BBC: Why is heroin killing so many people?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The idea that people should be forced to go to work to pay taxes to give junkies free heroin is outrageous.

The argument that they will commit crime of we don't give them free heroin is contemptible.

They will do bad things if we don't give them what they want, so we must give it to them, is complete surrender, agreeing to be perpetually held to ransom.
:lol:

Lets ignore stats and facts. Lets fail out of principle.
 


I wonder how many of you could go out into a town or city right now and be in possession of some heroin or whatever by 5pm

Genuine pondering thought
 
Well its not anecdotal per se, but professional experience. although i certainly wont say "if not most" though
We went through a consultation prior to a tender process for supervised consumption about a year ago. It obviously came up, and I wouldn't suggest it doesn't happen.

I just think if someone is using phrases like "many and most" they should be able to quantify it. :p

Virtually every addict I've ever spoken to which is in the hundreds.
So you pulled it out of the air.

Cheers.
 
We went through a consultation prior to a tender process for supervised consumption about a year ago. It obviously came up, and I wouldn't suggest it doesn't happen.

I just think if someone is using phrases like "many and most" they should be able to quantify it. :p
especially as in a lot of cases they dont even take the methadone and sell it on so what may appear as a double hit is just still heroin off the streets
 
I wonder how many of you could go out into a town or city right now and be in possession of some heroin or whatever by 5pm

Genuine pondering thought

I reckon about an hour or two. Not because I have connections or owt but because I see a lot of people about who are clearly on something.

Ask enough people and promise to pay and eventually you’ll get hold of some.

Bit scary really
 
I reckon about an hour or two. Not because I have connections or owt but because I see a lot of people about who are clearly on something.

Ask enough people and promise to pay and eventually you’ll get hold of some.

Bit scary really

I wonder if Panorama or a programme like that have actually tried. It would be interesting for the powers that be to see just how easily or not it is to do it, and what they can do about it.

I'm sure some will say "It'll force it underground and it will be harder to tackle". Others may look on it as an opportunity to change people's lives for the better.
As ever it's the root cause that needs addressing.
 
I wonder if Panorama or a programme like that have actually tried. It would be interesting for the powers that be to see just how easily or not it is to do it, and what they can do about it.

I'm sure some will say "It'll force it underground and it will be harder to tackle". Others may look on it as an opportunity to change people's lives for the better.
As ever it's the root cause that needs addressing.
What they can do about what?
 
We went through a consultation prior to a tender process for supervised consumption about a year ago. It obviously came up, and I wouldn't suggest it doesn't happen.

I just think if someone is using phrases like "many and most" they should be able to quantify it. :p


So you pulled it out of the air.

Cheers.

Well not quite, of the couple of hundred or so I know, virtually all of them. Cheers.
 
if you're ultimately of the view point of "fuck em" if someone falls into that vicious cycle then there's likely nothing anyone can say to change their mind. Even you spell out that it's actually going to save money (as the evidence abroad suggests)

Absolutely, I 100% agree. But that doesn't solve the heroin problem. Or are you just suggesting we let them all die because it's their own fault?
Regardless of whatever measures are done regarding heroin, people aren't going to give it up unless ultimately they want to stop and have the will power to do so.
They were the ones that allowed the needle in their own arm the first time so they have to determine when the last time is, whether it's through an OD by accident or through choice.
Same with people who are on prescription meds year on year....the doctor may facilitate it but ultimately docs can only work on what the patient is saying alongside any medical thinking they have.
 
Ok as you rightly say about smoking and drinking been normalised and legal. Which is my argument against normalising smack and making it legal possession wise, although no need to possess as why would someone posses it if they are getting it free.

The needle exchanges throughout the country also offer a safe space to take heroine but have simple rules. The one in Sunderland as these facilities but people break these simple rules. I.e. Clean up, be sick in provided containers, don't be horrible to staff. Just a few simple rules. 90% of their customers fail.

