instituted a policy whereby doctors could prescribe heroin so long as they followed certain treatment criteria.47 Previously in England, doctors could prescribe heroin much like any other opiate (such as morphine). This allowed a few unscrupulous doctors to sell ungodly amounts of heroin to members of the black market.48 Consequently, it was believed that if heroin were offered at medical clinics according to stringent rules and regulations, addicts would come to these clinics to seek treatment and eventually would overcome their habit.

As of 1983, however, England began to phase out these programs of clinically supplied heroin in favor of methadone treatment.49 Why? First, according to the reputable British physician journal Lancet, the number of addicts increased 100% between 1970 and 1980.50 A disproportionate number of these new addicts were between the ages of sixteen and seventeen.51 Second, only twenty percent of all of the addicts in England belonged to the clinical programs.52 At first blush, this fact seems strange - why would addicts choose not to participate in a program wherein they get free methadone? The answer probably lies in the fact that methadone does not produce the high that heroin does. Also, addicts probably did not care for the mandatory treatment and rehabilitation facets of the clinical programs. Whatever the reason, by 1985 England had 80,000 heroin addicts, the vast majority of whom wen not in treatment.53

A third reason why England began to abolish its clinical heroin program was the fact that not only were there few people, in them, but the programs themselves did not work. According to the British Medical Journal, more addicts left the program because of criminal convictions than because of treatment.54 Fourth, even with the clinical programs, heroin addicts had a death rate twenty-six times the average population. Finally, even when the programs were in operation, Scotland Yard had to increase its narcotics division 100% in order to cope with the increased crime rate.56

To summarize, the British experience with decriminalized heroin in the clinical context was a dismal failure. When experts from British Columbia were debating whether to create a similar program, they made the following conclusions that are so important as to deserve to be quoted at length:

While some success is claimed in terms of reducing the incidence of young users, the following findings have also been noted:

1) The British approach has failed to attract a majority of addicts;

2) Many registered addicts continue to turn to illicit sources of

drugs;

3) Many registered addicts do not decrease their dosage over time;

4) Many registered addicts continue to be involved in criminal activity;

5) Many registered addicts are chronically unemployed or do not earn enough to look after themselves;

6) The death rate of registered addicts is much higher than that of the general population and may be higher than that of North American addicts;

7) Since 1960, there has been a dramatic increase in the English addict population;

8) The black market for heroin continues to thrive;

9) Law enforcement appears to remain a necessary, costly and complex control measure.

In view of the above, it is felt that the application of the British approach to British Columbia would present serious dangers.57



I suspect, but cannot prove, that this isn't reporting from a particular POV. It appears that the indications reported from the referenced countries are notm in accord with your referenced "facts."
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
BMac : 1/12/2017 7:53 pm : link
In comment 13323137 Dan in the Springs said:
Quote:
In comment 13323113 BMac said:


Quote:



No indication of that as any sort of verifiable factor.



Acknowledged already. Also - cannot confirm that it isn't a factor, right?

No solid research actually exists as far as I can find, and so I revert to anecdotal evidence, of which there is plenty.

Got any evidence to the contrary of your own?


All I can reference you to, which I already have, is the evidence submitted by the countries I've named. I understand that I haven't cited exhaustive evidence, but frankly, I'm not going to do that on a football website. I throw the responsibility to support your assertions to you.
RE: In 2015  
HBart : 1/12/2017 7:54 pm : link
In comment 13321850 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
there were over 30,000 deaths from opioids, 7,000 from crack (all cocaine combined), which I believe is close to the peak for cocaine.

By percentages opiods is heavily slanted to white victims, but in total more blacks OD from opioids than from crack (and cocaine combined).

if crack ever reached these same levels of epidemic regardless of race I believe it would get the same attention.

regardless of people's perceived biases, at least in my opinion. AIDS I think may be a good example, AIDS disproportionately hit the gay and black communities, black especially, and it received a lot of attention.

the linked site doesn't show demographics of each overdose death, but I found that elsewhere. Link - ( New Window )


Based on the chart you've linked the uproar over prescription opioids is insanity. The population has increased 15% over the time period of the chart (which looks scary but in absolute numbers is puny) and the number of deaths is actually stable or decreasing.

