The safer supply farce is unravelling

[CdnFox]

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/np-view-the-safer-supply-farce-is-unravelling/wcm/243a9938-8273-4eec-a20e-4c0d71c07570/amp/

Long story short  -  the liberals and the left screamed that information suggesting that the safe supply drugs were being diverted to kids and the money used to buy hard drugs was 'Misinformation" and "irresponsible" - it's now proven to be true.
 

Further addicts switch from methadone to 'safe drugs' and then to hard drugs again.

The program has proven to be an utter disaster of epic proportions.

Doctors have spoken out noting the 'studies' that suggested it was going well used severely cherry picked data and were inaccurate.

It's actually leading to worse addiction issues and the gov't is attempting to cover it up both federally and provincially so they don't look bad for having suggested it in the first place. '

 

[Zeitgeist]

Permissiveness is bad parenting.  Making destructive temptations more available to people is like handing people free poison in the form of a delicious dessert.  This was entirely predictable.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

Permissiveness is bad parenting.  Making destructive temptations more available to people is like handing people free poison in the form of a delicious dessert.  This was entirely predictable.

Agreed.  Some people argue telling children 'no' doesn't always stop bad behavior but it turns out saying 'yes' stops it even less.

[Zeitgeist]

It’s the error of blanket affirmation. Not everyone deserves a ribbon for every act.  In fact sometimes one deserves a jail sentence.

Edited February 12, 2024 by Zeitgeist

[ExFlyer]

"Safe drug supply"???

I mean, even those words denote allowing illegal activity. All that has happened since safe supply, safe injection sites etc is record deaths and more addicts.

"Safe drug supply" just means it is OK to do it.

[Nationalist]

Libbies...they live for free stuff. It doesn't seem to matter to them what free stuff, as long as its free.

They refuse to acknowledge that there is always a price. NOTHING is "free".

[Michael Hardner]

isn't a non-fatal overdose at a safe site, itself, evidence of success ?

What are the trade-offs for this approach ?  I'm not up to date on how this is working at present.

[Nationalist]

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

isn't a non-fatal overdose at a safe site, itself, evidence of success ?

No.

Its clear evidence of social rot. Giving drug addicts more drugs?

[Legato]

I want to shoot myself, unfortunately I keep missing and ammunition is expensive.

Okay we will give you as much ammo as needed until you get it right.

[Michael Hardner]

40 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

No.

Its clear evidence of social rot. Giving drug addicts more drugs?

Ok, but what of the life that was saved ?  It's not worth considering that or just the idea of giving drugs is wrong no matter the outcome ?

[Nationalist]

45 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Ok, but what of the life that was saved ?  It's not worth considering that or just the idea of giving drugs is wrong no matter the outcome ?

You cannot save everyone. If you're so concerned, have them all rounded up and put in institutions. Jail might work.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

"Safe drug supply"???

I mean, even those words denote allowing illegal activity. All that has happened since safe supply, safe injection sites etc is record deaths and more addicts.

"Safe drug supply" just means it is OK to do it.

Well good news - they've decided to solve that problem. But changing the name to "prescribed alternatives'

Despite all of these harms that she herself detailed, Dr. Henry inexplicably recommended that safer supply be further expanded and rebranded as “prescribed alternatives”

Mission successful!!!

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

You cannot save everyone. If you're so concerned, have them all rounded up and put in institutions. Jail might work.

Ok... at a cost of $125K per prisoner per year... not realistic.

[Nationalist]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Ok... at a cost of $125K per prisoner per year... not realistic.

So give them drugs? Is that realistic? Or is it a warped kind of sick...

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

isn't a non-fatal overdose at a safe site, itself, evidence of success ?

What are the trade-offs for this approach ?  I'm not up to date on how this is working at present.

So as the article notes and this corroborates previous investigations, the druggies sell the "Safer" drugs to schoolkids and use the loot to buy harder drugs that are dangerous. Also those being treated by methedone which we know works but costs money give it up for the 'safe drugs' and it actually slows or stops recovery. 

Further many women are being pressured to get into this program to obtain the drugs for exploitative men

And the number of actual deaths is still increasing even faster.

So it's not working at all. It's been a year now.

SO it either needs to radically change or stop, but it really can't radically change in any kind of positive way.  THe druggies want the high that comes from dangerous drugs and you can't give 'safe' dangerous drugs.

[CdnFox]

23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Ok... at a cost of $125K per prisoner per year... not realistic.

It's entirely realistic.

most would only be in a few years. either in jail or a forced recovery center. 

THe cost of a lifetime of these drugs and the fall out is far more. Especially considering they're selling the safe drugs to kids.

I mean the other choice is just stop resuscitating the od's and let them fend for themselves.  That's certainly the cheapest option if you're worried about money.