That's why the government won't take it further. Watch Stacey Dooley on drugs, whatcha cape cods heroin programme. They can't turn up for the methadone course which is always backed up with a suspended sentence or probation.

With all due respect I don't need to watch Stacey Dooley on drugs. I did an MSc based around harm reduction and am starting a PhD on it. I spend most my life with drug users, both in the community and in prisons, as well as reading pretty much every paper under the sun about drug abuse and how to minimise the harms of it.

You're hitting me with a lot of stuff which is (presumably) anecdotal at best. Unless you have a source on 90% of heroin addicts failing to abide by rules then it's pretty meaningless to a serious conversation about heroin use.

You can prescribe a drug and not "normalise" it. Prior to 2016 there were hundreds of substances which were legal but were not normalised (e.g. all the NPS drugs). Often criminalisation has done nothing to stop the use of a drug c.f. ketamine. Also, it's worth pointing out that if you go to hospital and need serious pain killers you may well be given I.V. diamorphine, which is heroin. So we actually prescribe heroin for people in extreme pain. That hasn't resulted in it being "normalised".

Once again, you say that legalisation/ decriminalisation may result in normalisation, but as per my previous post decriminalisation doesn't result in normalisation. In fact, as I said, when they decriminalised drugs in Portugal heroin addiction fell. Holland has persistently had lower rates of cannabis consumption than the UK despite being legal to purchase. In Colorado, post legalisation there was a small increase in cannabis rates but a decrease in cannabis consumption amongst children & young adults; those most vulnerable to mental health effects. You're assuming that decriminalisation/ legalisation/ regulation affect consumption rates, and the empirical evidence is they don't. If you get into heroin the last concern will be whether you might get 100 hours community service for possession, or even a custodial sentence. Your concern will probably be scoring heroin. Hence why so many addicts will steal/ sell themselves/ whatever to keep using. However, it's also worth mentioning that a lot of heroin addicts hold down jobs for years and years.
 
Regardless of whatever measures are done regarding heroin, people aren't going to give it up unless ultimately they want to stop and have the will power to do so.
It's exactly for the people who want to stop.
 
There are lot of people who clearly need help. What needs to happen primarily is take out the suppliers.
If you've been to Manchester and seen the people in Piccadilly Gardens, some may want help, some don't.
Some probably don't care because they're getting what they want and feel they have no other option.

Well done for getting off the heroin.
What needs to be addressed is:
How people end up on it in the first place
How they get it or keep getting hold of it and
Why they keep using it.

It's about breaking the cycle I suppose.

There was a Spice Zombie in Wigan this Saturday. Comatose on a bench. Ambulance had to come and get them.
It's a shame that anyone would get themselves into that situation in this day and age.

I agree about breaking the cycle but it's more than a f***ing suppose. Strangely enough, prescribing heroin actually achieves it. I've said it numerous times that this is exactly what Holland did and it stopped new users getting into it. And that's because all the hard core junkies weren't buying black market, they got it legal. This led to a reduction in the amount of dealers selling it, which in turn made it harder for new customers to find somewhere to score from. How the fuck people can not get that simple fact in their heads is beyond me. As I've said, I'm no expert but I have got a bit of an decent insight into the issues and the simple truth is this. The current system for dealing with drugs has failed and is failing and will continue to fail. The war on drugs is older than me and all I've seen come of it is more and more drugs being available and more money being made from them.

