Should Heroin Be Prescribed To Addicts? (Merged)

erosion

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Oct 16, 2003
Messages
3,182
Should Heroin Be Prescribed To Addicts?
Science Daily
January 10, 2007


Experts debate whether heroin should be prescribed to addicts who are difficult to treat in a recent issue of the British Medical Journal.

Maintenance treatment with heroin is appropriate for heroin misusers under certain circumstances, argue Jürgen Rehm from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto and Benedikt Fischer from the University of Victoria, British Columbia.

They point to trials in Switzerland, the Netherlands and Germany, which found heroin assisted maintenance treatment feasible and effective for those resistant to treatment. They also found it to be cost effective compared with methadone maintenance treatment.

In the UK, heroin has also been a treatment option for heroin misusers for several decades, but the practice remains controversial.

"So, if maintenance treatment is generally justifiable, why should heroin not be used as one such pharmacological agent?" they ask.

One reason that has been cited is safety, both for the patient and for the general public. Yet results from the Swiss studies show that mortality among patients in heroin assisted maintenance programmes is low, and lower than for patients in other maintenance programmes.

Overall, say the authors, we see no convincing reason why heroin assisted maintenance treatment should not be part of a comprehensive treatment system for opioid dependence.

But Neil McKeganey, Professor of Drug Misuse Research at the University of Glasgow argues that prescribing heroin to heroin addicts is treating the effects of misuse not the addiction.

The evidence in relation to heroin prescribing is far from conclusive, he says, while the cost of treating an addict with heroin is estimated to be three to four times that of treating an addict with methadone.

Prescribing heroin to heroin addicts is also a risky strategy, which could lead to massive pressure on doctors to prescribe increasing amounts of the drug.

Research has shown that with the right services in place it is possible to do more than simply stabilise addicts' continued drug use through the prescribing route, writes McKeganey. For example, a Scottish study found 29.4% of addicts who received residential rehabilitation were abstinent for at least 90 days compared with only 3.4% receiving methadone maintenance.

Other research has found that most addicts want services to help them become drug free. Health services therefore need to ensure that they are supporting addicts' attempts to become drug free, and they need to be extremely cautious about any extension of a policy that could be seen as a route to maintaining rather than reducing an individual's drug dependency, he concludes.

Link
 
But Neil McKeganey, Professor of Drug Misuse Research at the University of Glasgow argues that prescribing heroin to heroin addicts is treating the effects of misuse not the addiction.
um so is methadone maintenance

and yeah its more expensive to use heroin. but that's just because methadone is such a cheap opiate itself. besides, you'd rather the drug cartels purchase/produce all the heroin?
 
I went on methadone maintenance to quit shooting dope. I did not abuse the methadone or use any drugs when I was on it. I also didn't get high or anything. My life slowly became normalized. If I had the option of heroin to treat opiate dependency however, I would have probably opted for that because I love being high so much. And the problems that arose from having a habit 95 times out of a 100 occurred when I ran out of dope and money, not due to actually being high itself. Therefore I guess that if methadone doesn't work, 'heroin maintenance' could be a viable solution. It was mentioned in the article that addicts would pressure doctors into prescribing more and more dope. I don't have a reference on this, but I heard that there is some sort of saturation point around 3g/day and it wouldn't matter if you had more, you would still be the same amount of high.
 
3 grams of pure heroin a day would just be ridiculous. That'd be equal to 6-9 grams of pure morphine. That's freaking insane!!

If you didn't reach a saturation point by that time, I don't think you ever would.
 
most addicts level off at a specific dose and dont go any higher. im sure your tolerance would skyrocket but there is only so much dope you can do.

i think for long term addicts giving heroin would be a good thing. tho i wonder how that would impact diverted heroin on the street. something like this would never fly in the states.
 
erosion said:
For example, a Scottish study found 29.4% of addicts who received residential rehabilitation were abstinent for at least 90 days compared with only 3.4% receiving methadone maintenance.


Link



I find this hard to believe. Only 3.4% of people on methadone stayed off dope for 90 days? But almost 30% stayed clean on their own? No way. The only way that more people stayed clean for 90 days by doing rehab versus methadone is if they are counting people who are in 90 day inpatient rehabs. Those people don't get out as much so the success rate is going to be much higher.

But I refuse to believe that only 3.4% of people on methadone stayed clean for 90 days. Unless they are talking about people who are just getting on methadone because everybody keeps shooting dope until they get up to a sufficient dose. Besides, anybody can make up statistics, 78% of all people know that. Also, only 34.2% of stats on the internet are true, according to 93% of studies.=D
 
Should Heroin Addicts Be Given Heroin?

Should Heroin Addicts Be Allowed to Receive Medical Prescribed Heroin as a Therapy for Their Addiction?
Rafael B.
Associated Content
1.16.08



An interesting debate is going on around the world in regard to allowing people addicted to heroin to receive it as form of maintenance therapy. Two interesting articles (article 1, article 2), published in the prestigious medical journal British Medical Journal, argue against or in favor of prescribing heroin to drug addicts as a means of reducing the health and social dangers related to use of this illegal drug.

Jürgen Rehm chair, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and Benedikt Fischer professor, Centre for Addictions Research of British Columbia, University of Victoria, in Canada answer a definite YES to the question: Should addicts be prescribed heroin?

In Switzerland, a small randomized trial found that heroin was successful in treating patients with heroin addiction who had no success with any other treatment. (Perneger, 1998, see source bellow). Since then, many studies have confirmed such use of heroin in treating addition to this drug.

More recently, large clinical trials in Netherlands and Germany have evaluated heroin use in assisted maintenance treatment and compared to current used procedures such as the use of methadone and placebos in treating heroin addiction. The study found that the use of heroin has been successful in treating heroin dependence with low mortalities rates. Also, in England, and according to the study, use of heroin in small doses and unsupervised has been an alternative treatment for opioid dependence.

So, according to the article of Rehm and Fischer, and based the evidence presented there, heroin should be prescribed as a maintenance therapy for heroin addiction.

On the contrary, Neil McKeganey, professor of drug misuse research, University of Glasgow, argues that this type of therapy treats the effects of heroin misuse and not the addiction per se. So he is against of using heroin as a treatment for this drug addiction.


McKeganey argues that the benefits of heroin prescription as a therapy to treating this drug dependency is inconclusive and that this strategy brings additional costs and burdens to a health and law enforcement system that it is already collapsed because of drug misuse.

The article of McKeganey mentions that effective treatments are available for treating the drug addition and not the outcomes of it. In fact, he mentioned an Australian study which found that with proper assistance (and not prescribing heroin) can maintain people off the drugs for 24 months and more. Treatments such as these are truly effective in treating addiction and not in treating the addiction outcomes or symptoms.

So to the question mentioned above there is an interesting debate going on in many countries of Europe and North America. YES or NO, It depends to whom you ask.

Sources:

Jürgen Rehm and Benedikt Fischer. 2008. Should heroin be prescribed to heroin misusers? Yes. British Medical Journal BMJ. Volume 336 Page 70. URL: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/short/336/7635/70

Neil McKeganey. 2008. Should heroin be prescribed to heroin misusers? No. British Medical Journal BMJ. Volume 336 Page 71.

URL: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/short/336/7635/71

Perneger T, Giner F, del Rio M, Mino A. Randomized trial of heroin maintenance programme for addicts who fail in conventional drug treatments. BMJ

Link!
 
Yes, I know we have various other articles about this very topic. But, this one actually lists the studies(for people to look into further), and is unbiased.
 
Top