To be clear, I think the research is excellent and important. My problem is with the spin the Economist puts on it (and it’s always more egregious with the econ

To be clear, I think the research is excellent and important. My problem is with the spin the Economist puts on it (and it’s always more egregious with the economist because of the lack of a byline). The Economist predisposes it’s readers to believe that this indicates needle exchange programs are bad, as opposed to leaving open the possibility that due to changing circumstances needle exchange programs which have proven to be extremely successful, also need to adapt, much like every other individual, program, company or non-profit at any time.