You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!
Joined: 02 May 2007 Posts: 23 Location: Eastern Ontario
Posted: Sun May 27, 2007 2:00 am Post subject: Excellent Editorial in the Edmonton Journal
This Editorial appeared in the May 26 issue of The Edmonton Journal. I gotta say it is truly one of the best presentations I've read. To see it in a mainstream daily paper is very inspiring.
WAR ON DRUGS A LOSER
Reports that the Harper government is preparing to announce changes to Canada's outdated 20-year-old national strategy on illicit drug use should be reason for optimism.
Instead, there are signs -- such as the Conservative distaste for safe-injection sites that are a key component of the "harm-reduction strategy" -- that Ottawa is tilting toward a more aggressive, U.S.-style war on drugs. If that is the case, it would be an unfortunate mistake with predictable and very disappointing outcomes.
While Washington from time to time trumpets bravely that it has scored a victory in the war on drugs, by all empirical measures it has been an abject failure.
Consider the record south of the border:
- - Hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent. This year alone in the U.S., federal and state government have spent nearly $20.5 billion directly on counter-drug measures.
- - There are nearly two million Americans in prison, about one-third of whom are locked up on charges for possession or low-level trafficking, costing tens of billions of dollars.
- - Despite nearly 30 years of focused domestic and international measures, however, drugs are more available than they have ever been, largely because it is such a wildly profitable criminal industry. Virtually anyone who wants to buy drugs can, and it's easier than ever.
But what are the alternatives? This is a reasonable question. Just because the state can't beat the drug cartels doesn't mean it should join them.
One of the driving forces behind the U.S. war on drugs, especially under the Republican party, is Christianity. The religious right has placed "saving" people from the scourge of drugs as an important American value and tantamount to saving souls. It is one reason that successive administrations have continued to throw increasing resources at a fruitless war. The message, in essence, that the small number of those rescued from the grip of drugs justifies the billions used in the war.
Perpetuating the war also appeals to the military and law enforcement communities. They see it as another almost limitless source of funds to buy new equipment and recruit personnel. If the U.S. were to move toward a more permissive stance on illicit drug use, spending in this area would diminish, as would the number of military personnel, police officers and prison guards. In the U.S., prison and court costs alone for people jailed on drug charges -- mostly users and foot soldiers of organized crime, not the kingpins -- mean that our neighbours to the south pay out about $10 billion a year.
While the U.S. remains adamant about using the military and police to clamp down on drugs, some states, and many other countries, have spent far less and shown remarkable results by investing in education and diversion. Research has shown repeatedly that having young people involved in supervised after-school sports programs is the best way to keep kids and drugs apart. And, if one hasn't become a regular drug user by the age of 19, the chances of ever becoming an addict are vastly lower.
Harm-reduction measures, and especially the safe-injection sites, have also been shown to be successful.
A study released this week showed a 30-per-cent increase in the number of people seeking to enter detox and recovery programs. Safe-injection sites have also "probably helped" reduce the overall number of injection drug users, according to another report by the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS.
Yet federal Health Minister Clement remains noncommital whether funding well be extended beyond this year. "It is lack of political will, not lack of data, that is keeping these life-saving public health services out of the hands of our drug-dependent citizens," said Dr. Steffanie Strathdee, a former B.C.-based researcher now at the University of California's School of Medicine in San Diego. "It is time for politicians who oppose ( supervised injection sites ) on the grounds that more research is needed to be honest with their constituents,"
If the Harper government believes that throwing more money into law enforcement and drug interdiction is the right model, it should do so only after explaining how it expects to succeed when all other similar efforts have shown no benefit and, in many cases, have resulted in considerable harm.
