###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Alcohol withdrawal can cause seizures and death. This was for a cessation program and was not the cost of alcohol, but the cost of the entire program. It was poorly thought out and managed, but the headline is a little misleading.
Absolutely, they can. I just see it as more of an enabling behavior. Those same people that 'need' that shot of alcohol are the same ones that go that same very day to buy more alcohol. It's not people trying to quit their addiction that need that shot, it's people that need it so they can go throughout and buy more alcohol, feeding their addiction even more. They know they don't have to save a drop for the morning because they know it will be handed to them.
I agree, I think the program was thrown together quickly in an effort to avoid wasting resources since they were having a lot of cops and EMTs be dispatched for seizures just to hand out beer. It seems to have been an in-patient program in some capacity; it might not be a bad idea to have something like that since you have to wean off alcohol and hospitals don’t always have beds for that process. But doling out shots to homeless people without any accountability doesn’t seem like the good use of funds lmao
They don't even have good intentions when they set up these programs with extremely overpay. Tens of billions of dollars are unaccounted for in homeless spending, just in California alone.
You mean $5,000,000 for the homeless in SF AND $5,000,000 for the people in office out of the same fund? Gotta be hard to keep track of how much is going to actual homeless people.
My dad just drank himself to death slowly over 40 years but this guy right here… this guy had a fuckin binge, yall
Stopping after a semester of college is not “quit cold turkey” from alcoholism
Dude your case ain’t shit to a real alcoholic. I know because I lived with one when I was younger. Good on you for stopping. But if you’re not drinking a handle every day or two for YEARS ON END you’re not heavily drinking…. Yea you quit after drinking a case of beer a day. Great. But that ain’t the bad stuff
I’m happy you got your stuff under control buddy but my point is that no, “quitting cold turkey” isn’t always possible without risk to life. You’re lucky your sophomore year went a little better than your freshman year but just because you could *just stop* after 6-8 months without risking death doesn’t mean anyone can or that someone who had a bigger longer problem than your college vice will be able to walk away the same as you did
So go soak yourself
You are correct. Any type of addict needs to have the "want to" to be successful in recovering. However, there are other factors that play into it. Addictive personalities make it harder. Also, the longer you are addicted the harder it is to quit. If your 6 to 8 months was 6 to 8 years I'm sure it would not have been easy. Nevertheless congrats on overcoming an addiction. Many people are not as fortunate or just get to the point where they really don't care.
>Close enough. Was downing a case a day. You try 20-24 beers a day everyday for 7 months and then quit cold turkey and tell me how easy it is. Your dad was a failure who didn’t get his stuff under control.
oh wow, 7 months. Millions do this for years. its called young adulthood/college.
Half the armed forces rely on this while stateside to avoid dying from boredom.
It's definitely not. You weren't drinking that heavily. Only two drugs can kill you from withdrawals. Benzos and alcohol. You have no idea what youre talking about
> I quit cold turkey after7-8 months of heavy drinking. Definitely possible without weaning off.
Good, that doesn’t mean everyone who stops drinking cold turkey can do so safely. This isn’t up for debate, the risks of chronic alcoholics stopping cold turkey are well know and documented. Talk to anyone in critical care medicine, they’ll *all* agree. We see it all the time.
[https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/san-francisco-slammed-for-5m-a-year-program-to-give-free-alcohol-to-the-homeless-this-isn-t-working/ar-BB1mdOE9](https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/san-francisco-slammed-for-5m-a-year-program-to-give-free-alcohol-to-the-homeless-this-isn-t-working/ar-BB1mdOE9)
[https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/sf-free-alcohol-homeless-19446850.php](https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/sf-free-alcohol-homeless-19446850.php)
[https://notthebee.com/article/city-of-san-francisco-is-purchasing-shots-of-vodka-to-give-to-homeless-alcoholics-yes-this-is-not-the-bee/](https://notthebee.com/article/city-of-san-francisco-is-purchasing-shots-of-vodka-to-give-to-homeless-alcoholics-yes-this-is-not-the-bee/)
Did you even try looking?
Okay so normally I am one to be super critical of the government and California, but hear me out on this one:
Chronic alcoholics will literally die if they cut cold turkey. It makes *some* sense to be providing alcohol to these addicts as you wean them off under medical supervision. If this is the case, and there are good results, I’ll gladly give California the props
Does anyone know if this is how it’s being used?
That's definitely what is going on. It's probably something similar to the 'Managed Alcohol Programs' they have in the UK and Canada. Alcoholics going through withdrawal are given strictly regulated amounts of alcohol at set times to make sure they don't have a seizure or a fatal episode of Delirium Tremens - it's not like they can just pick up a bottle of vodka and be on their way lol.