You want kids with parents who are fucked up not to have access to the drugs that fucked them up. Kill the f***ing market then, and target those who make money off the back off misery. But that's not morally appetizing for the perfect folk of Britain so guess we'll just carry on condemning those who are fucked up and let their kids have access to it. As that is what is happening right now, every day, up and down the country. Stark choice you all have; do something to alleviate the misery and the fallout of this shit or do nothing and let the same shit keep happening. Let's say the fate of all those kids is in your hands, what would you do? Do something to try to help them so they don't follow the same path or leave them to rot just because their parents fucked it up. Because currently, you're leaving them to rot

Spice, heroin, and weed are all different and have different effects. You chucking them all together shows an incredibly limited knowledge of drugs and how they work tbh. And I've said it before and I'll say it again, we only got Spice and all them 'legal highs' as cannabis was illegal. It was marketed as a safer alternative when it was actually more dangerous than weed. It's a brilliant example of how shitty legislation created a problem that never would have happened if weed had been legal.
 
I agree about breaking the cycle but it's more than a f***ing suppose. Strangely enough, prescribing heroin actually achieves it. I've said it numerous times that this is exactly what Holland did and it stopped new users getting into it. And that's because all the hard core junkies weren't buying black market, they got it legal. This led to a reduction in the amount of dealers selling it, which in turn made it harder for new customers to find somewhere to score from. How the fuck people can not get that simple fact in their heads is beyond me. As I've said, I'm no expert but I have got a bit of an decent insight into the issues and the simple truth is this. The current system for dealing with drugs has failed and is failing and will continue to fail. The war on drugs is older than me and all I've seen come of it is more and more drugs being available and more money being made from them.

You want kids with parents who are fucked up not to have access to the drugs that fucked them up. Kill the f***ing market then, and target those who make money off the back off misery. But that's not morally appetizing for the perfect folk of Britain so guess we'll just carry on condemning those who are fucked up and let their kids have access to it. As that is what is happening right now, every day, up and down the country. Stark choice you all have; do something to alleviate the misery and the fallout of this shit or do nothing and let the same shit keep happening. Let's say the fate of all those kids is in your hands, what would you do? Do something to try to help them so they don't follow the same path or leave them to rot just because their parents fucked it up. Because currently, you're leaving them to rot

Spice, heroin, and weed are all different and have different effects. You chucking them all together shows an incredibly limited knowledge of drugs and how they work tbh. And I've said it before and I'll say it again, we only got Spice and all them 'legal highs' as cannabis was illegal. It was marketed as a safer alternative when it was actually more dangerous than weed. It's a brilliant example of how shitty legislation created a problem that never would have happened if weed had been legal.

I do wonder what would happen if weed was legal.
Do you think people would move onto something else because it was illegal?

Genuine question. I'm just wondering if that might be the case. The thrill of having something you shouldn't have and all that
 
I think you should have a read of my previous comments which clearly state that addicts who are on methadone also take heroin as to top up due to their tolerance levels or need to constant hits (delete as appropriate). ps for @Some Random Guy i have seen and heard patients talking about it whilst collecting methadone, psychiatric meds (i was on the professional side of the counter ;))

For some results have a look at the brief summary which was handily linked by @Lankester Merrin which details the trial which had one study location in Darlington to counteract that planned care can work. Results indicated that whilst receiving their prescribed diamorphine or IV/oral methadone a lot werent getting additional hits on the street.

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/ioppn/depts/addictions/research/drugs/riott.aspx

To replicate their heroin street use they would ascertain the amount they take a day, and give them an approximate dose which can be easily titrated up or down depending on response, this is already done with methadone and replicated across almost every speciality of healthcare. Its just basic medicine and conversion charts between opiates is already available. Add into that the use of clean aseptic technique when adminsitering, different site and method of administration to include fluids such as sodium chloride or glucose etc etc and it becomes more of a clinical procedure.

It is a clinically proven alternative, im not sure why you think you would know better than the clinicians involved in the study with demonstrable evidence apart from the fact it may see reductions in crime.

I wasn't involved in the RIOTT clinically, although I worked at TEWV when the trial was going on.

I don't think that it was intended as a replacement for methadone for all patients. It was simply an acknowledgement that for a particular group of addicts methadone treatment wasn't achieving very much, and they were living very chaotic lifestyles, which were costing the NHS and other agencies lots of money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top