3 ms·

What if instead of all the money poured into law enforcement and prosecution we instead make treatment for addiction completely frictionless, effortless and gui

by ck2 4y ago

What if instead of all the money poured into law enforcement and prosecution we instead make treatment for addiction completely frictionless, effortless and guilt-less. Like walking into a supermarket easy. Of course progressives have been begging for that to happen with mental health in the USA for decades, so all this is a fantasy to try to help people in society.

blfr 4y ago
We do not have the technology to make mental health care supermarket easy. Psychiatric drugs have NNTs in the dozens, terrible side effects, or both. It's a fantasy because it has no chance of working even before you consider the enormous amount of resources it would require. I strongly suspect the same about just letting people do copious amounts of legal drugs and then trying to fix addictions they develop. Stepping in after the damage is done is usually both much more expensive and way less effective. Ounce of prevention and all that.
- tchaffee 4y ago
  The ounce of prevention doesn't work. Prohibition has been a huge failure.
starkd 4y ago
That might work if drugs were as easy to stop than start. Addiction treatment has a very low success rate with high relapse rate, and its incredibly expensive per user. The best treatment remains not starting in the first place.
- tchaffee 4y ago
  Prohibition doesn't work at all at stopping people from starting in the first place. It has over a hundred years of failure. Switzerland hugely reduced an endemic heroin problem in part by making it a health issue instead of a criminal issue. And Portugal has shown a lot of success in decriminalization of most drugs. Illegal drugs are perhaps the 2nd largest business globally, after petroleum. Prohibition is an abject failure at "not starting in the first place".
  - starkd 4y ago
    Yes. I was not claiming prohibition did anything.
    - tchaffee 4y ago
      So how do you suggest "not starting in the first place"? How would you implement that if not prohibition? Keeping in mind that the parent comment made a concrete suggestion on what could replace prohibition. If prohibition didn't do anything then we should surely drop it. And then?
      - starkd 4y ago
        Well, policies that introduce a little bit of friction into the choice to do drugs would be a good start. Mostly, education that warns against the harms. But, your comment seems to indicate you are more interested in legal ways you can use them than recognizing the lives that have been damaged.
        tchaffee 4y ago
        Then you've completely misread my comments. Where did you get the idea that I'm interested in anything other than what actually works in reducing harm? Can you quote me? Pumping money into education about the pros and cons of recreational drug use would likely do a lot to reduce abuse and addiction. However only talking about the harms was already tried and was a failure. Most kids will at least try alcohol or marijuana or vaping nicotine and if you've already lied by omission about the pros they won't trust you anymore. But if you can manage to educate in an unbiased and scientific way that would likely lead to fewer lives damaged. Worth a try at least.
        starkd 4y ago
        Yes, more education that is honest about the effects, good and bad, would be the best approach. But that involves a cultural shift where celebrities, teachers and parents all recognize the dangers and preach/remind young people how bad it is. I was not saying you were more interested in doing drugs, but your language just seemed to weight users' interests equally with harm reduction. That is just my instinct though. Sorry, if I am mistaken.
- sitkack 4y ago
  > The best treatment remains not starting in the first place. This is not shown. Many many people try drugs like speed, marijuana, cocaine and do not become addicted, many only do them a handful of times. Absolutist policies are the ones that encourage draconian laws and responses because by the very nature of your statement, the first time is the worst time. How about a recreational drug driver's license? It is how we respond to a situation that matters, not getting into the situation in the first place, esp when that situation is so easy to get into.
tchaffee 4y ago
That does indeed seem to be working in Portugal. One unpredicted side effect of making it a health issue instead of a criminal issue is that it's no longer so cool to young kids. Breaking the law is a bit of a rebellious thrill. Getting an addiction like Uncle Bob and having to visit the doctor a lot, not so cool.

by ck2 4y ago

blfr 4y ago

We do not have the technology to make mental health care supermarket easy. Psychiatric drugs have NNTs in the dozens, terrible side effects, or both. It's a fantasy because it has no chance of working even before you consider the enormous amount of resources it would require. I strongly suspect the same about just letting people do copious amounts of legal drugs and then trying to fix addictions they develop. Stepping in after the damage is done is usually both much more expensive and way less effective. Ounce of prevention and all that.

tchaffee 4y ago
The ounce of prevention doesn't work. Prohibition has been a huge failure.

starkd 4y ago

That might work if drugs were as easy to stop than start. Addiction treatment has a very low success rate with high relapse rate, and its incredibly expensive per user. The best treatment remains not starting in the first place.

tchaffee 4y ago
Prohibition doesn't work at all at stopping people from starting in the first place. It has over a hundred years of failure. Switzerland hugely reduced an endemic heroin problem in part by making it a health issue instead of a criminal issue. And Portugal has shown a lot of success in decriminalization of most drugs. Illegal drugs are perhaps the 2nd largest business globally, after petroleum. Prohibition is an abject failure at "not starting in the first place".
- starkd 4y ago
  Yes. I was not claiming prohibition did anything.
  - tchaffee 4y ago
    So how do you suggest "not starting in the first place"? How would you implement that if not prohibition? Keeping in mind that the parent comment made a concrete suggestion on what could replace prohibition. If prohibition didn't do anything then we should surely drop it. And then?
    - starkd 4y ago
      Well, policies that introduce a little bit of friction into the choice to do drugs would be a good start. Mostly, education that warns against the harms. But, your comment seems to indicate you are more interested in legal ways you can use them than recognizing the lives that have been damaged.
      - tchaffee 4y ago
        Then you've completely misread my comments. Where did you get the idea that I'm interested in anything other than what actually works in reducing harm? Can you quote me? Pumping money into education about the pros and cons of recreational drug use would likely do a lot to reduce abuse and addiction. However only talking about the harms was already tried and was a failure. Most kids will at least try alcohol or marijuana or vaping nicotine and if you've already lied by omission about the pros they won't trust you anymore. But if you can manage to educate in an unbiased and scientific way that would likely lead to fewer lives damaged. Worth a try at least.
        starkd 4y ago
        Yes, more education that is honest about the effects, good and bad, would be the best approach. But that involves a cultural shift where celebrities, teachers and parents all recognize the dangers and preach/remind young people how bad it is. I was not saying you were more interested in doing drugs, but your language just seemed to weight users' interests equally with harm reduction. That is just my instinct though. Sorry, if I am mistaken.
sitkack 4y ago
> The best treatment remains not starting in the first place. This is not shown. Many many people try drugs like speed, marijuana, cocaine and do not become addicted, many only do them a handful of times. Absolutist policies are the ones that encourage draconian laws and responses because by the very nature of your statement, the first time is the worst time. How about a recreational drug driver's license? It is how we respond to a situation that matters, not getting into the situation in the first place, esp when that situation is so easy to get into.

tchaffee 4y ago

That does indeed seem to be working in Portugal. One unpredicted side effect of making it a health issue instead of a criminal issue is that it's no longer so cool to young kids. Breaking the law is a bit of a rebellious thrill. Getting an addiction like Uncle Bob and having to visit the doctor a lot, not so cool.