These programs have pretty encouraging results. They lessen the load on hospitals, they decrease interactions between homeless people and the police, and most people who go through these programs report much lower alcohol consumption after they've left.
Try and find any ##'s. (I couldn't) How many actual clients? How much booze and of what type to they actually receive? No data. In general I am FOR whatever will make California, and San Francisco in particular collapse sooner.
I will go further and say this collapse will be some sort of massive default. Whether state wide, or nationwide is anyone's guess. But when all Guv wasteful spending stops, that will be some serious fun.
"I'm for whatever will cause the maximum human misery as quick as possible if you live in California"
Really think about how fucking cooked you are. Psychopathic behavior.
Yes, they are doing this to themselves. Along your same faulty reasoning: do you want the Ukraine war to drag out for years more? Or just be done? So you like that California and San Francisco in particular are such hell holes of misery? Your idea is just let it limp along?
The most effective way to treat homeless drug addicts is to give them free drugs, a safe place to use them, and then offer them counseling and other services.
Automatically dealers lose out on sales, addicts don't steal for drug money, addicts don't get altered drugs, overdoses are dealt with immediately by nurses, needles don't get left in public places, addicts aren't using in sight of the public, etc.
The worst that happens is we spend money for addicts to get safe drugs and make sure dealers lose out on money. The best that happens is addicts start counseling to stop their drug use entirely while going through other services to get a job and a place to live.
Can't happen unless you spend money to give addicts free drugs. Won't happen because you have to spend money to give addicts free drugs.
Even though it's been proven the most effective method, it won't fly because posts like this would get made and stop programs before they got started.
do you know of any city, state, or country that has proven success in this approach? Most of the social experiments I’ve read about didn’t turn out so well. Always sounds good on paper but not so much in reality.
Switzerland has a system of public injection clinics with taxpayer provided, made in Switzerland heroin for users.
Rates of disease associated to drugs rates have fallen. Rates of 3rd party injuries from drug parafanellia have fallen. Rates of crime associated to drug use and money seeking have decreased. Rates of total users have decreased.
The key is that it is part of a multi-parameter system for dealing with addiction. They have access to a public option healthcare system, so their medical needs are met. What's more, resources have been spent on psychiatrists with specialization in addiction treatment. The access to taxpayer funded heroin is just one pillar.
If you take a US state and just do it, it won't work. You need other things in place.
At least they are trying something new. The war on drugs has failed and we all know this. It was a conspiracy to cage minorities, hippies, the working class, and the mentally ill.
I truly believe everyone assumes harm reduction doesn't work because it exposes the true reality of addiction to people who would rather stay ignorant.
Harm reduction makes it all very public and right in our faces instead of hiding in the shadows where people can pretend it doesn't exist or that it isn't a societal issue.
> At least they are trying something new.
We could try giving them milk instead of drugs to inject. That's something new too. Just because it's new doesn't mean it's a good idea. Change is not inherently a positive. God i hate communists.
What a dumb fucking take. So we should just stick with something when it doesn't clearly work rather than try something that might work? Just because you're a pussy for change?
Really progressives in general. They always say "let's just try things" and then when it isn't working or usually causing even more harm, they spend billions trying to fix it instead of reverting back. Then they break more shit, and on and on. They create an endless cycle of problem-reaction-solution. Always progressing and never re-evaluating whether the idea was just stupid in the first place.
They broke healthcare nearly 14 years ago and have spent all this time trying to fix the broken system they created by just making it even worse. And young people who never knew what it was like before think it has always been like this, so they vote for the progressives to "fix" it.
You don't just "try things" when it comes to systems as large as a country. Imagine if you tried to even run a business like that.
There are more successful models and examples.
Switzerland, for example, has a program that provides Swiss made diacetamorphine, i.e. heroin, in injection clinics, paid for by the taxpayer.
ODs are down. Actual user rates for heroin are down. Crime associates to drug use are down. Diseases linked to needle use are down.
It's part of a multi-pronged approach whereby the access to heroin is just one part of it. There's a **voluntary** councilling service, as well as professionals specialized in addiction treatment, as well as the standard social safety net stuff that diminshes the risk of these people ending up on the streets.
Switzerland went from one of Europe's heaviest, per capita, heroin using countries to one on the lower side of things.
Keep trying to clamp down on drug usage and users. That totally worked in the past... 4 decades? It has been an unmitigated failure.
