Forums › Drugs › Heroin & Opium › Should heroin be prescribed?
@know_hope 546769 wrote:
smack that they will get anyway and get them into other troubles also. there is always supply so why not to get it from a dr rather than some dodgy dealer
is it
You could say the same about a lot of things, though. In the long run, like Pat said, giving people free smack is not going to help them. There are some programmes here in the UK for people who aren’t responding to methadone treatment of giving them heroin, but it’s done in an extremely controlled setting and with a lot of rules in place (they have to have meetings with hospital staff every week to help them get off the stuff) as well as their dose being tapered over time. “Free smack” would be irresponsible towards those people’s lives.
Hello opiate addict passing thought…
In the UK you can get perscribed diamorphine for opiate addiction (regulated intravenous opiate trials). Anyway you have to have been using fo a while and tried other methods of getting clean and failed. Anyway you go and get to hits of pure diamorphine a day, and sometimes if there is still hope for you they will try to bring you down and off it. You also still get serscribed methadone to deal with the longer lasting withdrawal effects as the diamorphine doesn’t hold you for that long.
I know a few people who haven’t used street gear once they got put on this program. Also Brighton has just opened a similar clinic where you can go and do drugs. This is all good if you ask me.
methadone is just gonna get you more hooked as it takes longer to come off and i always see methadone users still using. Obviously it shouldn’t be as simple as people getting given free smack no one is that fucking stupid seriously. basically you should get put on smack maintenance if you’ve already proven to be a burden due to your addiction and cannot quit..
stay semi synthetic at least (brown).
@barrettone 546784 wrote:
as well as their dose being tapered over time. “Free smack” would be irresponsible towards those people’s lives.
I should maybe have added something similar to that to my earlier post, but I think that most people when in a position of being able to get their gear for free are more likely to want and be able to get off it by reducing their dosage because they haven’t got the stress of wondering where the next hit’s coming from.
@p0ly 546789 wrote:
obviously it shouldn’t be as simple as people getting given free smack no one is that fucking stupid seriously. basically you should get put on smack maintenance if you’ve already proven to be a burden due to your addiction and cannot quit..
+1
@MC G-Tek 546790 wrote:
I should maybe have added something similar to that to my earlier post, but I think that most people when in a position of being able to get their gear for free are more likely to want and be able to get off it by reducing their dosage because they haven’t got the stress of wondering where the next hit’s coming from.
+1
@MC G-Tek 546790 wrote:
…I think that most people when in a position of being able to get their gear for free are more likely to wtant and be able to get off it by reducing their dosage because they haven’t got the stress of wondering where the next hit’s coming from.
Trouble is, if people are happy being zoned out, why would they want to change? Every story is different of course. But it’s a Catch-22 – if people are on Heroin, that’s effecting the way they think and feel. If they were straight then then they wouldn’t think the same way.
Definitely there have to be pro-active organisations to help. Help is about finding people alternative things to do besides heroin, because (in my opinion) most heroin users build there life around the habit, and end up being the habit.
I also have a sneaking suspicion that methadone is handed out as a safety blanket for all opiate addicts but it’s a bit of a monkey for the back in its own right. Certainly more people die from methadone than heroin use.
Perhaps that is the real tragedy – in order to feel more alive, opiate addicts have to risk death in order to embrace… oblivion.
there is no rosey answer lol. a story that starts ‘once upon a time some peeps got hooked on heroin’ is never going to be easy to find a happy ending that pleases everyone. but from what mr brand showed in his documentary, it doesn’t seem like the current methadone programmes are thoughtful or caring
Hi guys, thanks for the replies!
@The Psyentist 546759 wrote:
Short term it sounds like a good plan but long term I doubt if anyone would benefit all that much.
All the people whose houses won’t get broken into, whose car radios won’t get nicked and who won’t get mugged will benefit. Also the addicts themselves will benefit as they will stay out of jail for nicking and not have to degrade themselves being prostitutes.
@Pat McDonald 546781 wrote:
How exactly is prescribing heroin helping them quit addiction? It isn’t.
In a prefect word we would get all the heroin users off heroin. But we can’t. Rehab doesn’t work, they just relapse. I’m not saying prescribing heroin will get addicts off heroin, I’m saying it will be better for society and improve the lives of addicts. They will still be addicted to heroin, but with a better quality of life.
@barrettone 546767 wrote:
There need to be better rehab programs but giving someone free smack is basically enabling someone to hurt themselves.
They are already hurting themselves, heroin is easy to get hold of. I understand that the purpose of prohibition is to protect people but it actually does the opposite – forces them to use dirty dangerous drugs and commit crime.
proof is in the pudding tbh, as i say i know 2 people personally and know of a few more who haven’t bought street gear since they were put on the OIT program. I see it as a good thing as it is lowering drug related crime as they are not having to raise cash to score gear.
TBH i have been in the all drugs should be legalised party for a long time. I find it funny when people say “people die taking brown” because they roll it off their tongue without even thinking about what they are saying. Lots of things are dangerous, like driving a car or eating a new type of fish as you might be allergic to. Most things are dangerous but we don’t outlaw them and attach stigmas left, right and centre.