Twice as many people die each year from accidental falls.
RE: RE: In 2015  
pjcas18 : 1/12/2017 8:02 pm : link
In comment 13323261 HBart said:
Quote:
In comment 13321850 pjcas18 said:


Quote:


there were over 30,000 deaths from opioids, 7,000 from crack (all cocaine combined), which I believe is close to the peak for cocaine.

By percentages opiods is heavily slanted to white victims, but in total more blacks OD from opioids than from crack (and cocaine combined).

if crack ever reached these same levels of epidemic regardless of race I believe it would get the same attention.

regardless of people's perceived biases, at least in my opinion. AIDS I think may be a good example, AIDS disproportionately hit the gay and black communities, black especially, and it received a lot of attention.

the linked site doesn't show demographics of each overdose death, but I found that elsewhere. Link - ( New Window )



Based on the chart you've linked the uproar over prescription opioids is insanity. The population has increased 15% over the time period of the chart (which looks scary but in absolute numbers is puny) and the number of deaths is actually stable or decreasing.

Twice as many people die each year from accidental falls.


yes, legally prescribed prescription opioids. The commercial with the soccer mom who was in a minor car accident and prescribed 20 vicodin and became a junkie heroin addict is an extreme rarity based on what I've read. In fact the link between legal prescription use and heroin use seems slim at best.

The bulk of heroin users do use pills first or at some point, but not via legitimate prescription, according at least to studies I've read.

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: At this point, there's more than enough justification  
Dan in the Springs : 1/12/2017 8:04 pm : link
In comment 13323260 BMac said:
Quote:

All I can reference you to, which I already have, is the evidence submitted by the countries I've named. I understand that I haven't cited exhaustive evidence, but frankly, I'm not going to do that on a football website. I throw the responsibility to support your assertions to you.


Guess you're missing my point. What you referenced is a claim that drug use/addiction, crime and disease are reduced with legalization - right?

You do understand that's not what I'm talking about - right?

I'm talking about something very specific. I'm concerned about long-term impact of legalization on career prep.

I've already told you that - and you haven't really responded directly to it. If you have any research to share related to this then please do. If not, it's okay to admit it and we can agree that the best we have is anecdotal evidence at present.

Thanks.
RE: Sgrcts  
Sgrcts : 1/12/2017 8:20 pm : link
In comment 13323223 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
That is certainly positive, and discussing prescriptions alone might be relevant, but the data stops in 2010 and I would suggest that the conclusions might require some updating with the mushrooming of heroin and related deaths in Vermont and the rest of the Northeast.


There are other studies- linked a time article about another one.

As far as Vermont goes, they have a very stringent medical program, so it's not easy to get a MMJ card, esp for pain. Strictly as it relates to opiate use, you will see the most impact when doctors are prescribing cannabis for pain instead of opiates. It's not a 1:1 comparison, but cannabis works for a large chunk of the cases.
Time link - ( New Window )
RE: RE: RE: I'm all about legalizing anything and everything  
Sgrcts : 1/12/2017 8:26 pm : link
In comment 13323226 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
In comment 13323184 Sgrcts said:


Quote:


In comment 13323066 Greg from LI said:


Quote:


But the claims that pot cures everything and is the most miraculous wonderdrug of all time do make me roll my eyes.



Big difference between cures everything and has efficacy for an incredible number of symptoms and conditions. So many of our pharmaceuticals are plant based, so why would it be surprising that Cannabis could be so beneficial?



My wife suffers from chronic pain disorders, if the state of the law was different we would certainly consider her trying a course of therapy. However, I agree with Greg that this dogged insistence that marijuana is a wonder drug is remarkably annoying.