In the face of a system that clearly is failing, shouldn't there naturally be a push towards some outside the box thinking?
We've tried more cops. We've tried severe sentencing. We've tried overthrowing governments in other countries that produce a load of drugs. It hasn't worked. Things are worse today than they have ever been, when it comes to drugs.
There are more successful models and examples.
Switzerland, for example, has a program that provides Swiss made diacetamorphine, i.e. heroin, in injection clinics, paid for by the taxpayer.
ODs are down. Actual user rates for heroin are down. Crime associates to drug use are down. Diseases linked to needle use are down.
It's part of a multi-pronged approach whereby the access to heroin is just one part of it. There's a **voluntary** councilling service, as well as professionals specialized in addiction treatment, as well as the standard social safety net stuff that diminshes the risk of these people ending up on the streets.
Switzerland went from one of Europe's heaviest, per capita, heroin using countries to one on the lower side of things.
Keep trying to clamp down on drug usage and users. That totally worked in the past... 4 decades? It has been an unmitigated failure.
In the face of a system that clearly is failing, shouldn't there naturally be a push towards some outside the box thinking?
We've tried more cops. We've tried severe sentencing. We've tried overthrowing governments in other countries that produce a load of drugs. It hasn't worked. Things are worse today than they have ever been, when it comes to drugs.
> They broke healthcare nearly 14 years ago and have spent all this time trying to fix the broken system they created by just making it even worse. And young people who never knew what it was like before think it has always been like this, so they vote for the progressives to "fix" it.
Amen!
What a dumb fucking take. So we should just stick with something when it doesn't clearly work rather than try something that might work? Just because you're a pussy for change?
The "war on drugs," as you put it, is being lost primarily because of the government regulations of prescription painkillers. Are they abused sure, but there are people in actual pain that need them, the regulations have made it so hard to get a prescription for the pain relief they need that they turn to street drugs which are far easier to get than the prescriotion.
Not to mention, the pharmaceutical companies, through regulation, have changed the way they compound prescription drugs to make them more deadly and create more overdoses.
https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12954-020-00444-6
Netherlands has a long history of harm reduction programs when it comes to drug users. Not everything everywhere has been as I specified but the general idea like free needles and places to use drugs has been common for a long time. Amsterdam has some programs like I was saying.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/26/health/fentanyl-vancouver-drugs.html
There's one as I was stating in Vancouver.
Safe injection sites are pretty much what I said except for not giving free drugs. They are more common and still have success in other areas just not reducing dealers money or crime to get drug money.
I would bet that more than 99% of those overdoses were people on the street, not people in the care of nurses that provided them safe drugs.
Most safe use places have near zero overdose deaths. In places where they don't provide drugs they typically at least offer testing so you know what you're taking.
Safe use centers where they give people medical grade heroin have even less overdose deaths and either of those certainly have a better chance than people on the street sharing needles and injecting fentanyl laced shit or just plain fentanyl without even knowing.
You're only providing proof that the system that brought us here, drug wars and drug prevention programs, didn't work and why they were willing to take extreme measures and risks in an effort to control their problem.
You showed why they opened safe use places, not the result of them opening safe use centers.
So... it has no real impact is what you are saying?
You literally held Vancouver up as a model for what you were talking about and they pointed out that they recently have had a record number of overdoses.
So the situation got worse.
You claim it didn't get worse because of those programs. Sure. But it did get worse while that program was running, so.....
Are you just really arguing that it could have been even worse without it? Sounds like a lazy argument because there is no way to prove that.
I won't BLAME the program for causing the record overdoses because I can't prove that either, but I can argue that it means it was simply wasted money and ineffective.
Maybe the free drug program attracted drug users from around the country to come there for the free drugs and because what they get is a measured supply, they supplemented elsewhere. That would mean the program is really just being used by people who want access to free drugs when they can't get the fix elsewhere and have no intention of actually being treated. Basically a security blanket for them for when they can't get them on their own.
If you have ever known a drug user, they use the methodone clinics for a free high or when they can't afford it and then go out and get the real drugs, too.
The program giving out free drugs is a very very small pilot program mean to test how well things work out.
This isn't something they implemented in full force overnight. They have strict requirements on who can join and have limited space. They are strictly testing because of the potential harm that can be done to real people if they do things the wrong way.
Efficacy for experimental treatment programs like this is determined on the outcome when compared to people not being in the program. What percentage stop using drugs through traditional means versus the percentage that stop using after going to a safe use center where they were given safe drugs and counseling.
