Recreatioinal use would drop if the message was clear "HEROIN IS MEDICINE".

HEROIN IS MEDICINE, and if you don't need it then don't start taking it for no reason.

For those who are allready addicted to it, or morphine or other opiate drugs, and for others who are "underserved" by the medical mainstream, having a legal supply of Heroin would, as the results show, really help make Canada a better place.

Most heroin addicts DO have medical problems... they are simply "self-medicating".

Another thing is that heroin and morphine are physically addictive, and the one thing that must not happen is that those drugs are restricted.

Consider this: it is inhumane it is to restrict a substance that people need to take three time a day. Thats pretty simple stuff...

What the Naomi Study found is that by giving heroin addicts heroin, the addicts were no longer a source of trouble in our society. DUH.

Here are some quotes from the Naomi study that was recently concluded, where heroin addicts in large cities were given the heroin they need, for one year, and the Naomi workers recorded the vital stats on the addict's lives:

quote:

---

all showed an increased ability to get housing and showed improved health.

those on heroin or hydromorphone were twice as likely to stay in treatment compared to those on methadone.

Reduction in crime was greater in the group receiving heroin

participants reduced the amount of heroin they used per day and the number of times they used per day

---

Addicts can hold down jobs.

Addicts are not all messed up, that is just when they are in withdrawals, an effect of prohibition, not the drugs.

And, it could be that the case that Heroin is so valuable, and addictive, that it creates a huge market, so the various agencies of the US government are using heroin as an alternate source of money for projects and activites that cannot be funded through regular government budgets, and THATS the reason heroin is prohibited. But I digress...

So - what do Babblers think? - Give addicts their heroin and quit trying to make them take stuff they do not like [methadone]? Quit with the insane "War on Drugs" because it isn't reducing the amount of drugs or the numbers of users, and in fact it does a huge amount of harm to society?

Would crime rates drop if drugs were legalised, and isn't that a whole lot better for society than this continuous struggle to eradicate drugs and put addicts in jail?

In my mind, medicinalizing herion seems logical. A friend who has had a life long problem with opiate addiction told me a long time ago that it's not the heroin that kills, it's the stuff you have to do to get it.

But, what appears to be sublime logic in the mind has often proved to have unintended consequences in practice. So studies are important.

Working in a factory for almost 30 years, I've witnessed many kinds of addictions, seen waves of this drug and that sweep through the plant as it swept through society, and seen the damage they do in thier wake-- not just to my co-workers, but to their families. I've seen grown men cry, I've looked into eyes and seen nothing there. But there are victories.

None of this makes me any kind of expert. But, from my experience, I wouldn't assume from a successfull study on heroin that all other drugs should be treated with the same approach.

Each substance seems to have it's own special nuance in addiction and consequences. I think there has to be a tailored approach to each substance.

This all comes back to a common problem with the masses who always have a ready opinion for things they not only have no knowledge of, but things that upset them so much they go out of their way not to have any knowledge of it. Drugs, crime, sex, etc. The knee-jerk response to issues that they can feel don't involve their lives is to moralise. Decide who the "bad" people are and who deserves or doesn't deserve what and then support policies accordingly. Policies that are useless because they weren't even formed with the notion of solving the problem. They were formed to pander to moralising.

Politicians are always on hand with such policies because they appeal to our worst instincts and they're handy for winning votes, but they never accomplish a thing. A social sickness or demographic affliction has to be tackled at it's roots, which usually means "coddling" the so-called "criminals". It means helping the people who need help and dispensing with the pointless vanity of whether or not they "deserve" it. Trying to punish the "bad people" only creates more pain, misery, and suffering. It makes the problem worse.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noah_Scape:

Most heroin addicts DO have medical problems... they are simply "self-medicating".

---

Well, it's great to see that so many Rabblers are pro-harm reduction

Drug use is not a moral issue, it shouldn't be a legal issue. It's a HEALTH issue.

To bring another viewpoint into the discussion as many of you have already covered some of the aspects I thought I'd throw some more provoking ideas into the mix.

Let's look at *legal* pharmaceuticals.

More people in North America die per year from clinical reactions to over-the-counter arthritis medications than overdose from every single illicit drug COMBINED

Most psychopharmatropics for depression, bi-polar, schizophrenia etc. take 4-6 weeks to work effectively. There is no guarantee that any drug/combination will work and months to years may pass before an effective combination is found.

Then, if something changes such as the person developing diabetes, becoming immune to one or more drugs, gaining/losing weight, or other factors the whole chemical soup can become unbalanced rapidly.

