As an opiate addict on methadone for 5 years, I have a problem with this article because of several major factual inaccuracies. First, and most notably, heroin

As an opiate addict on methadone for 5 years, I have a problem with this article because of several major factual inaccuracies. First, and most notably, heroin withdrawal, like withdrawal from any opiate worth its cost, is absolute torture. It's ironic that Burroughs was quoted here, since he's written some of the most accurate descriptions of the utter pain of withdrawal. It's far, far more serious than something like swine flu (which I had during the pandemic), and people can and do die from opiate withdrawal on a frequent basis, usually from the accompanying cardiac issues. Second, having dosed in methadone clinics across this country, I've never seen one with an armed guard, or even an unarmed guard. I've dosed in a clinic in Gary, Indiana, and one in a rough spot near Orlando. Both were clean, safe, well-run places with no guards necessary. In my 5 years on methadone, I've only seen the police called to a clinic on one occasion, when a disgruntled patient got a little verbally abusive toward a counselor. But never physical violence, and never a need for armed guards. It's possible that there is a clinic somewhere that has an armed guard, but saying methadone clinics in general have armed guards is incorrect. Others with far more experience in issues like this than the writer have commented on other inaccuracies, like the "saucer-like" eyes of heroin users, and the exaggerated desirability of Subutex to IV drug users. Because of inaccuracies like this, I have to doubt the other "facts" reported in this article. The whole piece seems to have been written to support a pre-existing idea the writer has about drug policy. Good journalists do this the other way around.