[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don’t mind safe supply but they should charge for drugs at a rate below street value. Also along with safe supply you need to offer treatment as per of every transaction. And you need to offer a path to less harmful opioids.

Part of the goal needs to be funnelling people into treatment otherwise you just let addicts live longer which is a noble goal in some respects but not a solution to the current epidemic.

But only a tiny fraction of addicts of this class of drug will voluntarily seek treatment. That’s the pitiless shoal upon which the harm reduction model has been dashed. The treatment channels set up by Oregon as part its initiative to decriminalize all hard drugs have a 1 per cent takeup rate.

Of the 4,000 drug use citations issued in Oregon during the first two years of Measure 110, The Economist found, only 40 people called the hotline and were interested in treatment.

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion...tion-disaster/

The opiates ravaging vulnerable populations today are not alcohol or cocaine or even heroin. They’re orders of magnitude more destructive and more addictive. Well-meaning care workers and harm reduction advocates imagine what they would if they were addicts, maybe calling on their own experiences with far less dangerous drugs. It’s impossible for them to put themselves in the shoes of today’s fentanyl and meth addicts, who are in absolute thrall to their addictions and who have zero desire to stop using.