The side effects or many pain, antidepressants, anti-psychotics can become so pronounced that the person is unwilling to continue the drug treatment. What rarely gets openly discussed at all is that a great proportion of them cause impotence

Most doctors are *not* open to intense discussions with their patients who are suffering, it's a case of "Daddy knows best" with far too many of them.

To add to the general insanity of the above--the drug card benefits of ODSP and Ontario Works are so limited that the new "targeting" drugs are not covered. This leaves the doctor in the position of having to hand out drugs s/he knows are far less effective, more addicting and have more side effects.

The patient has little to no control over what the drugs will do, or the reactions s/he will have. When someone is suffering mental or physical pain it is natural to want it to STOP.

Who wants to wait MONTHS to feel as if life is worth living again, if it ever happens at all?

The patient is not allowed to *decide* "Today is a bad day. I need a bit more" or "Today is a good day, I don't need it." because these drugs depend consistency.

If someone struggling mentally *remembering * to be consistent can be difficult. If they are homeless, or working shifts, it can be downright impossible.

Now let's look at the illegal drugs.

Injected heroin stops pain in 10 minutes.

Marijuana can alleviate depression, decrease physical pain or lessen psychosis in minutes.

Crack/cocaine/methamphetamine can increase a sense of well-being, increase concentration and reduce physical pain in SECONDS. In some cases it can increase psychosis, in other people, it lessens it.

Amphetamines can increase concentration and alleviate depression immediately after processing through the liver, the effects begin within 30 minutes and last for a minimum of 4 hours.

Now, I fail to understand WHY, Big Pharma with BILLIONS of dollars in research money cannot seem to come up with pharmaceuticals that act that quickly or effectively with so few side effects.

In their *natural* forms, every one of the above drugs, is effective, inexpensive and less harmful in its' own way.

As for mental health and emotional struggles, as well as chronic pain, the bottom line is;

SOME PROBLEMS ARE ***NOT*** FIXABLE...

Yet society penalizes those who are simply trying to increase their quality of life.

We take away every modicum of control or self-respect they might have and throw them into jails, medical health facilities, we demonize their attempts to make sense of their pain and we pathologize their will to survive.

Because as a society, we know that if life ever gets painful enough...

...We'll be THEM.

[ 01 November 2008: Message edited by: TVParkdale ]

quote:

---

Injected heroin stops pain in 10 minutes.

---

If it takes 10 minutes my friend, get a new supplier. More like less than 15 seconds.

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldgoat:

If it takes 10 minutes my friend, get a new supplier. More like less than 15 seconds.

I pretty much agree with TVP about psycopharmacy, and will elaborate with my own observations when I have a few minutes. I'll just say though, that even if you were a big fan of the use of these drugs as indicated in the CPS, so many Dr.'s don't even prescribe them properly. They do NOT do the required assessments for signs of developing tardif diskenidia, and I have known at least one psychiatrist to ignore the signs when they were right in fron of him.

---

Well as an HR, we requested that clients "go low" until the effects were apparent due to potency differentials on the street Also, chasing the dragon [smoking] is safer.

As you say, there very few psychiatrists who are really drug savvy as well as the reality that they may only see a patient once a month or so due to time constraints--meanwhile the patient is decompensating or suffering severe side effects.

I come from a simple perspective about ANY drug use.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SwimmingLee:
I've known one person who took 1000 mg of morphine a day. He was quite lucid & functional. Did a lot of painting on canvas, helped manage an apartment building, was prescribed the drug by a doctor for pain related to being paralyzed.

BUT - in America, doctors like being the gatekeeper for pain. If every time you need a medication for pain or anxiety, you have to go to a doctor, it's great for business - the medical business.

---

Diabetes has been a problem and is getting worse. A number of the more popular meds, Zyprexa (Olanzepine) being the worst offender, have weight gain as a major side effect. A lot of psychiatrists will just say "oh exercise more, watch your diet", and let it go. While that in itself of course may be good advice for all of us, it is both dismissive, and fails to take into account the lifestyle limitations of a person with a mental health diagnosis surviving on ODSP.

I am sure Perdue industries will not want anyone working their side of the street.

Oxycontin blues.

Oxycontin swept through London a few years ago, and, predictably that and percocets/percodans did too. Some doctors and dentists were handing them out like candy.

The London Free Press, who I don't usually have too many good things to say about, did do a good investigative report on the issue. Parmacists that had moved to London from elsewhere in the country were quoted as saying they'd never seen anything like the rate of oxycontin prescriptions in London.

