4 ms·
It's becoming a logistical problem in Switzerland to have so little replacement as they've aged. There aren't enough to warrant many centers anymore, but each
by yayana 8y ago
It's becoming a logistical problem in Switzerland to have so little replacement as they've aged.
There aren't enough to warrant many centers anymore, but each closing means some would have travel further, possibly dropping out.
The US doesn't have to worry about these kinds of problems.. or about who will buy it's newly acquired crop domestically with veterans such as the one in the article coming home with trauma and addictions.
Still, a little sad for the US if Portugal and Switzerland are the first signs of European dominos -- Russian and domestic customers can't make strong demand for agriculture at US scale.. Asia is too brutal about drugs and Africa too poor..
Continued financial support for Afghanistan and less black money for operations. Is this an example of nothing is ever easy or of nothing ever goes to plan..
- leetcrew 8y ago> It's becoming a logistical problem in Switzerland to have so little replacement as they've aged. this sounds like a pretty good problem to have.
- tomcam 8y ago> this sounds like a pretty good problem to have. Think that one through. Who pays for the disabled, unemployed, and elderly?
- leetcrew 8y agounless I misread the post, the logistical problem is that there aren't enough new heroin addicts to justify keeping so many centers open. not sure what that has to do with paying for the unemployed and elderly.
- stephengillie 8y ago20 years is enough to quit anything. Something here doesn't add up. Have there been a lot of new heroin users entering this system over the past 20 years? Or have these governments been supporting the drug addiction of a small handful of people who refuse to kick the habit, despite 20 years of therapy? Also, who fills the prescriptions? Or do the doctors just prescribe whatever the patient can get from a dealer? How does free healthcare the dealer? GP's great article is paywalled.
- cm2012 8y agoIt's not necessarily bad to support the drug addictions of a small handful of people for 20 years. Some people just suck at life, due to mental illness. They're going to be addicts regardless. It is insanely cheaper to just give them drugs than to close your eyes and let the other costs of them being unpredictable, homeless and sick add up.
- stephengillie 8y agoBut isn't the point that you require treatment alongside the drug? And yes, supporting addiction over decades is hugely damaging. Also, please be more empathetic towards your fellow human. Giving up on someone doesn't help.
- xkcd-sucks 8y ago"Predisposed to addiction" is how we say it in the industry, and it really means "has a shitty life." The diagnostic criteria for addiction are whether the person can't stop doing the thing despite wanting to, and whether doing the thing causes problems. If they're stable-- whether on or off medication of any kind including opiates-- then the addiction is considered successfully managed. Also, mental illnesses are never cured. They're managed, and the best possible outcome is stability over a lifetime. Typically stressors induce un-managed relapse, so staying on dope and keeping tolerance stable really is the best outcome for people living in adverse circumstances.
- stephengillie 8y agoSo, instead of helping these people with their "predisposition", these countries are helping with their habit. How is this admirable?
- TylerE 8y agoBecause it's better for them to have legal access to a controlled, safe supply than to be robbing houses for money to score who-knows-what off the street? Making drugs illegal has never stopped anyone from doing drugs, it just adds additional problems to their life (hey, they have a felony record now, no one will hire them).