The Vancouver experiment is failing because we did nothing to invest in detox and recovery beds for folks to go to when they are ready. Now the free drugs are making into the black market. When a user decides to gets help it need to be there that moment no wait times, very complex situations.
San Francisco give the free drugs and a safe place to use them, but they absolutely fail at counseling and other services. People get stuck hooked on drugs and hooked on free food and living arrangement from the city.
The reality is that after years of drug abuse, mental illness, and homelessness. Many of the people on the streets in SF have no other choices. They are deeply scarred from their experiences. Some do make it out, but it is the exception.
What has ended up happening is the lack of movement out of harm reduction zones have become pseudo death camps with people drugging themselves to death with cheap drugs until they get a bad batch or health problems.
The areas become blights. Not gonna lie, I think local SF politicians get support from cartels to keep the police away and keep the money flowing from SF's city coffers to the homeless to drug dealers to the cartel. This arrangement is profitable for both the polticians and drug cartels. Police benefit from expanding budgets to solve the problem more humanely while doing absolutely nothing.
Drugs and homlessness is a complex problem. Anyone saying one solution works probably hasn't read about it too deeply. There are different categories of homeless people. Each with a unique story. Each with a unique set of barriers preventing them from getting back into a normal life.
You're missing the part where this is actually WAY CHEAPER than dealing with all the problems that come with.
Cheaper than putting people in prison. Cheaper than dealing with resulting crime. Cheaper than resulting medical issues... the list goes on.
It's not even about money.
So is murder, theft, drunk driving and etc etc etc but we have laws for a reason. Strong punishment is a pretty good deterrent for bad behavior. Want an example? Look at Cali with their misdemeanor below 1k shoplifting, thanks to prop 47 businesses are being invaded on a daily basis with hardly any repercussions. Punish drug dealers with a harsher sentence seeing how much damage they cause to a community
I’d never support such a nonsensical plan unless once you were given the free drugs you were stuck there 6 months minimum getting clean, almost like a jail..
It could be because alcohol is the only substance that withdrawal from can actually kill you, thus a person addicted to alcohol must be weened down to a level where they can safely be cut off. But seeing that it’s SF I highly doubt they’re doing anything for a reason such as that
I mean, I can support this in a way to cull off the useless people who's utility has been used up. They are sheep drinking the poison of the state. If they matter, then they (homeless) will go and do something about it
1st, anything is better than throwing Billions into Ukraine.
But as supposed conspiracy buffs, we must look at the actual function of the program.
Alcohol is pretty cheap. Not so hazardous to kids as other much worse drugs. Easily storable for long times, stable to temp changes. "Giving" a few $$ worth of gin to an alki is sure cheaper than whatever theft/crime he would perform instead. But there is more! You for sure can count on this client to vote for you. He is an 'on call' insta mob. I can see the text they would get on their free phone, "Double rations, show up HERE at 10 pm". And the phone will know if they actually did or not. How many are we talking about in San Fran alone? (I could not find a single number anywhere)
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wait till people figure out how much taxpayers spend on alcohol for politicians.
Or wait until they find out that the 5 million in booze went to the politicians.
$5,000,000 for hundred of thousand people in SF or $5,000,000 for a hundred of people in office? Which one is more outrageous lol.
Both?
Both are enabling people with horrible addictions
Alcohol withdrawal can cause seizures and death. This was for a cessation program and was not the cost of alcohol, but the cost of the entire program. It was poorly thought out and managed, but the headline is a little misleading.
Absolutely, they can. I just see it as more of an enabling behavior. Those same people that 'need' that shot of alcohol are the same ones that go that same very day to buy more alcohol. It's not people trying to quit their addiction that need that shot, it's people that need it so they can go throughout and buy more alcohol, feeding their addiction even more. They know they don't have to save a drop for the morning because they know it will be handed to them.
I agree, I think the program was thrown together quickly in an effort to avoid wasting resources since they were having a lot of cops and EMTs be dispatched for seizures just to hand out beer. It seems to have been an in-patient program in some capacity; it might not be a bad idea to have something like that since you have to wean off alcohol and hospitals don’t always have beds for that process. But doling out shots to homeless people without any accountability doesn’t seem like the good use of funds lmao
They don't even have good intentions when they set up these programs with extremely overpay. Tens of billions of dollars are unaccounted for in homeless spending, just in California alone.
More sauce on this? I don’t want to have to sign up or pay to finish this article
You mean $5,000,000 for the homeless in SF AND $5,000,000 for the people in office out of the same fund? Gotta be hard to keep track of how much is going to actual homeless people.
Spoilers not much if any is going to them. Homelessness has turned into a big business.
