Quebec to open safe injection sites in the coming months

[olp1fan]

Good for Quebec, this will ruin Harpers week

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/canada/Quebec+opens+door+safe+injection+sites/5535145/story.html

MONTREAL — Quebec's health minister has opened the door to supervised-injection sites in the wake of September's Supreme Court ruling upholding the right of provinces to run such drug-treatment facilities.

Yves Bolduc said Tuesday he met with representatives of the province's two proposed drug-injection clinics — one each in Montreal and Quebec City — and explained that local communities, health centres and police departments must be consulted and involved in setting up the centres.

Edited October 12, 2011 by olp1fan

[olp1fan]

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/10/11/quebec-safe-injection-sites_n_1005928.html

QUEBEC - The Quebec government is giving the green light to new safe injection sites for addicts to shoot up under supervision.

Health Minister Yves Bolduc says he supports the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision to keep the Insite safe injection clinic open in Vancouver.

Bolduc says the ruling removed the last hurdle preventing Quebec from opening similar government-supported centres.

The province is accepting proposals for safe injection sites — which could open their doors in the coming months in Montreal and Quebec City.

Two organizations have already expressed interest in opening such clinics.

In its decision, the Supreme Court ordered the Conservative government to abandon its effort to close Vancouver's Insite clinic.

The high court also ruled that exemptions must be put in place to protect staff from prosecution for drug possession or trafficking.

[Keepitsimple]

Be careful what you wish for. Good luck to them. Maybe it's time to see if these things actually work to any acceptable degree here in North America.

[Tilter]

No, it's better to have them use dirty needles--- that way all addicts can be infected with HIV and a side dish of Hepatitis. This will only cost the health systems in Canada about 10 billion a year, a cheap way to keep the Americanized system of "ostrichism" and we can all pretend that there are no injecting addicts in Canada.

[olp1fan]

Be careful what you wish for. Good luck to them. Maybe it's time to see if these things actually work to any acceptable degree here in North America.

It has been proven to work already, what we need is one in every big city..maybe more than one in really big cities

Edited October 12, 2011 by olp1fan

[segnosaur]

Be careful what you wish for. Good luck to them. Maybe it's time to see if these things actually work to any acceptable degree here in North America.

It has been proven to work already...

Actually, no they haven't. At least not in a scientific sense.

If the ultimate goal is to prevent illness/death, then you have to consider the side effects of things such as needle exchange programs or injection sites. What has been found in other scientific studies is that such programs can actually have a NEGATIVE effect... it can cause more infections/deaths.

This might sound counter-intuitive, but a mechanism for this has been provided. Basically, what happens is that while drug users might be 'safe' when they use safe injection sites (or needle exchange programs), they will not use those sites exclusively; they will still continue to inject/shoot up on their own or with friends in private for at least some of their activities. Where things like needle exchange programs or safe injection sites cause problems is that it gives an opportunity for individuals who might never have met to become 'friends', and thus help spread diseases like HepC or HIV.

For example, from: http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/146/12/994.abstract

Risk elevations for HIV infection associated with Needle Exchange Program attendance were substantial...

Of course, I've explained that point in the threads discussing the Supreme Court ruling on Insite, but nobody there seemed to have the ability to actually, you know, understand the evidence.

Now, Insite supporters have been quite eager to point out their "successes" (like preventing overdose deaths, etc.) but nowhere do they properly address the issue of HIV. Until they do, we can't really say that safe injection sites are beneficial overall. They could end up killing people unexpectedly.

[olp1fan]

There are a lot of con bots on this website who refuse to look at the facts and make up their own

I wonder if they are paid by the conservatives

[segnosaur]

There are a lot of con bots on this website who refuse to look at the facts and make up their own

I wonder if they are paid by the conservatives

And there are lots of bots who, when presented with evidence that might contradict their falsely-made assumptions, stick their fingers in their ears and shout "LA LA LA I Can't Hear you".

I pointed out a rational why Safe Injecting Sites might be counterproductive. I even provided an article that appeared in a peer-reviewed scientific journal to support my point. Yet instead of, you know, dealing with the evidence, you ignore it in favor of a general insult against "conservatives".

Perhaps you should spend less time trying to think of ways to score political points and spend a little more time trying to exercise some rational logical thought.

I have "Looked at the facts" (especially those surrounding Insite). They don't necessarily support the notion that "Insite is good". Consider:

- They never actually produced a study which shows that Insite users actually are at lower risk of contracting blood-borne diseases than other IV drug users.

- They claim that it reduces Overdose deaths. Ok, fine, I never challenged that claim. The issue is whether that number is greater or less than the lives that could be lost if the safe injection site actually increases HIV cases

- They claim that crimes/public drug use decreased in the areas around the Insite site, but they ignore the fact that police officers actually increased their patrols in the area.

I'm not claiming that safe injection sites don't work. I'm claiming that we don't have any evidence whether they work or don't work. The problem with Insite supporters is that they wrongly think they have the answers when they don't.

[olp1fan]

7 Liberal supreme court judges and 2 conservative court judges agreed unanimously

you are who now? somebody with an opinion who has no influence?

okay great, we've got that settled

I rule in favour of The Supreme Court over 1 ordinary man with an opinion

[capricorn]

I rule in favour of The Supreme Court over 1 ordinary man with an opinion

Lucky for us the ordinary men/women with an opinion outnumber the justices sitting on the Supreme Court.

[segnosaur]

7 Liberal supreme court judges and 2 conservative court judges agreed unanimously

you are who now?

Simple... I'm someone who seems to have a better grasp at science than you and the Supreme Court.

You see, as far as I can tell, not one of the Supreme Court Justices have any advanced degrees in science. (Of course, given that their jobs are primarily aimed at interpreting laws, its not too surprising. However, it does not mean that they have the ability to properly interpret scientific data.

As an analogy, I may have the greatest doctor in the world, but that doesn't mean that they're any better at fixing my car than a mechanic is. Similarly, our supreme court justices may be the greatest legal minds in the world, but that does not mean that they are omnipotent.

I could also lay some of the blame against the Harper government itself. There is a good chance that they did a faulty job at stating their case against when challenging the claims of Insite itself.

Of course, what you are actually engaging in is "appeal to (inappropriate) authority". I find it rather, ahmem, significant that instead of actually addressing the claims that I made (that safe injection sites might be counterproductive), one that's actually supported by actual scientific studies, you decide to instead suggest "Oh a bunch of non-scientists know best".

I rule in favour of The Supreme Court over 1 ordinary man with an opinion

Except of course I actually provided scientific evidence (done by, you know scientists) to support my position.

Edited October 12, 2011 by segnosaur

[Black Dog]

I could also lay some of the blame against the Harper government itself. There is a good chance that they did a faulty job at stating their case against when challenging the claims of Insite itself.

They didn't challenge the claims at all.