Injectable Heroin Keeps Addicts Clean

You could use the same arguement for methadone, but yes indeed you most defaintely ARE clean if you on MMT.

The point is that you are clean if you change your LIFESTYLE and your OBSESSION with heroin.
The BEHAVIOR is wat makes a addict. the mental thought patterns make the addict. not just the actual use of the drug or not.
It's possible to live a completely 'normal' life on opiates. Like you said, the major issues are obtaining the drug and all of the bullshit that comes with taking an illicit drug -potency, arrest, cuts, etc..
But, and this is just me arguing semantics, being clean means not being dependent on any opiate, regardless of what situation it's used under and how your life is. Again, it's just semantics. :)
^the trick in the US is to get the FDA to believe in it as strongly as you do. We'd need a few outfits (universities, hospitals and the like) to start running statistically rigid trials. Placebo-control is impossible in this context, but studies of diacetylmorphine versus active comparators will hold water if they have good controls. For instance, the study shouldn't be open label. The subjects have to be "blinded" so that they don't know if they're getting the heroin or the comparator. They can also be "dummied" in the sense that every once in a while you switch the appearance of the dose to something that can either be the same substance or the other substance. Or they can get switched to the other substance without being informed of a switch. You can have multiple parallel arms running and a shitload of numbers for reviewers to crunch if you establish such controls, and if heroin consistently outperforms the active comparators, a case can be made for its approval.

I'd be interested in knowing if this is already being done in the US, or whether its been done in the recent past. Too lazy to look it up right now.

EDIT: It occurs to me that we can pretty much chuck the verifiability of blinded and dummied subjects, as heroin and methadone tests can be bought at any drugstore.
There are various studies on how well heroin prescription works, in different countries. Hell, Canada just went through a successful trial with it. The point is, the gov't wants nothing to do with it. It's a political career killer and there are various industries dependent on keeping the legal status quo with recreational drugs. The law enforcement industry, the rehabilitation industry, pharmaceuticals, alcohol and tobacco, etc.
There are peer reviewed, and replicated, studies on a lot of different aspects of drug use, and they simply don't matter to the people in charge. :\
 
I don't understand. It says that the heroin was given in two doses a day of 450mgs!!! thats 900mgs of diacetylmorphine a day... I do believe that is an INSANE amount...doesn't that seem a little much?? also 200mgs of methadone a day is a lot too!
 
I don't understand. It says that the heroin was given in two doses a day of 450mgs!!! thats 900mgs of diacetylmorphine a day... I do believe that is an INSANE amount...doesn't that seem a little much?? also 200mgs of methadone a day is a lot too!

Look at the post by Lacey K (she posted a couple times on this page, the one I am referring to is post #13 on this page) where she breaks down the doses as it relates to street heroin equivalency.

That should answer you question. You have to keep in mind that they are giving a dose that is high enough to keep the patients satisfied enough to not go and pick up ish on the streets. And also, not everybody is going to be getting that high of a dose. I am sure thats the max.

As for the methadone doses, there are plenty of people at that dose in every clinic in the U.S.
 
There are various studies on how well heroin prescription works, in different countries. Hell, Canada just went through a successful trial with it. The point is, the gov't wants nothing to do with it.

There is at least a process in place for testing schedule 1 compounds on human subjects in the US. A doctor can get a schedule 1 DEA license.
 
Top