News Despite Newsom’s veto, S.F. might push ahead with supervised drug consumption sites anyway

[thegreenhand]

Despite Newsom’s veto, S.F. might push ahead with supervised drug consumption sites anyway​

Mallory Moench
SF Chronicle
22 Aug 2022

Excerpt:

Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill that would have allowed pilot programs where people could use drugs under the supervision of trained staff in San Francisco, Oakland and Los Angeles, a blow to a long-fought battle to tackle the cities’ overdose crises.

The most recent veto is a setback for many local officials and supporters who have pushed to open these sites for years to curb overdose deaths, but have dithered because federal law still prohibits them and state law does not provide protections for nonprofits or medical providers running the sites. But San Francisco could still move forward with opening a site after City Attorney David Chiu released a statement following Newsom’s veto that said he would support a non-profit immediately opening a site.

“To save lives, I fully support a non-profit moving forward now with New York’s model of overdose prevention programs,” Chiu said in the statement.

 

[Fiori di Bella]

I believe supervised drug consumption sites should be legal. Vancouver’s program has no doubt saved many lives.

I do wonder why San Diego was not mentioned in the original bill. We certainly have the need for such a place here!

And Hey, this is my first post in DPMC!

 

[thegreenhand]

I believe supervised drug consumption sites should be legal. Vancouver’s program has no doubt saved many lives.

they've definitely proven their efficacy, the world over

I do wonder why San Diego was not mentioned in the original bill. We certainly have the need for such a place here!

it's odd, i never hear san diego in the national news as one of these alleged "lib failure" cities with rampant drug use everywhere. only LA and SF

And Hey, this is my first post in DPMC!

we are glad to have you here

 

[Fiori di Bella]

@thegreenhand

Are there many drug consumption sites across the US? I’d be curious to know if cities with these sites have noticed a dip in overdose deaths, or ER visits and hospitalizations related to abscesses or infections from dirty paraphernalia. I’m assuming the site ideally provides users with clean gear, though I’m not certain that’s the way all sites are run.

 

[thegreenhand]

@thegreenhand

Are there many drug consumption sites across the US? I’d be curious to know if cities with these sites have noticed a dip in overdose deaths, or ER visits and hospitalizations related to dirty paraphernalia. I’m assuming the site ideally provides users with clean gear, though I’m not certain that’s the way all sites are run.

I believe New York City has the only sanctioned drug consumption sites (2 of them). Note that unsanctioned sites have been known to operate in the US, but getting the exact count on how many is obviously tricky.

The NYC project uses the term ‘overdose prevention center‘ (OPC) to show that the sites also provide additional recovery support. Like clean injection gear, for example.

This report on the first two months of operation at the sites says that naloxone had been administered 125 times during that period. That number has surely gone up since the article was published.

There is no mention in that article about changes in population level outcomes due to the OPCs.

The authors note that:

”Findings are limited by the short study period and lack of a comparison group with individuals not participating in OPC services. Additional evaluation may explore whether OPC services are associated with improved overall health outcomes for participants, as well as neighborhood-level outcomes, including public drug use, improperly discarded syringes, and drug-related crime.”

So I would expect that research to be in the works already. It’s just simply too soon to have that data yet