As far a methadone getting people “more hooked”;
If you are at a stage where you want to start taking meth to not be in pieces with withdrawals, methadone isn’t gonna get you much more addicted. Also I know loads of people who have had positive results with methadone, reducing their dose slowly until down to 1ml a day and then nothing. Sure there are loads of people who abuse the methadone scripts and just use on top but tbh they are just not ready to get off the gear. Problem with using in top is the meth you get won’t be enough to hold you as you have been topping up you target opiate level making you need more meth to stabalise. As most of you know I have been on a meth script for a good long time. You don’t get a buzz off it, it just makes you feel a bit more tired than usual. The bad side of methadone is that like any opiate it can cause constipation, but with a nice regular dose of Senna leaf in your diet it help those though bowel movements. 😀
Subutex and suboxone is more common these days anyway. You can’t really use on top of suboxone anyway as it is built in with naloxone which is an agonist for opitate antagonists making the drug in effective for up to 12 hours. Just curious but what do people think of subutex and suboxone?
@pat, more people die from methadone OD’s than heroin? I don’t think that’s quite true TBH
Anyway I hope no one take me the wrong way over this post, it might sound a bit hostile but I promise it’s not, I hope you can understand that i’m just stating my opinions over something that I have reservations about.
@Smackchimp 546876 wrote:
In a prefect word we would get all the heroin users off heroin. But we can’t. Rehab doesn’t work, they just relapse. I’m not saying prescribing heroin will get addicts off heroin, I’m saying it will be better for society and improve the lives of addicts. They will still be addicted to heroin, but with a better quality of life.
They are already hurting themselves, heroin is easy to get hold of. I understand that the purpose of prohibition is to protect people but it actually does the opposite – forces them to use dirty dangerous drugs and commit crime.
OK, ideally that would be the case, if the drugs are rigidly supervised so that an addict cannot use them in order to build up other people’s habits.
The trouble with all drug addiction, but especially heroin, is that it when administered to new users, the person giving out the heroin has control (or at least influence) over their behaviour. Addicts will do things that they would not normally do, just to get their fix to remove their discomfort at not having a fix.
If addicts just get handed bags and needles, what are the chances they will pass on any excess or sell them or otherwise use those drugs to alter other people’s behaviour patterns?
And yes, absolutely, same problem happens with existing prescription drugs.
The goal of effective addiction treatment (and I agree with you totally, heroin addiction is extremely difficult to remove) must be to remove the influence of that behaviour.
@Pat McDonald 546965 wrote:
Addicts will do things that they would not normally do, just to get their fix to remove their discomfort at not having a fix.
All the more reason to give it them for free, instead of letting dealers/pimps exploit them.
@Pat McDonald 546965 wrote:
If addicts just get handed bags and needles, what are the chances they will pass on any excess or sell them
Firstly addicts could use heroin in a ‘shooting gallery’, they don’t need to be literally given it in a bag to take home. And also why limit free heroin to addicts? Why not offer it to all heroin users, including new users? New users are going to get into it anyway. The only way to eliminate the heroin trade is to make heroin available to everyone, that way there is no money to be made selling it.
@Smackchimp 546969 wrote:
The only way to eliminate the heroin trade is to make heroin available to everyone.
:sign0019:
@Smackchimp 546969 wrote:
Firstly addicts could use heroin in a ‘shooting gallery’, they don’t need to be literally given it in a bag to take home. And also why limit free heroin to addicts? Why not offer it to all heroin users, including new users? New users are going to get into it anyway. The only way to eliminate the heroin trade is to make heroin available to everyone, that way there is no money to be made selling it.
Right. So where do you get the heroin from? Why, you get it from the heroin producers, mostly based in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
All you’ve done is cut the middlemen out of the equation. Unless you want to start planting poppy… then you have to hire guards for the poppies… and security for the transportation…
… you seem to think governance is about saying “this is the way it should be” and everything falls magically into place, heroin appears as if by magic, and people would be quite happy to see addicts going back and forth to clinics without having the slightest intent of ever giving up their addiction and taking responsibilty for their lives.
In the real world, chemicals have to be sourced, security guards have to be paid, people are only as honest as the rules, and heroin addiction is not a socially tolerated vice.
Now, you could argue that “giving” out drugs removes the crime, but then you have to invent other crimes for law enforcement to chase OR reduce law enforcement budgets.
The technical term for such a policy is “political suicide”.
@The Psyentist 546970 wrote:
:sign0019:
if it was available and legal and of reliable quality, then that would reduce/eliminate illegal trade, wouldn’t it?
@Pat McDonald 546980 wrote:
Right. So where do you get the heroin from? Why, you get it from the heroin producers, mostly based in Afghanistan and Pakistan
british troops are already there… ‘operation – bag the poppy?’
0
Voices
33
Replies
Tags
This topic has no tags
Forums › Drugs › Heroin & Opium › Should heroin be prescribed?