4 ms·

What are we going to do? Should some kind of 'Basic Assistance' include fairly unlimited metered doses of whatever drugs a person may want? Fully legal, regul

What are we going to do? Should some kind of 'Basic Assistance' include fairly unlimited metered doses of whatever drugs a person may want? Fully legal, regulated, and taxed? What would an idealised harm reduction programme look like?

cf498 8y ago
Just make it a legal produc. The question is how many people would use some RCs or drugs with extreme side effects when they had access to ordinary weed. Also, something like opiates can be unbelievably cheap. There is a reason laudanum was the drug of choice of the poorest segments of society. Its byproduct of the existing poppy harvest and many countries currently have to spend money to get rid of it by washing any poppy seed before selling it. Without having to worry about blowing through a month wage in no time because of the black market cost, the resulting withdrawal and suffering the effects of what ever it was laced with, almost all unwanted side effects would be gone. The question is what do you do with drugs who change the behavior of the user dramatically to the degree that they become a risk to others. We currently have that problem with alcohol and see the side effects in violent and reckless behavior. From domestic violence to drunk driving. The answer might be to shift the approach from restricting possession to restricting consumption and being under the influence in certain areas or situation where they might become a danger to others. The only open question I see is how to deal with expensive, addictive substances that change the behavior of its consumers. Crack comes to mind.
bfuller 8y ago
Germany and other places do opiate maintenance with diamorphine (heroin). You go in and get to shoot up as much as you want then go about your day. Sounds nice.
- hguhghuff 8y ago
  >> sounds nice Sounds shit to me but I fully respect any system that allows it. These people can probably get on with some sort of life in between their hits instead of spending their lives trying to get in a position to get high agsin.
  - vbrandl 8y ago
    Switzerland has a program where clean heroin is given to addicts. Since the program started in 1994, none of the participants died from an overdose or other problems caused by impure drugs. Also, as long as you have a clean substance, it is actually easier and healthier to taper of heroin by lowering the dose than by substituting it with something like methadone. The last withdrawal when going from a low dose to taking nothing anymore is way heavier when coming of methadone than it is for heroin.
- gaspoweredcat 8y ago
  im not sure id encourage the use of full diamorphine for this id argue using straight morphine is sufficient, its also cheaper for the service to provide (also cheaper than the likes of methadone too as far as im aware)
  - tim333 8y ago
    Reduces the chance of them using black market stuff though. I'm not sure the actual cost of the legal diamorphine is much in the scheme of things. Update: "The cost of a year's diamorphine treatment for an addict is about £15,000, although this includes administering and supervising the injections." Compare: "CEA estimates that in 2015, the economic cost of the [US] opioid crisis was $504.0 billion, or 2.8 percent of GDP that year." And 33,000 deaths. It can be worth intervening to stop these things going exponential.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
vbrandl 8y ago
I think first of all, possession of all drugs should be legalized. Secondly, we need state controlled entities that are allowed to sell drugs. This tackles a number of problems: Better youth protection: a dealer doesn't care if you are 18 or not Consumer protection: clean substances without dangerous cutting agents will prevent health issues and accidental overdoses No more black market: as long as the legal substances aren't too expensive, a legalisation will close the black market for drugs since it is no longer economic to sell them illegally. (This might also take a huge hit on the finances of organised crime and terrorist organisations) More money for helping addicts and _neutral_ drug education: when taxing the sells, the money can be used to treat addiction. Further the legalisation might change society's point of view on drugs which might make it easier for addicts to seek help without being judged. Before being able to buy drugs from these state controlled entities, the buyer should be required to acquire some kind of license. I imagine the license similar to a first aid course. Participants should be educated about health risks, dosages, safer use guidelines and so on. There should be licences for different classes of drugs, e.g. opioids, stimulants, cannabinoids, psychedelics and so on.
- xorfish 8y ago
  classes of drugs, e.g. opioids, stimulants, cannabinoids, psychedelics and so on Don't forget the dangerous drugs alcohol and tobaco in that list.
  - vbrandl 8y ago
    Of course. These should require licences as well. I might even go a step further and ban alcohol and tobaco from being sold in supermarkets but only in the same stores where you could buy the other drugs.