It should also not do so at the expense of those measures, including safe-injection sites that have been shown to work. _________________
"You have enemies? Good. That means that somewhere, some time in your life, you stood up for something." - Sir Winston Churchill
Joined: 07 May 2007 Posts: 11 Location: Edmonton, Alberta ,Canada
Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 7:27 pm Post subject:
Hey Brent
Things are well in Edmonton. We are finally getting some awareness in the general Public.There is an interview that is going to appear in the Edmonton Sun Thursday May 31. The more we can get in the mainstream press the better. Talk to you soon..Say hello tp Deb for me . I am on my third week of Pegasyis and am getting all the sides that come with it. Only 45 weeks to go.
Roy _________________ Everything Happens For a Reason
AS IT IS
Joined: 02 May 2007 Posts: 26 Location: Ontario Canada
Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 8:58 pm Post subject: It's
Hi Roy
Yep only 45 weeks to go for ya. I wish you all the best for time you have ahead of you. It's not going to be easy but it's well worth it.
I did six monrhs of the treatment, I couldn't go the intire way it was to hard on my system. I had to inject another drug once a week with my other weekly injection . This extra injection was to bring up my white blood cell count as it was very low. It was so low I would stand up and then just drop to the floor fainted. I could hardly walk I was so week. I did get any better even with that blood cell drug so I had to stop it was just way to much for me.
I did clear the virus at two months and completed six so that's better than nothing. If I could handle it I would of gone the intire way.
I feel that here in Canada we should be using the media a LOT MORE around methadone issues and how our gov. should be continuing to move forwards not backwords on our developed harm reduction. With the gov. in power now, they'll be taking all harm reduction programs and groups away. After all the hard work people have put into fighting to get what we have now is going to be slowly taken away back to the old way of doing things that have NEVER wroked and put us all at risk of HIV/AIDS and HCV.
Methadone is becoming very scary and the regs only get harder on patients. By the way things are heading even those that have proven to do well on their methadone and no diversion or other drugs will have their carries taken away also. YOu just watch, bit by bit it'll be less and less of any freedom on methadone. We can always hope that won't happen but it's as if we can see it comming.
Joined: 07 May 2007 Posts: 11 Location: Edmonton, Alberta ,Canada
Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 1:19 pm Post subject:
We are finally making some headway and getting some action regarding Harm Reduction. This is an article that appeared in today's Edmonton Sun. Every little bit of media coverage we can get is great for our cause.
Strength in Solidarity
Roy
edmontonsun.com Today's Cover
Thu, May 31, 2007
Safe-injection site in city?
New poll shows 47% of Edmontonians favour safe spot for addicts to shoot up
By FRANK LANDRY, CITY HALL BUREAU
Nearly half of Edmontonians support the idea of establishing a safe-injection site for intravenous drug users in the city, according to a new survey.
It comes at a time when park rangers are picking up three times the number of discarded syringes in the river valley compared with just a few years ago - suggesting the problem is getting worse.
"Addiction is not going to go away," Roy Aldridge, a recovering heroin and speed addict, who's been clean for about a year, told Sun Media yesterday.
The 55-year-old, who contracted hepatitis C from intravenous drug use, said he would be in favour of a so-called safe injection site, where users could shoot up without fear of being arrested, and under the supervision of trained staff.
"Drug use has been here since Adam stole the apple from the Garden of Eden, that was his addiction," said Aldridge, who now uses a needle-exchange service offered by Streetworks so he can inject his Hep C medication safely.
A recent Canada West Foundation survey found 47% of Edmontonians think safe injection sites are a good or very good idea.
The survey, conducted by Probe Research, polled 3,500 Canadians in seven major cities - six in the West, plus Toronto - between Jan. 2 and Feb. 3.
It found support for safe injection sites ranged from a low of 42% in Winnipeg to a high of nearly 55% in Vancouver.
However, when respondents were asked to rank potential responses to illegal drug activity, safe injection sites ranked well below increased law enforcement and increased programs for addicts.
Proponents of safe injection sites have long argued they help prevent the spread of disease and overdoses.
Darren Grove, supervisor of Edmonton's park ranger unit, said while he doesn't have any hard numbers, he figures workers are picking up 1,000 to 1,500 discarded needles in the river valley each year. The last time the city had hard numbers was in 2005, when officials collected 497 needles from park areas, most of them around homeless camps.
