Would you support needle exchange in your community?

[pinto]

I work in Public Health and am active with a local non-profit that is developing a needle exchange program.

New California law, effective in January, has removed barriers to local, legal needle exchange.

While the powers that be have the job of enlisting our Board of Supervisors for their support, which will give us the legal go, I'm curious about a general take on opinions about needle exchange.

Thanks.

[The Magistrate]

1. Yes, Sir

It is a sensible idea that seems to work in practice.

[understandinglife]

2. Yes. Reasonable public health practice.

Peace.

[Withywindle]

3. Yes, definitely

I volunteered for a service some years ago. It saves lives.

[Cleita]

4. Yes, I support anything

that prevents the spread of disease. Judging people's drug use isn't as important as keeping the population safe from the spread of HIV, hepatitis and other diseases that can be transmitted into the population from unsafe needle use.

[baby_bear]

5. Absolutely

It's insane to oppose it. It used to be right out in the open here in downtown Seattle, but it seems to have been moved underground, or somewhere not so visible. I guess it turned off the tourists at Pike Place Market and vicinity. I used to walk by it all the time and never was offended or upset by it.

The politicos like to sweep these things to the side if not under the carpet. Too bad, because they are realities we need to deal with, and needle exchange if good public health.

b_b

[firefox]

6. Yes. Needle exchange is proven harm reduction.

[ButtScratchinMike]

12. Let's not stop at needle exchange

I'm all for needle exchange to prevent disease, but it's not going to do a damn thing to prevent crime. How about publicly paid treatment, or at least cheap/free dope to keep addicts from having to resort to robbing and thieving?

[0007]

16. We can do this by legalizing drugs and finding the people

who have problems. The "War on Drugs" is a waste of time and money and full of corruption.

[newyawker99]

26. Hi ButtScratchinMike!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Demoiselle]

28. Yes, absolutely. And with each exchange should come information

on treatment programs, any other kind of social service available to help addicts. (Of course, we need to establish enough and the right kind of programs too.!)

[firefox]

29. Talked me into it.

What gets me is other countries deal with the problem in a manner you describe. I think Finland is one that administers heroin, but the discussion could easily cover any country that claims success. This is the age of information isn't it.

People can live a long life with an addiction to heroin. It is not really necessary to break the habit, but you do want them to learn to live with a minimal amount. Quiting might be an impossible thing, but use itself is not the great killer the government would have us believe. With clinical heroin and knowledgable administration you are not going to have deaths or HIV or Hepatitus, or thefts and robberies. It is a case of prohibition inflicting harm on the users and society. The laws that inflict harm, including imprisonment and criminal records, need to yield to a health care model where harm reduction is the goal.

[Canadian Socialist]

7. In Vancouver, they've gone one better

They have a free/safe injection site. With nurses and social workers. The police leave people alone when they go there. It has really helped to cut down on the amount of needle sharing and disease amongst the drug users.

[PDJane]

8. Yep,

and I think the Vancouver initiative is a fine thing too.

[pinto]

10. Yeah, the Vancouver program is talked about throughout the "biz".

[CatBoreal]

30. Been working beautifully from what I understand.

Think it should become a model.

[sandnsea]

9. Eugene has one

I don't know the affects. Until we have more treatment, it's hard to evaluate anything related to drug use.

http://www.hivalliance.org/needle.html

[darkmaestro019]

11. Absolutely.

100% in favor of harm reduction and frankly in favor of legalization across the board for most drugs. People are using them anyway and the government has no right endangering and ruining adult lives over their choice of fun. Responsible use should NOT result in outside artificial negative consequences.

Heroin use with education and clean supply and equipment is NOT known to be inherently disastrous, as most people seem to have come to believe.

[drhilarius]

13. Without a doubt. nt

[longship]

14. Yes, without any reservations.

nt

[unhappycamper]

15. Yes, in a New York minute. n/t

[area51]

17. You bet. (n/t)

[WernhamHogg]

18. Absolutely

It just makes sense that people protect themselves (and others) from disease. Similar to the need for kids to learn about how to protect themselves when they start having sex. Not providing a needle exchange program won't stop drug use, it will only make it more hazardous to those who choose to use drugs.

[BlueIris]

19. Yeppers. Researched it for a long paper in college. Education works.

There are, of course, lots of other things that also increase an IV drug abuser's desire to quit abuse. But few can get governmental approval (don't hate, I recognize the validity of the arguments against public funding of other forms of drug-education/treatment). Bring on the needle exchange!!!

[LostinVA]

20. Absolutely

[jmowreader]

21. Let's go one further

Before Ronald Reagan took office, British heroin addicts could get free heroin through the National Health Service. I would imagine you also got free syringes and needles. IIRC cocaine was also on the National Health.

What advantages does this have?

It takes the criminal element completely out of the equation. Why go to some scumbag dope pusher and pay for heroin when you can get free heroin from the government?

It also takes law enforcement almost completely out of the equation. If the government is passing it out, it MUST be legal, right? Hence, no costs to bust junkies, no costs to prosecute them, no costs to incarcerate them.

Further, it eliminates the uncertainty that comes with street smack. You know what the purity is, and you know it's really heroin. IOW, overdoses go way down because junkies know how much to use.

And! It cuts down on hepatitis and HIV problems.

Then Reagan convinced Margaret Thatcher to outlaw heroin, and now they have a heroin problem just like we do.

The only way to accomplish this would be to have a liberal media in this country and to throw Rush in jail for HIS hillbilly-heroin habit, so don't expect to see it anytime soon.

Edited to add the word "British."

[etherealtruth]

22. An emphatic yes n/t

[July]

23. Yes, absolutely. nt

[northamericancitizen]

24. Abolutely. It saves lives. nt

[Sgent]

25. Nope....

I would support legalizing heroin treatment first. In my state methadone is illegal for treating drug addictions. After legalizing an alternative, I would then support having a needle exchange.

[Mutley]

27. Yes I would.