Hacker News Reader

Comment by kradroy | Hacker News Reader

It is a perspective, but I think the culture in most places in the US would render this option unviable.

I can guarantee you that if this were to be attempted in SF, they would have to have the drugs administered by medical staff. They couldn't just hand heroin and crack to the patients. Pimps and dealers would send in mules to get drugs that could be resold for cash. That would also probably cause human trafficking to surge.

Portugal's efforts to reduce addiction and homelessness sound great too, but those won't work here either. We need to find solutions that are workable for our culture... or wait for our culture to change.

View on HN

> ...they would have to have the drugs administered by medical staff

As they do in the UK I believe. I was once in a branch of boots IIRC (boots is a UK pharmacist) in a midlands city where there was plenty of drugs problem. A rattily-dressed guy came in and they gave him half a measuring cup of some thick green liquid which he drank in half a minute, while he chatted with them. They were watching him carefully, 2 of the pharmacists.

I dunno but I guess that was methadone.

There's no reason to assume that they'd simply hand out the stuff, and if it was by medical staff who expected to be taken as they watched, that's ok I think.

Dunno about the UK, but usually for the more trust-earned patients, they get to take most of their doses home and consume them there.

I believe you're spot-on that culturally that would not be acceptable in the US.

I can guarantee you that if this were to be attempted in SF, they would have to have the drugs administered by medical staff. They couldn't just hand heroin and crack to the patients.

I'm not sure about the logistics, but don't think they're that complicated. Getting into those programs is tied to quite stringent conditions. Like a certain age barrier and a number of attempts to go clean. I'd wager that there's more prescribed Ritalin resold on the black market than heroin obtained through those programs.

In one sense I believe it was fundamentally successul: It turned the drug from having a "hero image" in the 70s and 80s into a complete loser drug.

Harm reduction is one of the pillars in treatment of addiction, which now is widely and generally accepted. Proven by two referendums in which the public had a say on the issue. And harm reduction is unarguably a good thing, when it comes to addiction.

> Pimps and dealers would send in mules to get drugs that could be resold for cash.

Who they are going to resell them to?

Other cities, states or countries.

I think it’s quite obvious that drugs prescribed this way have to be consumed in front of a supervisor.

No, that's unproductive. This approach will only lead to the black market staying black.

Drugs are recreational. By outlawing, or otherwise restricting drugs, a government admits to a decision to not provide environment and opportunities for recreation, or any other affordable opportunity for fullfillment.

By not removing those restrictions entirely, it admits it still desires the resulting oppression. So it's pointless.

Then let's let those other cities, states or countries deal with this. Or do you deem those others so incapable that they require a nanny?

Give out only some milligrams of decent, even "organic" stuff per person, once every day - and the logistics will make it impossible to export any amount worth it, even at the todays prices.

When I was in my early 20's a good friend of mine (mid 30's) was on the methadone program.

He functioned more or less fine all things considered, but used to get a little more than he needed and would trade the excess for weed with a guy who used occasionally.

They were only small amounts, and it was methadone rather than heroin so all of those caveats apply, but the situation seemed harmless enough to me at the time.

I remember that sometimes he'd be a little more out of it than normal, though, and it was when he'd have his supervised "usual" dose as a part of the program rather than the takeaway prescription.

Not sure why the weed dealer didn't get on the program himself, but I don't know what's involved -- maybe he really was one of the mythical recreational users, or maybe he was selling it on (seems unlikely in such small amounts, but that would depend on how many people he had that same arrangement with).

The arguments you make here are identical to those made by politicians that opposed such measures in Spain and Portugal.

It is a perspective, but I think the culture in most places in the US would render this option unviable.

This isn't an excuse to do the right thing, though. I'm sure they've said it about gay marriage, integration of schools, and marriage between "races", women voting, and so on. Culture will move forward.

A less pessimistic take is that it would be unprecedented, and we have no idea what would happen.

Please review Norway's current program of doing just that before you "guarantee" any such thing...

https://www.foxnews.com/world/norway-to-test-free-heroin-pro...

We would need to do something like a wet house https://sfpublicpress.org/news/homelessness/solutions/2017-1.... where only residents get the heroin, on site.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com