cf498 8y ago

Just make it a legal produc. The question is how many people would use some RCs or drugs with extreme side effects when they had access to ordinary weed. Also, something like opiates can be unbelievably cheap. There is a reason laudanum was the drug of choice of the poorest segments of society. Its byproduct of the existing poppy harvest and many countries currently have to spend money to get rid of it by washing any poppy seed before selling it. Without having to worry about blowing through a month wage in no time because of the black market cost, the resulting withdrawal and suffering the effects of what ever it was laced with, almost all unwanted side effects would be gone. The question is what do you do with drugs who change the behavior of the user dramatically to the degree that they become a risk to others. We currently have that problem with alcohol and see the side effects in violent and reckless behavior. From domestic violence to drunk driving. The answer might be to shift the approach from restricting possession to restricting consumption and being under the influence in certain areas or situation where they might become a danger to others. The only open question I see is how to deal with expensive, addictive substances that change the behavior of its consumers. Crack comes to mind.

bfuller 8y ago

Germany and other places do opiate maintenance with diamorphine (heroin). You go in and get to shoot up as much as you want then go about your day. Sounds nice.

hguhghuff 8y ago
>> sounds nice Sounds shit to me but I fully respect any system that allows it. These people can probably get on with some sort of life in between their hits instead of spending their lives trying to get in a position to get high agsin.
- vbrandl 8y ago
  Switzerland has a program where clean heroin is given to addicts. Since the program started in 1994, none of the participants died from an overdose or other problems caused by impure drugs. Also, as long as you have a clean substance, it is actually easier and healthier to taper of heroin by lowering the dose than by substituting it with something like methadone. The last withdrawal when going from a low dose to taking nothing anymore is way heavier when coming of methadone than it is for heroin.
gaspoweredcat 8y ago
im not sure id encourage the use of full diamorphine for this id argue using straight morphine is sufficient, its also cheaper for the service to provide (also cheaper than the likes of methadone too as far as im aware)
- tim333 8y ago
  Reduces the chance of them using black market stuff though. I'm not sure the actual cost of the legal diamorphine is much in the scheme of things. Update: "The cost of a year's diamorphine treatment for an addict is about £15,000, although this includes administering and supervising the injections." Compare: "CEA estimates that in 2015, the economic cost of the [US] opioid crisis was $504.0 billion, or 2.8 percent of GDP that year." And 33,000 deaths. It can be worth intervening to stop these things going exponential.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

vbrandl 8y ago

I think first of all, possession of all drugs should be legalized. Secondly, we need state controlled entities that are allowed to sell drugs. This tackles a number of problems: Better youth protection: a dealer doesn't care if you are 18 or not Consumer protection: clean substances without dangerous cutting agents will prevent health issues and accidental overdoses No more black market: as long as the legal substances aren't too expensive, a legalisation will close the black market for drugs since it is no longer economic to sell them illegally. (This might also take a huge hit on the finances of organised crime and terrorist organisations) More money for helping addicts and _neutral_ drug education: when taxing the sells, the money can be used to treat addiction. Further the legalisation might change society's point of view on drugs which might make it easier for addicts to seek help without being judged. Before being able to buy drugs from these state controlled entities, the buyer should be required to acquire some kind of license. I imagine the license similar to a first aid course. Participants should be educated about health risks, dosages, safer use guidelines and so on. There should be licences for different classes of drugs, e.g. opioids, stimulants, cannabinoids, psychedelics and so on.

xorfish 8y ago
classes of drugs, e.g. opioids, stimulants, cannabinoids, psychedelics and so on Don't forget the dangerous drugs alcohol and tobaco in that list.
- vbrandl 8y ago
  Of course. These should require licences as well. I might even go a step further and ban alcohol and tobaco from being sold in supermarkets but only in the same stores where you could buy the other drugs.