And Doctors here deffended themselves by saying that they had received little to no formal training in chronic pain treatment. To which the doctor at the methodone clinic responded that they did indeed get training in chronic pain management-- from the pharamacuetical companies.

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldgoat:
Yeah, I just had a couple of specific instances in mind when I posted.

Diabetes has been a problem and is getting worse. A number of the more popular meds, Zyprexa (Olanzepine) being the worst offender, have weight gain as a major side effect. A lot of psychiatrists will just say "oh exercise more, watch your diet", and let it go. While that in itself of course may be good advice for all of us, it is both dismissive, and fails to take into account the lifestyle limitations of a person with a mental health diagnosis surviving on ODSP.

Also, the old tri-cyclic anti-depressants had weight gain as a big side effect, but no one prescribes them any more. No one warned me about them at the time though, and I must have put on 30 pounds when I was taking those things.

---

Absolutely, my friend.

Many years ago I took a tricyclic and went from 130lbs [underweight] to 168 lbs in three months. My budget was limited so obviously, I did not increase my food intake.

Within six weeks of stopping--I dropped to my normal weight of 148 lbs. Dieting, that wouldn't even be a possibility.

Feeding oneself on ODSP or medical OW is impossible under the amount of food money given to diabetics. Then they are told they are "non-compliant" around diet.

The same with the working poor and people that don't have employment paid drug plans for insulin. I've seen people quit their jobs when the choice was work--buy insulin, starve the kids, go on ODSP, get insulin, feed the kids.

Another talking point that never gets discussed is stopping drug use. The only two drugs that will kill you during withdrawal are *alcohol* and *benzodiazapams* [valium]. Both can cause seizures and death.

Quitting street drugs is sometimes nasty and uncomfortable. However, many people can go on and off them with little ill effect.

The same cannot be said for pharmaceuticals. For those receiving depo shots, they don't even get the option of tailoring off the drugs to see if less works effectively, or tailoring off to quit.

They are thrown into massive withdrawal within days and cannot access medical care because they will be told to "get back on the drugs".

Getting off ANY legal or illegal substance should not be made more difficult than getting ON it.

Another point is that some people do not respond well to certain classes of medications. Then they're told, "you're not trying" or when they report no success, or massive side effects they're treated as if they are making it up.

If there is an illicit substance that will do a better job with less negative effects, then they're blamed for "being addicts" and not given any schedule 2 drugs no matter whether it might benefit them, or not.

"Heroin as Medicine" should not be a big leap - it WAS seen as medicine, and used as medicine, for many years until the [pharmaceutical corporation led] prohibition of the 1920s in the USA.

One thing that is important [that some replies here seem to know] is that heroin addicts don't walk around as zombies or curl up in the corner and sleep all day. You might have a coworker addicted to heroin and not ever know it. It is when they are in withdrawals that they look sick and messed up.

As an addictive drug, it is just wrong to keep it from people who are addicted to it, or to have an expensive supply only... of course there will be crime.

Some good points about the dangerous pharmaceutical drugs here too... but I might just add that SOME people can, and do, die when from withdrawals from opiates [heroin, morphine] because the blood pressure drops so low.

There is no "toxic level" of opiates, interestingly. You can get an overdose by taking too much at once, but as tolerance grows the user can take as big a dose as they need - there is no upper limit. Pharma drugs are often deadly at a certain level [as you were saying].

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noah_Scape:
Canada now joins Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany, the United Kingdom and Spain in hosting heroin prescription trials.
Drug news

"Heroin as Medicine" should not be a big leap - it WAS seen as medicine, and used as medicine, for many years until the [pharmaceutical corporation led] prohibition of the 1920s in the USA.

As an addictive drug, it is just wrong to keep it from people who are addicted to it, or to have an expensive supply only... of course there will be crime.

Some good points about the dangerous pharmaceutical drugs here too... but I might just add that SOME people can, and do, die when from withdrawals from opiates [heroin, morphine] because the blood pressure drops so low.

There is no "toxic level" of opiates, interestingly. You can get an overdose by taking too much at once, but as tolerance grows the user can take as big a dose as they need - there is no upper limit. Pharma drugs are often deadly at a certain level [as you were saying].

---

The problem with opiates is when they're taken with benzodiazapams [valium]...that's when overdoses tend to occur.

Tolerances increase over time and most doctors don't know enough about pain management to know that opiates for pain relief need to be rotated every 6 months to keep tolerance levels stable.

The sad part is, opiates are often prescribed for pain and benzos for sedation effects, thus setting the stage for problems.