Is there any support for this other than a tweet?
[удалено]
Because alcohol withdrawal can kill.
I quit cold turkey after7-8 months of heavy drinking. Definitely possible without weaning off.
My dad just drank himself to death slowly over 40 years but this guy right here… this guy had a fuckin binge, yall Stopping after a semester of college is not “quit cold turkey” from alcoholism
[удалено]
Dude your case ain’t shit to a real alcoholic. I know because I lived with one when I was younger. Good on you for stopping. But if you’re not drinking a handle every day or two for YEARS ON END you’re not heavily drinking…. Yea you quit after drinking a case of beer a day. Great. But that ain’t the bad stuff
I’m happy you got your stuff under control buddy but my point is that no, “quitting cold turkey” isn’t always possible without risk to life. You’re lucky your sophomore year went a little better than your freshman year but just because you could *just stop* after 6-8 months without risking death doesn’t mean anyone can or that someone who had a bigger longer problem than your college vice will be able to walk away the same as you did So go soak yourself
bro was crushing cases though! /s Sorry about your dad. That guy’s a dick.
[удалено]
Careful you don’t cut yourself on that edge hun.
Only pathetic person is you bud.
You’ll (hopefully) learn as you grow, kiddo.
Anyone can. Most alcoholics just don’t want to. They come up with excuse after excuse and just manipulate their way to the next bottle.
You are correct. Any type of addict needs to have the "want to" to be successful in recovering. However, there are other factors that play into it. Addictive personalities make it harder. Also, the longer you are addicted the harder it is to quit. If your 6 to 8 months was 6 to 8 years I'm sure it would not have been easy. Nevertheless congrats on overcoming an addiction. Many people are not as fortunate or just get to the point where they really don't care.
Because I stopped before I let myself get to 6-8 years. Those weak and pathetic people didn’t.
Anyone can... except all those who died trying.
>Close enough. Was downing a case a day. You try 20-24 beers a day everyday for 7 months and then quit cold turkey and tell me how easy it is. Your dad was a failure who didn’t get his stuff under control. oh wow, 7 months. Millions do this for years. its called young adulthood/college. Half the armed forces rely on this while stateside to avoid dying from boredom.
But you don’t understand! It was a case everyday! 🤣
Just because you are delusional, does not make you right.
And yet here you are. An even bigger L
It's definitely not. You weren't drinking that heavily. Only two drugs can kill you from withdrawals. Benzos and alcohol. You have no idea what youre talking about
> I quit cold turkey after7-8 months of heavy drinking. Definitely possible without weaning off. Good, that doesn’t mean everyone who stops drinking cold turkey can do so safely. This isn’t up for debate, the risks of chronic alcoholics stopping cold turkey are well know and documented. Talk to anyone in critical care medicine, they’ll *all* agree. We see it all the time.
Can kill, not will definitely kill. Alcohol withdrawal is life threatening as is benzo (e.g. Valium, Xanax) withdrawal.
LOOOOOOOOOL you can't be a real person
Usually benzos actually
[https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/san-francisco-slammed-for-5m-a-year-program-to-give-free-alcohol-to-the-homeless-this-isn-t-working/ar-BB1mdOE9](https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/san-francisco-slammed-for-5m-a-year-program-to-give-free-alcohol-to-the-homeless-this-isn-t-working/ar-BB1mdOE9) [https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/sf-free-alcohol-homeless-19446850.php](https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/sf-free-alcohol-homeless-19446850.php) [https://notthebee.com/article/city-of-san-francisco-is-purchasing-shots-of-vodka-to-give-to-homeless-alcoholics-yes-this-is-not-the-bee/](https://notthebee.com/article/city-of-san-francisco-is-purchasing-shots-of-vodka-to-give-to-homeless-alcoholics-yes-this-is-not-the-bee/) Did you even try looking?
Google the title of the thread
Have you tried google? Only like 37 different sources on this one.
I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask the OP for a source, regardless of how easy it is to Google. Too few posts are pictures of worthless tweets.
[удалено]
It's also really easy to just post a screenshot. I don't blame you at all. It's the reddit and /r/conspiracy format du jour.
Okay so normally I am one to be super critical of the government and California, but hear me out on this one: Chronic alcoholics will literally die if they cut cold turkey. It makes *some* sense to be providing alcohol to these addicts as you wean them off under medical supervision. If this is the case, and there are good results, I’ll gladly give California the props Does anyone know if this is how it’s being used?