"Absolutely there is a concern," Grove said.
"We don't want to have someone stumble across them and accidentally get struck with a needle."
Marliss Taylor, who speaks for Streetworks, said while the group isn't pushing for a safe injection site, it would welcome one.
"We're not hopeful it will happen here at this time," she conceded, noting the federal government appears opposed to the concept.
The country's only official safe injection site is in Vancouver.
Got a News Tip?
Previous story: Brew through
Next story: Pro and con ...
Sun Media Corporation
This site is updated by 4:00 a.m. MST each day and includes stories and columns from the day's print edition of The Edmonton Sun.
Joined: 02 May 2007 Posts: 23 Location: Eastern Ontario
Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 9:22 pm Post subject:
Roy A wrote:
From the Edmonton Journal article
... It found support for safe injection sites ranged from a low of 42% in Winnipeg to a high of nearly 55% in Vancouver.
However, when respondents were asked to rank potential responses to illegal drug activity, safe injection sites ranked well below increased law enforcement and increased programs for addicts.
Congrats on the article Roy! I liked your quotes. In fact, I actually found myself chuckling at the Adam/Eve analogy.
Overall, it is good that almost half of Canadian's approve safer injection sites. I mean, it really is amazing that such a large part of the public is actually thoughtful enough to recognize the value of such sites. A publically funded place for people to shoot illicit drugs! I mean really, that is a radical idea. It is fantastitic that more people don't just say NO WAY! considering that injection drug use is generally regarded with such disdain.
So, yeah, overall it is good.
However, the part I quoted above is scary - "when respondents were asked to rank potential responses to illegal drug activity, safe injection sites ranked well below increased law enforcement and increased programs for addicts". When the surface is scratched, people want increased law enforcement MORE THAN safer injection sites.
That's scary because I think the Harper government is going to present their new get-tough criminal justice plan as sort of an either/or thing. They'll say that Canada can either have more enforcement or more harm reduction, but not both. And because its not both, as a government, the Conservatives are going to go ahead with the more law enforcement.
Of course, we could have both. It really isn't a matter of either/or. But underneath it all, the Conservatives are actually ideologically opposed to harm reduction, and so to get away with no funding harm reduction, and cutting back existing harm reduction, they are going to say that in order to have really effective law enforcement, it is necessary to draw funds from the harm reduction side of drug program money.
Which of course, is absurd. Since they only spend about $10 million on harm reduction altogether, and $1 billion on law enforcement.
So, yeah 50% of the people are ok with safer injection sites, but they are even more okay with more cops and prisons for drug offenders. And if the Conservatives have their way, its the cops and jails we'll be seeing, not the safer injection sites.
I tell ya, if the first decade of this 21st century is teaching us anything, it is teaching us how significant elections can be. If we look at the U.S. and Bush being elected, and now Canada with Harper and consider what's happening with those governments, as opposed to if Gore or Kerry was elected, or the Liberals in Canada, it really shows that it can make an incredible difference who gets elected.
After all, neither Bush or Harper has anywhere near a majority of public support, yet they are able to make sweeping changes in the reality of our lives. Had others been elected, we likely wouldn't have the Iraq war, and we likely would have a few more safer injection sites.
I've create a little page - InSITE Debate page - to try and follow the situation regarding the InSITE project and its upcoming renewal (or end) this fall. The struggle is intensifying in a big way with the anti-inSITE people really going on the offensive. The definately want to see it shut down, and the easiest way is to convince the governemnt to not extend its permit to operate. Of course, the Conservatives don't need too much convinving. It will come down to a political decision because if it was on merit then its a no-brainer. Only public pressure at this point will stop the Conservatives from shutting down inSITE.
I'm going to keep adding to this page, so if you ever have articles or info (or graphics) you'd like me to add to it, please sent them to me. _________________
"You have enemies? Good. That means that somewhere, some time in your life, you stood up for something." - Sir Winston Churchill
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Hey Brent