Enough opiate of course, you stop breathing.

Jakob, in the interests of exploding the myths of heroin users, perhaps calling them "junkies" is not quite right. "Junky" usually means "do any and all drugs"... but I suppose that it could be a referance to "junk", a nicname for heroin.

Many Heroin or morphine addicts take that particular drug and no other, especially not other hard drugs because the money they have is needed for the heroin or morphine, and no other drug will take it's place or beat the withdrawal pains.

I think the superior effectiveness, and the lack of toxicity, of the opiate drugs and cannabis as compared to pharmaceuticals has something to do with evolution. Humans evolved alongside opiates and cannabis plants, and both the plants and the humans found benefits in helping each other.

I think it is very interesting that we have the "MU OPIOD receptor" in our brains and spinal cord, which uses the specific chemicals in opiate plants. Perhaps without that MU Opiod receptor those drugs would be toxic? [We do not have a "Vioxx receptor" and so it IS toxic to us, where the liver has to do the work of metabolising its chemicals. Anyone know more about this?]

Trivia: All vertebrates have the MU OPIOD receptor, but none of the invertebrates have it.

That's a legal charge far different than simply getting arrested for posession or what-have-you; far more serious.

[ 05 November 2008: Message edited by: statica ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by statica:
In regards to affects on daily life, I don't think you should be driving while high on any impairment-causing drug (physical, biological, cognitive) legal or illegal. Sorry, I draw the line there.

That's a legal charge far different than simply getting arrested for posession or what-have-you; far more serious.

[ 05 November 2008: Message edited by: statica ]

---

There are countless people on morphine-derivative pain medications and psychotropics for mental health impairments that drive and operate machinery safely every day.

It is a matter of the correct dosage and physical tolerance.

Shall we remove all their driver's licenses and plunge the country into economic chaos?

[ 05 November 2008: Message edited by: TVParkdale ]

quote:

---

There are countless people on morphine-derivative pain medications and psychotropics for mental health impairments that drive and operate machinery safely every day.

It is a matter of the correct dosage and physical tolerance.

---

Exactly my point. If people are on certain medications and they pass a cognitive test (similar to screening out dementia) and show no signs of IMPAIRMENT, then fine! But if, for anything from incorrect dosages to physical tolerance or matabolism, they cannot pass the impairment test, then they should not be allowed to drive. That's unsafe.

quote:

---

Originally posted by statica:

Exactly my point. If people are on certain medications and they pass a cognitive test (similar to screening out dementia) and show no signs of IMPAIRMENT, then fine! But if, for anything from incorrect dosages to physical tolerance or matabolism, they cannot pass the impairment test, then they should not be allowed to drive. That's unsafe.

Sorry if my point was unclear in my first post, that's why I was focusing on the health-impairment angle and not the legal/moral issue.

---

Ah, thank you for clarifying.

The structural problems of such testing would be enormously time-consuming and costly since health is in constant flux.

Perhaps what is needed is some form of self-testing for dexterous acuity then the police having similar [random] testing available in site checks.

Likewise, concerning so-called recreational or psychostimulant use, from what I've read, the majority of use is NOT to stave off withdrawal symptoms. Junkies say they could go off the drug if they wanted to. The reason long-term users keep taking it is because they are miserable without it. They are treating a psychological disability that the medical establishment has not, or cannot help them with. Many times poverty is one of the main causes of that impairment.

quote:

---

I don't think you should be driving while high on any impairment-causing drug

---

A much better point to discuss is by triciamarie - thx for the reply -

quote:

---

doctors don't -- often, can't -- go anywhere near far enough in identifying and treating the underlying physical causes of pain. There is a lack of non-pharmacological alternatives. And there is inadequate recognition of the varying different kinds of pain,

---

Getting a definitive diagnosis is one of the major "sore points" for chronic pain people. Sometimes, or often, the doctors deny that a chronic-pain patient is in pain, and judge the patient to be simply "drug-seeking". Having a solid diagnosis, with MRIs or lab evidence, would end this horrible situation. Patients in pain who are declared to be lying, and drug-seeking, become despondant and enraged, and their pains become worse.

Also, yes, more of the "hand-on" therapies, and the alterrnative therapies like accupuncture, would help a lot, but all that is covered is drugs. All the doctors do is prescribe drugs. Sometimes I think that is all they know how to do.That has to change.