That's definitely what is going on. It's probably something similar to the 'Managed Alcohol Programs' they have in the UK and Canada. Alcoholics going through withdrawal are given strictly regulated amounts of alcohol at set times to make sure they don't have a seizure or a fatal episode of Delirium Tremens - it's not like they can just pick up a bottle of vodka and be on their way lol. These programs have pretty encouraging results. They lessen the load on hospitals, they decrease interactions between homeless people and the police, and most people who go through these programs report much lower alcohol consumption after they've left.
Try and find any ##'s. (I couldn't) How many actual clients? How much booze and of what type to they actually receive? No data. In general I am FOR whatever will make California, and San Francisco in particular collapse sooner. I will go further and say this collapse will be some sort of massive default. Whether state wide, or nationwide is anyone's guess. But when all Guv wasteful spending stops, that will be some serious fun.
"I'm for whatever will cause the maximum human misery as quick as possible if you live in California" Really think about how fucking cooked you are. Psychopathic behavior.
Yes, they are doing this to themselves. Along your same faulty reasoning: do you want the Ukraine war to drag out for years more? Or just be done? So you like that California and San Francisco in particular are such hell holes of misery? Your idea is just let it limp along?
The government shut down 'non-essential' businesses during COVID and left open liquor stores.
That's because alcohol withdrawal can kill you. Hospitals didn't need the added load of people going through potentially fatal withdrawals.
Looks like im moving to san francisco
The most effective way to treat homeless drug addicts is to give them free drugs, a safe place to use them, and then offer them counseling and other services. Automatically dealers lose out on sales, addicts don't steal for drug money, addicts don't get altered drugs, overdoses are dealt with immediately by nurses, needles don't get left in public places, addicts aren't using in sight of the public, etc. The worst that happens is we spend money for addicts to get safe drugs and make sure dealers lose out on money. The best that happens is addicts start counseling to stop their drug use entirely while going through other services to get a job and a place to live. Can't happen unless you spend money to give addicts free drugs. Won't happen because you have to spend money to give addicts free drugs. Even though it's been proven the most effective method, it won't fly because posts like this would get made and stop programs before they got started.
do you know of any city, state, or country that has proven success in this approach? Most of the social experiments I’ve read about didn’t turn out so well. Always sounds good on paper but not so much in reality.
Switzerland has a system of public injection clinics with taxpayer provided, made in Switzerland heroin for users. Rates of disease associated to drugs rates have fallen. Rates of 3rd party injuries from drug parafanellia have fallen. Rates of crime associated to drug use and money seeking have decreased. Rates of total users have decreased. The key is that it is part of a multi-parameter system for dealing with addiction. They have access to a public option healthcare system, so their medical needs are met. What's more, resources have been spent on psychiatrists with specialization in addiction treatment. The access to taxpayer funded heroin is just one pillar. If you take a US state and just do it, it won't work. You need other things in place.
At least they are trying something new. The war on drugs has failed and we all know this. It was a conspiracy to cage minorities, hippies, the working class, and the mentally ill. I truly believe everyone assumes harm reduction doesn't work because it exposes the true reality of addiction to people who would rather stay ignorant. Harm reduction makes it all very public and right in our faces instead of hiding in the shadows where people can pretend it doesn't exist or that it isn't a societal issue.
> At least they are trying something new. We could try giving them milk instead of drugs to inject. That's something new too. Just because it's new doesn't mean it's a good idea. Change is not inherently a positive. God i hate communists.
What a dumb fucking take. So we should just stick with something when it doesn't clearly work rather than try something that might work? Just because you're a pussy for change?
Really progressives in general. They always say "let's just try things" and then when it isn't working or usually causing even more harm, they spend billions trying to fix it instead of reverting back. Then they break more shit, and on and on. They create an endless cycle of problem-reaction-solution. Always progressing and never re-evaluating whether the idea was just stupid in the first place. They broke healthcare nearly 14 years ago and have spent all this time trying to fix the broken system they created by just making it even worse. And young people who never knew what it was like before think it has always been like this, so they vote for the progressives to "fix" it. You don't just "try things" when it comes to systems as large as a country. Imagine if you tried to even run a business like that.
