Jack layton is a idiot too so im not too keen on voting NDP at the moment either. Stephan Dion is a total twat as well and if we had a half right leader for the liberals at all the conservatives would already have gotten their asses kicked out.
-
DPMC Moderators: tryptakid
Health Minister's Insite attack leaves WHO red-faced
- Thread starter E-llusion
- Start date
4EverTweakin
Greenlighter
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2006
- Messages
- 340
Carsick said:
Again, not even close to well educated on the topic. I do know that in the U.S.A(and just about all well developed countries) to be considered HIV+ you must under-go a serires of extensive testing including methods of injecting the cells with the virus and seeing how they react. In Africa it is completely different, and there reasons/methods for determining if a person is HIV+ is nothing like the rest of the world. This is common knowledge to any scientist (like my brother).
Ham-milton
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2007
- Messages
- 5,746
if you were a rich cocaine user, or a major donation-providing housewife who liked to snort oxy and ambien, it'd be entirely different.
Ham-milton
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2007
- Messages
- 5,746
4EverTweakin said:
Injecting the cells with the virus and seeing how they react??? UM no.
They use ELISA first to see if there's an antigen or antibody, and if there's a positive they confirm with a western blot test.
That's how it's done in the US. I'm guessing they do the same in Africa, perhaps not using the Western Blot to confirm though.
Right there is the money quote. By removing the ability to arrest users, you're taking away one of the governments most powerful tools it can use to marginalize and control. Here in the US, we have millions of people who have criminal backgrounds just because they used drugs. It's difficult for people to fully take part in society when they have that blemish on their records.
The good news is that the supreme court of canada is liberal and is often the voice of sanity in a otherwise insane wave of conservative ideology. I doubt they will side with the regressive conservatives on this.
i agree with the health minister. actively encouraging people not to use a harmful drug AT ALL is clearly a better harm reduction stance than giving people a safe place to shoot up said drugs. approaching the heroin epidemic in vancouver by providing addicts with a place to do the drugs is like accepting defeat.
of course people are going to do drugs regardless of whether it's illegal or not, but if you're making heroin use safer and safer, than logically new users will be far less hesitant to try it (and likely become addicted) than if there is a strong enough reason (i.e. HIV) to believe it will cause them serious harm and is not worth trying because of that possibility.
while the safe injection sites may save a few from HIV, it also silently encourages addicts to continue living a self-destructive lifestyle that will likely claim them of other illness, overdose, or suicide.
of course people are going to do drugs regardless of whether it's illegal or not, but if you're making heroin use safer and safer, than logically new users will be far less hesitant to try it (and likely become addicted) than if there is a strong enough reason (i.e. HIV) to believe it will cause them serious harm and is not worth trying because of that possibility.
while the safe injection sites may save a few from HIV, it also silently encourages addicts to continue living a self-destructive lifestyle that will likely claim them of other illness, overdose, or suicide.
Ernestrome
Bluelighter
thujone said:
Bollocks.
Or, more politely, please provide some stats to show that use increases when shooting galleries are allowed. The aim is to reduce the number of people who contract serious disease due to their use.