It is an even worse thing - this happened to someone I know well - when one doctor prescribed morphine for actual pain, and then the patient moves to another area and all the doctors there claim that he is not really in pain, and so they refuse to prescribe the morphine, BUT HE IS ALLREADY ADDICTED. Now he is dealing with his pain, and withdrawals, and maybe finding out about "street drugs" and getting ripped off. Terrible thing, eh??

Finally, triciamarie's other points:

quote:

---

The reason long-term users keep taking it is because they are miserable without it. They are treating a psychological disability that the medical establishment has not, or cannot help them with. Many times poverty is one of the main causes of that impairment.

---

quote:

---

The only two drugs that will kill you during withdrawal are *alcohol* and *benzodiazapams* [valium]. Both can cause seizures and death.

---

quote:

---

I think it is very interesting that we have the "MU OPIOD receptor" in our brains and spinal cord, which uses the specific chemicals in opiate plants. Perhaps without that MU Opiod receptor those drugs would be toxic?...Anyone know more about this?]

---

Trouble is, psychiatric and addictions treatment isn't properly organized and available to everybody who needs it. Some of you, from the sounds of it, have been the victims of poor medical care. Many people have been hurt by doctors who told them benzos aren't addictive.

After 22 years as a pharmacist, and eleven working in harm reduction, I'm not all that positive about the "more is better" attitude towards drugs; that ending prohibition will help everybody. Don't get me wrong; I would end prohibition against cannabis tomorrow, if I had the power (hey, President-elect Obama! Want to do something consequential??)

But consider this: the US, with 5% of the world's population, uses more than 80% of the world's opium supply, and 99% of the world's hydrocodone (the two evil twins of pharmacological addiction in N. America are hydrocodone and oxycodone, the ingredient in Oxycontin).

Oxycontin has replaced heroin as the opioid of choice in every city in Canada except Vancouver and Montreal.

So instead of insisting we need even more drugs on this already drug-addled continent, maybe we need to consider cultural/psychological/spiritual reasons for why so many of us feel motivated to medicate in the first place.

quote:

---

So instead of insisting we need even more drugs on this already drug-addled continent, maybe we need to consider cultural/psychological/spiritual reasons for why so many of us feel motivated to medicate in the first place.

---

I doubt Oxycontin was developed because of some huge consumer outcry for better drugs. The pretext for the development and use for Oxycontin was for pain management of terminally ill.

...but somewhere along the line, it started to replace tylenol 3's for wisdom teeth extraction.

I don't think it's fair to blame the users, some of whom I know were told by their doctor that oxycontin and percodans were not addictive, so here's a scrip for a hundred.

quote:

---

I don't think it's fair to blame the users, some of whom I know were told by their doctor that oxycontin and percodans were not addictive, so here's a scrip for a hundred.

---

quote:

---

It's not a cultural/psychological/spiritual problem, unless we are discussing the cultural/psychological/spiritual nuances of psychopathic greed.[/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:
But where did this tendancy come from? Gotta run-- commercial break on CNN. Love those commercials.....

---

However...drug-seeking behaviour precedes the advertisement of drugs, which is a relatively new phenomenon. I doubt a few ads are responsible for Americans consuming more than 80% of the world's opium supply.

What I have trouble reconciling are the demands from advocacy groups for access to more drugs when N. Americans are already over-drugged.

A real-life example: two people, both with back pain from degenerating discs in the spine (pretty much universal, if you're over 30). One person decides she doesn't like to take drugs. She finds out about physiotherapy and exercises you can do to strengthen the back, and is now doing fine without drugs, golfing, walking, and going on trips. She still has pain sometimes.

The other person: he goes to his dr, who prescribes high doses of Dilaudid. He is now almost completely debilitated, walking with a cane, and will probably be in a scooter within five years.

BTW, person #2 is younger than person #1. She got better care not because of her doctor, but because as a retired nurse, she doesn't trust the health care system implicitly. She took matters into her own hands to make sure her condition was treated properly.

The way our health care system is set up, it's much, much easier to get a script for Oxycontin than get physiotherapy for your back pain that will actually help resolve the problem rather than making you dependent on opioids to get through your day.

I know a woman who weighs +300 pounds. She was off work for many months due to severe debilitating back pain, as being obese puts an enormous strain on your back. Instead of working with her to see how she can take the weight off (she might be a good candidate for bariatric surgery, for instance), her doctor gives her Oxycontin 80 mg 3 times a day. She is a pretty young woman in her 30s who is heading straight for early retirement due to disability before she is 50.

It's not about blaming the victim. It's about using the resources of our health care system appropriately, actually treating people for their medical problems rather than just tranquillizing them.