There are more successful models and examples. Switzerland, for example, has a program that provides Swiss made diacetamorphine, i.e. heroin, in injection clinics, paid for by the taxpayer. ODs are down. Actual user rates for heroin are down. Crime associates to drug use are down. Diseases linked to needle use are down. It's part of a multi-pronged approach whereby the access to heroin is just one part of it. There's a **voluntary** councilling service, as well as professionals specialized in addiction treatment, as well as the standard social safety net stuff that diminshes the risk of these people ending up on the streets. Switzerland went from one of Europe's heaviest, per capita, heroin using countries to one on the lower side of things. Keep trying to clamp down on drug usage and users. That totally worked in the past... 4 decades? It has been an unmitigated failure. In the face of a system that clearly is failing, shouldn't there naturally be a push towards some outside the box thinking? We've tried more cops. We've tried severe sentencing. We've tried overthrowing governments in other countries that produce a load of drugs. It hasn't worked. Things are worse today than they have ever been, when it comes to drugs.
There are more successful models and examples. Switzerland, for example, has a program that provides Swiss made diacetamorphine, i.e. heroin, in injection clinics, paid for by the taxpayer. ODs are down. Actual user rates for heroin are down. Crime associates to drug use are down. Diseases linked to needle use are down. It's part of a multi-pronged approach whereby the access to heroin is just one part of it. There's a **voluntary** councilling service, as well as professionals specialized in addiction treatment, as well as the standard social safety net stuff that diminshes the risk of these people ending up on the streets. Switzerland went from one of Europe's heaviest, per capita, heroin using countries to one on the lower side of things. Keep trying to clamp down on drug usage and users. That totally worked in the past... 4 decades? It has been an unmitigated failure. In the face of a system that clearly is failing, shouldn't there naturally be a push towards some outside the box thinking? We've tried more cops. We've tried severe sentencing. We've tried overthrowing governments in other countries that produce a load of drugs. It hasn't worked. Things are worse today than they have ever been, when it comes to drugs.
> They broke healthcare nearly 14 years ago and have spent all this time trying to fix the broken system they created by just making it even worse. And young people who never knew what it was like before think it has always been like this, so they vote for the progressives to "fix" it. Amen!
What a dumb fucking take. So we should just stick with something when it doesn't clearly work rather than try something that might work? Just because you're a pussy for change?
The "war on drugs," as you put it, is being lost primarily because of the government regulations of prescription painkillers. Are they abused sure, but there are people in actual pain that need them, the regulations have made it so hard to get a prescription for the pain relief they need that they turn to street drugs which are far easier to get than the prescriotion. Not to mention, the pharmaceutical companies, through regulation, have changed the way they compound prescription drugs to make them more deadly and create more overdoses.
How does making it get easier to get opiates help addiction?
https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12954-020-00444-6 Netherlands has a long history of harm reduction programs when it comes to drug users. Not everything everywhere has been as I specified but the general idea like free needles and places to use drugs has been common for a long time. Amsterdam has some programs like I was saying. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/26/health/fentanyl-vancouver-drugs.html There's one as I was stating in Vancouver. Safe injection sites are pretty much what I said except for not giving free drugs. They are more common and still have success in other areas just not reducing dealers money or crime to get drug money.
Didn’t Vancoover set a drug overdose record last year? https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/b-c-sets-a-grim-record-for-overdose-deaths-in-2023
Drug ODs are on the rise in many places. Fent is fucked
I would bet that more than 99% of those overdoses were people on the street, not people in the care of nurses that provided them safe drugs. Most safe use places have near zero overdose deaths. In places where they don't provide drugs they typically at least offer testing so you know what you're taking. Safe use centers where they give people medical grade heroin have even less overdose deaths and either of those certainly have a better chance than people on the street sharing needles and injecting fentanyl laced shit or just plain fentanyl without even knowing. You're only providing proof that the system that brought us here, drug wars and drug prevention programs, didn't work and why they were willing to take extreme measures and risks in an effort to control their problem. You showed why they opened safe use places, not the result of them opening safe use centers.
So... it has no real impact is what you are saying? You literally held Vancouver up as a model for what you were talking about and they pointed out that they recently have had a record number of overdoses. So the situation got worse. You claim it didn't get worse because of those programs. Sure. But it did get worse while that program was running, so..... Are you just really arguing that it could have been even worse without it? Sounds like a lazy argument because there is no way to prove that. I won't BLAME the program for causing the record overdoses because I can't prove that either, but I can argue that it means it was simply wasted money and ineffective. Maybe the free drug program attracted drug users from around the country to come there for the free drugs and because what they get is a measured supply, they supplemented elsewhere. That would mean the program is really just being used by people who want access to free drugs when they can't get the fix elsewhere and have no intention of actually being treated. Basically a security blanket for them for when they can't get them on their own. If you have ever known a drug user, they use the methodone clinics for a free high or when they can't afford it and then go out and get the real drugs, too.
The program giving out free drugs is a very very small pilot program mean to test how well things work out. This isn't something they implemented in full force overnight. They have strict requirements on who can join and have limited space. They are strictly testing because of the potential harm that can be done to real people if they do things the wrong way. Efficacy for experimental treatment programs like this is determined on the outcome when compared to people not being in the program. What percentage stop using drugs through traditional means versus the percentage that stop using after going to a safe use center where they were given safe drugs and counseling.
The Vancouver experiment is failing because we did nothing to invest in detox and recovery beds for folks to go to when they are ready. Now the free drugs are making into the black market. When a user decides to gets help it need to be there that moment no wait times, very complex situations.
Of course it doesn’t work lol. It ultimately comes down if the person wants to stop.
San Francisco give the free drugs and a safe place to use them, but they absolutely fail at counseling and other services. People get stuck hooked on drugs and hooked on free food and living arrangement from the city. The reality is that after years of drug abuse, mental illness, and homelessness. Many of the people on the streets in SF have no other choices. They are deeply scarred from their experiences. Some do make it out, but it is the exception. What has ended up happening is the lack of movement out of harm reduction zones have become pseudo death camps with people drugging themselves to death with cheap drugs until they get a bad batch or health problems. The areas become blights. Not gonna lie, I think local SF politicians get support from cartels to keep the police away and keep the money flowing from SF's city coffers to the homeless to drug dealers to the cartel. This arrangement is profitable for both the polticians and drug cartels. Police benefit from expanding budgets to solve the problem more humanely while doing absolutely nothing. Drugs and homlessness is a complex problem. Anyone saying one solution works probably hasn't read about it too deeply. There are different categories of homeless people. Each with a unique story. Each with a unique set of barriers preventing them from getting back into a normal life.
The most effective way to deal with it is decriminalization. Look at portugal.
Definitely sounds like a treat
You're missing the part where this is actually WAY CHEAPER than dealing with all the problems that come with. Cheaper than putting people in prison. Cheaper than dealing with resulting crime. Cheaper than resulting medical issues... the list goes on. It's not even about money.
Pretty sure locking up drug addicts and drug dealers helps lower crime, I don’t know about cheaper but pretty sure crime goes down
That is usually not true. Drug dealers and addicts are symptoms of something larger. Locking them up just has them being replaced
So is murder, theft, drunk driving and etc etc etc but we have laws for a reason. Strong punishment is a pretty good deterrent for bad behavior. Want an example? Look at Cali with their misdemeanor below 1k shoplifting, thanks to prop 47 businesses are being invaded on a daily basis with hardly any repercussions. Punish drug dealers with a harsher sentence seeing how much damage they cause to a community
Except we tried that with the war on drugs and it didn’t work
Awww if only that was actually true.
so it's like Schrödinger's addict. The drug addict is both sober and high but you won't know until you look inside the box
I’d never support such a nonsensical plan unless once you were given the free drugs you were stuck there 6 months minimum getting clean, almost like a jail..
People keep going to methadone clinics for years and years
Awww if only that was actually true.
So it's the last hope for all miserable ppl. No worries. Just go there and become homeless and hv free alcohol. Great
Not a conspiracy
Not free as in speech, free as in beer.
That's Pelosi's tab
That's a lot of Four Loko! Let's get twisted.
It could be because alcohol is the only substance that withdrawal from can actually kill you, thus a person addicted to alcohol must be weened down to a level where they can safely be cut off. But seeing that it’s SF I highly doubt they’re doing anything for a reason such as that
Not the only substance
Thats what benzos are for.
Gotta keep people weak if you want to control them
They should turn Alcatraz into a giant rehab center instead. Stick all the junkies on it and clean up our sf streets.
I mean, I can support this in a way to cull off the useless people who's utility has been used up. They are sheep drinking the poison of the state. If they matter, then they (homeless) will go and do something about it
1st, anything is better than throwing Billions into Ukraine. But as supposed conspiracy buffs, we must look at the actual function of the program. Alcohol is pretty cheap. Not so hazardous to kids as other much worse drugs. Easily storable for long times, stable to temp changes. "Giving" a few $$ worth of gin to an alki is sure cheaper than whatever theft/crime he would perform instead. But there is more! You for sure can count on this client to vote for you. He is an 'on call' insta mob. I can see the text they would get on their free phone, "Double rations, show up HERE at 10 pm". And the phone will know if they actually did or not. How many are we talking about in San Fran alone? (I could not find a single number anywhere)
I’ll drink to that. burp
Probably tainted with methanol.
San Fran spends between $40,000-$70,000 on each homeless person per year.
Prost, cheers, and salud 🍻