All I can state is why be annoyed when you haven't done the research on the efficacy of it? The amount of conditions it can help treat is astounding, why would that annoy you? As I said, if you're interested in learning more you can read Sunjay Guptas words on. If you want to email me I'd be happy to send over other reading material as well.
So if medical marijuana was easier to come by...  
Dunedin81 : 1/12/2017 8:40 pm : link
People wouldn't be dropping like flies? Sorry, that simply strains credulity. Marijuana is ubiquitous in Vermont. It is not an exaggeration to say party life at UVM is as much pot-centric as alcohol-centric, or at least it wasn't one when I was an undergrad. Wonder-drug or not, that state's example alone suggests that your explanation at most accounts for a fraction of opiate/opioid abuse. I would suggest that an understanding of the last five years or so has much - not everything, but much - to do with the huge increase in the availability of heroin and other illicit drugs and little to do with marijuana, which is broadly available (legally, semi-legally or illegally) in states with varying degrees of heroin issues.
RE: So if medical marijuana was easier to come by...  
Sgrcts : 1/12/2017 8:51 pm : link
In comment 13323300 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
People wouldn't be dropping like flies? Sorry, that simply strains credulity. Marijuana is ubiquitous in Vermont. It is not an exaggeration to say party life at UVM is as much pot-centric as alcohol-centric, or at least it wasn't one when I was an undergrad. Wonder-drug or not, that state's example alone suggests that your explanation at most accounts for a fraction of opiate/opioid abuse. I would suggest that an understanding of the last five years or so has much - not everything, but much - to do with the huge increase in the availability of heroin and other illicit drugs and little to do with marijuana, which is broadly available (legally, semi-legally or illegally) in states with varying degrees of heroin issues.



100% not what I'm saying. It's a part of the solution, but it can't be maximized as part of the solution as long as the stigma around it continues.
I just disagree that it is first and foremost a pain problem...  
Dunedin81 : 1/12/2017 9:14 pm : link
This injury to oxy to heroin path happens, but as others have detailed it is the exception and not the rule. The more common scenario, born out anecdotally and statistically, is that individuals abuse prescription drugs recreationally and end up addicted, switching to different forms of administration (snorting) and then to heroin because of potency and price.

My point, which I've made on here several times, is that this quest for an addict deserving of our sympathy is wrongheaded. All addicts are deserving of our sympathy, because they are people, father's, sons, mothers, daughters, siblings, etc. If it's primarily a pain problem your recommendation makes all the sense in the world. Now I agree with you by and large, but not because of the opiate/opioid epidemic though.
RE: I just disagree that it is first and foremost a pain problem...  
Sgrcts : 1/12/2017 9:38 pm : link
In comment 13323331 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
This injury to oxy to heroin path happens, but as others have detailed it is the exception and not the rule. The more common scenario, born out anecdotally and statistically, is that individuals abuse prescription drugs recreationally and end up addicted, switching to different forms of administration (snorting) and then to heroin because of potency and price.

My point, which I've made on here several times, is that this quest for an addict deserving of our sympathy is wrongheaded. All addicts are deserving of our sympathy, because they are people, father's, sons, mothers, daughters, siblings, etc. If it's primarily a pain problem your recommendation makes all the sense in the world. Now I agree with you by and large, but not because of the opiate/opioid epidemic though.


Pain can mean a lot of things, and people can become addicts for a lot of reasons. Its a longer conversation but the the reality is, as long as humans exist, they will find substances to help them get through the days. Whether those are relatively harmless like caffeine, relatively harmless in moderation but incredibly damaging when abused like alcohol or incredibly harmful on all levels like heroin, they will be sought out and used.

Its INCREDIBLY hypocritical for the US government to allow so many opiate derivatives to be legal while continuing its outdated prohibition on another drug with far more medical applications, and without all of the incredible risks and downsides of the potential of them used recreationally.

We are fighting a war that is unwinnable on too many fronts. Spending DEA money, local policing, lost tax revenue on many levels- cannabis is, conservatively, a 100 billion dollar industry on the black market. None of that revenue gets taxed, not from sales, not from income, etc.

Its not a panacea for heroin abuse, opiate abuse predates cannabis prohbition obviously. It's undoubtedly one step further to help figure out ways to reign it in though.
Marijuana is a wonder drug  
PA Giant Fan : 1/12/2017 11:42 pm : link
From seizures to pain to PTSD to sleep disorders to potential cancer fighting capabilities to glaucoma. Pretty wonderous if you ask me plus it is not dangerous and has minimal side effects.
Pain doesn't have to be physical  
buford : 1/13/2017 9:09 am : link
There are probably some people who were perfectly fine and had to take pain meds for some physical problems and then became addicted. But there are many more who turn to drugs, illegal and prescribed and alcohol to self medicate for emotional or mental pain. You only need to watch a few Intervention episodes to see how damaged some people are and they can't function without some kind of drug to get them through the day. It usually does more harm than good, but it's what they do.
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner