Speak Your Mind on the OD Rules

[sixpartseven]

Site me a source proving that, then I might consider believing it.

And we arent holding back any info on it. Like I said earlier, I wrote an entire FAQ on shooting suboxone that can be found in the ODD. Anyone who needs the info is more than welcome to have it.

 

[delta_9]

As far as I know (i havent been mod long enough), each forum does a mass pruning every so often. I think letting the dead threads go and make their way back to the last couple pages would make things easier by putting all the threads that need to be pruned in a few pages instead of having to go through each and every page manually finding threads to prune.

Ah I see I wasn't aware of that. If that's the case then you make a good point, however, I looked through the last 7 pages of OD and didn't see a single closed thread. Many of them had very few replies(>25) and were topics which are frequently asked and would be closed by today's OD standards. The closed threads(and I cant even begin to venture a guess as to how many there are) are likely scattered throughout the hundreds of pages of OD.
Now, I've never modded/admined(is this a word?) a site before, and certainly not one as big as Bl, but it dosen't seem like too much work to prune on a thread by thread basis. Certainly going through the 600+ pages of OD is much more difficult than going thourgh the first 10 or so and pruning what needs to be pruned. But I know the staff here are all volunteers, and they all have lives outside of bluelight unlike some of us8)
Anyway, I hope you guys dont think I'm critcizing, these are all just ideas that keep coming to me as I read your replies. I look forward to seeing any future changes implemented. I trust the staff's judgement and I know they want whats best just like me

 

[ayjay]

^the FAQ argument is a little fragile - by that argument we should shut down the discussion forums altogether and just have FAQs.

As far as evidence to support the safety of IVing tablets that have been filtered with micron filters - I'm not aware of any published research (would be pretty hard to get ethics approval on such a paper, methinks). However, it's bilogically plausible - we know the micron rating of the various filters, we know the sizes of blood vessels and of fungal spores and bacterial cells. We know we can filter these things out of a drug mix. What's the problem?

I'm also not really happy about

We wont support any type of abuse of it because if you are on it just as a temporary fix for the times you cant get high, then you are wasting space for someone who would use it to its full potential.

. Frankly - I'd rather someone picked up a dose when they were hanging, than do some crazy shit to make enough money to score.

 

[ccm]

I would like to see the Sub programs utilized by people that want to clean up/legitimately want help. There are limited slots here in TX.

 

[sixpartseven]

^the FAQ argument is a little fragile - by that argument we should shut down the discussion forums altogether and just have FAQs.

As far as evidence to support the safety of IVing tablets that have been filtered with micron filters - I'm not aware of any published research (would be pretty hard to get ethics approval on such a paper, methinks). However, it's bilogically plausible - we know the micron rating of the various filters, we know the sizes of blood vessels and of fungal spores and bacterial cells. We know we can filter these things out of a drug mix. What's the problem?

I'm also not really happy about . Frankly - I'd rather someone picked up a dose when they were hanging, than do some crazy shit to make enough money to score.

Those are good points, and its true, although it would be ideal, creating FAQ's on every topic would defeat the purpose of OD or BL in general.

On the topic of IVing bupe (and Im not going to discuss this anymore in this thread. If you want to make a new thread on it, Ill happily join discussion with you in there), theres more to worry about than particulate matter. Bupe itself is actually bad on the veins and liver. A form of hepatitis has been related to IV bupe, and it also causes damage to the veins from the inside out (I believe the word for that is "vesicant", although I may be wrong about that). Also, micron filters arent 100% full proof. Getting talc in your lungs is the last thing you want happening.

But, ccm made a statement that pretty much sums up our veiwpoint:

I would like to see the Sub programs utilized by people that want to clean up/legitimately want help. There are limited slots here in TX.

That is why we want to dissuade the promotion of abusing suboxone programs. There are so many people who want on it who cant get in, while at the same time, there are so many people on it who dont take full advantage of it.

 

[ayjay]

Bupe itself is actually bad on the veins and liver

I'd like to see a source for that. Injectable bupe exists - it must have a reasonable safety profile or it wouldn't be available.

Also if someone is "abusing" bupe in the manner you suggest (get a dose every now and then when they can't score), that's hardly a recipe for liver failure. Liver inflammation would also be a risk regardless of the route of administration - taking your bupe "properly" would put you at higher risk of liver damage than if you were occasionally IVing it.

It is quite possible for someone to gain all the intended benefits of a subutex/suboxone program, while banging it up every day. In fact, many already do. Given the choice between this scenario, or having people fall off the program because of their desire to inject, the former is clearly preferrable.

Also, arguments about worthiness to obtain medical care are completely inhumane. The word "abuse" is vague and emotive too - can you rephrase your arguments without using this word?

 

[sixpartseven]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15371928

Its rare, but its possible none the less.

Ill try to rephrase:

Someone who is on the bupe program with the full intention of only using the prescribed meds when they are not able to obtain other full agonist opiates are wasting precious space in clinics, thus causing others who would take the program seriously to be denied. Buprenorphine is a blessing in pill form, and anyone who does not take or want the full advantages it has to offer should respectfully decline to be involved in the program, allowing someone else to take their place.

And no, taking bupe as directed has a MUCH smaller chance of liver damage than IVing it does.

EDIT - Here is another must read (very interesting stuff, too) on IV bupe.

And, if you want to continue this conversation, go ahead and make a new thread on it and ill join you in it. We cant carry this on in here.

http://www.annals.edu.sg/pdf/35VolNo7200608/V35N7p487.pdf

Its a PDF, so it may take a minute to load.

 

[ayjay]

^I'll let you snap this off into a new thread if you want, using your mod powers Given that what we are discussing are the OD rules, this does seem to be the right place for this discussion.

How about I try and reframe specifically in this way: I can appreciate that there may be specific ways that people interact with pharmacotherapy programs that may cause harms - both to themselves and others. HOWEVER, I take extreme exception to the word "abuse". I would prefer that this part of the OD rules be rephrased - for example: "Discussions about accessing pharmacotherapy should conform to harm reduction principles", and then maybe a link to same.

And I still can't agree with your distinction between deserving and undeserving pharmacotherapy recipients - maybe that's the separate thread?

 

[johanneschimpo]

And it could be said to be a lost cause, because I and the rest of the OD mods back everything that sixpartseven has said about this subject. Yes, we are encouraging you to "speak your mind," but that doesn't automatically mean we are going to change everything everyone suggests. In this case, I already know we wont; I agree 100% with sixpartseven.

We do not promote the abuse (or misuse, whichever word you prefer) of maintenance/detoxification programs. If you're on one, stick on it, if not, get out and get back in the gutter* so the next guy on the waiting list, who wants it and needs it, can get proper treatment
And since we do not promote it, we will not allow discussion of it. Plain and simple.

(* I don't mean anything bad by the gutter thing. I'm a [former] "gutter-junkie" myself. Note that I was a daily heroin user, and now have been on suboxone for 8 months. I'm not just talking out of my ass.)

 

[sixpartseven]

(Also, before anyone jumps to conclusions, please know I was a daily heroin user, and now have been on suboxone for 8 months. I'm not just talking out of my ass.)

To take that a step further, all 4 of us OD mods are or were on suboxone.

 

[ayjay]

We do not promote the abuse (or misuse, whichever word you prefer) of maintenance/detoxification programs. If you're on one, stick on it, if not, get out and get back in the gutter* so the next guy on the waiting list, who wants it and needs it, can get proper treatment
And since we do not promote it, we will not allow discussion of it. Plain and simple.

(* I don't mean anything bad by the gutter thing. I'm a [former] "gutter-junkie" myself. Note that I was a daily heroin user, and now have been on suboxone for 8 months. I'm not just talking out of my ass.)

Well - that's unfortunate. I still think you need to clarify what you mean by "abuse" (not just replace it with another word). It's fine to say you won't promote or discuss "it" - but we need to know what "it" is. As I said in my original post - I hope we can still discuss safer injecting of Suboxone without breaching forum guidelines. It'd be nice to know what else is/isn't allowed.

If there is a shortage of treatment places, surely the correct approach is to lobby for more places - not to attack those who don't fit your entrance criteria. Even these people may be benefiting to some extent from accessing pharmacotherapy...

I still maintain that it is perfectly possible to gain the benefits from buprenorphine pharmacotherapy (wanting it, needing it and sticking on it) and inject it. Is that "abuse"?

 

[sixpartseven]

Well - that's unfortunate. I still think you need to clarify what you mean by "abuse" (not just replace it with another word). It's fine to say you won't promote or discuss "it" - but we need to know what "it" is. As I said in my original post - I hope we can still discuss safer injecting of Suboxone without breaching forum guidelines. It'd be nice to know what else is/isn't allowed.

If there is a shortage of treatment places, surely the correct approach is to lobby for more places - not to attack those who don't fit your entrance criteria. Even these people may be benefiting to some extent from accessing pharmacotherapy...

I still maintain that it is perfectly possible to gain the benefits from buprenorphine pharmacotherapy (wanting it, needing it and sticking on it) and inject it. Is that "abuse"?

Look, if you dont understand the answer to those questions by now, then I dont know what else to tell you. Ive described it in pretty great detail why we wont allow it and now your just using semantics to try and further your argument.

 

[Niandra LaDes]

ahghk, this still makes me queasy, but either way.

no wonder you mods are so realiably consistent. youre all an subs. dont get me wrong, i usually am to but i like to umm... jump off the wagon every now and again.
look, youre the moderators and youve already made your minds up, so why even ask for feedback? im mostly talking to 6part7 mainly, but really yeah I have noticed a lack of "can u snurt xanex to get hi?" threads lately, buti dont want every new post to get redirected to the new BL Directory[Awesome job GM, even though you were being "a dick"(i get your humor) to me]
why even bother having new posts at all then? surely in the last several years EVERYTHING has been coverred by now, right? so then why even allow new posts, or new members then?
i dont mind where were at now, or where this is going, but im afraid of where it might end up.

oh and JC, you know damn well Ive rolled down the gutter and into the sewer. next stop, the creek, then out to the ocean.

 

[sixpartseven]

^ I dont know where you get the idea that Im saying we are going to close every thread that has been asked before. We have never done that, and dont plan on doing that. The only time a thread gets closed with that as the reasoning is because that thread has been discussed way too many times. Theres nothing wrong with a little bit of redundancy, but once it gets to a certain point, there is no need to let it continue.

Also, what makes you assume that we wont change our minds on anything? Just because we have a strong opinion on the suboxone issue that we wont change doesnt mean we wont listen to anything else. Look through the rest of this thread, there are quite a few ideas where I said we would consider or look in to it. I didnt just say that for the sake of saying it either.

I dont know why you feel its necessary to single me out on this one. Im not the only Mod who feels this way about it, and as a matter of fact, I am not even the Mod who originally suggested that change in policy. Everything we do that significantly effects the way OD runs is a joint decision. We never make decisions without other Mods approval first.

 

[ayjay]

Look, if you dont understand the answer to those questions by now, then I dont know what else to tell you. Ive described it in pretty great detail why we wont allow it and now your just using semantics to try and further your argument.

Actually you seem not to understand what I am saying very well - that's why I keep going.

There are two components to my objection to the OD guidelines as they are currently written. One is with the word "abuse" itself (semantics indeed!), in any context relating to drug use. It's pejorative and inflammatory - get rid of it.

The second is with the intended meaning of the word "abuse" in the phrase in question. It really sounds like a moral judgement of people who don't "follow the rules". Different jurisdictions have different guidelines and legislation directing the way individuals access pharmacotherapy - these guidelines even change over time. Instead of fretting about whether or not people are "doing it right", why not consider the harm instead - and how to best reduce that harm. The guidelines might change to make that person's behaviour within "the rules" in any case...

Yours in harm reduction, ayjay

 

[Niandra LaDes]

dont take it personal becuase youre the only mod i personally took any issue with, please. i also ref'd two other mods in the same post. all im really uncomfortable with, frankly is how arbitrary all this new shit is.

i understand very well how the machinery works, here, believe me you.

and as far as going back to read thru this particular thread goes, ive been following this one since hora una so please dont underestimate my ability to comprehend what youre saying. i know im just a little paranoid about this crackdown as you know, and i think there should be a a few clearly defined paramaters\objectives for this whole opperation.

again, dont be offended because i singled you out. hey, after all im clearly paying attention to you. doesnt that make you all warm and fuzzy inside? no? well me neither but i thought it was worth it try. i like you man, i just dont see eye to eye with you, apparently, and if thats enough for me to garner your ire, so be it.

looks you go your hands full with us rabble rousers, eh? well, ill go fuck off now and give you time to blow off steam. between the great semantics debate and my being a little fussy im sure youre head is swimming already.
no hard fillins',
NLD

 

[sixpartseven]

^ Sorry if I came off as being angry. I wasnt at all. Just wondering if there was a specific reason or not. And yes, it did get me all warm and fuzzy.

ayjay, I want to continue this discussion, but Im extremely tired. I will pick up from here in the morning. I just dont have the energy to write a reply that would be worth yours (or anyone elses) time.

 

[johanneschimpo]

There's been no crackdown. Nothing major has changed. Quit acting like this is Germany circa 1938. I've acted no differently in the past week. None of the other mods have either. We have made slight changes to the guidelines and the directory. Regular ODers have changed though, they seem to be making less retarded threads and flaming less. Maybe its just because klowns is gone, I don't know for sure.


ayjay:
And if you need a definition or abuse so much, I looked it up in a dictionary for you, here's what merriam-webster had to say:
"1 a: to put to a wrong or improper use <abuse a privilege> b: to use excessively <abuse alcohol>; also : to use without medical justification <abusing painkillers>"

Thats copied word for word... and its convenient how the parts in the brackets explain the this situation.

So do you understand what that word means yet?

( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abuse )

 

[Sportfisher39]

^correctly filtered subutex/suboxone is as safe to inject as any drug. It would be against harm reduction principles to withold information on safer injecting of these drugs.

I would like to know your source at where you got this mislead information.
I just can not believe injecting pills is safe. No mater how many times you filter it.
What your trying to say sounds completly crazy to me
And thats out right abuse of the medication

 

[Niandra LaDes]

unfornately klowns is still around. is that considerred flaming?

it seems to me that although the great majority of threads being closed are retarded as corky, ive seen a few that i can see no legitamite reason for them to be shut down. id be glad to refrence a few, but frankly, im cranky tonight and ive got a long night of thinking ahead of me, so perhaps in the morning; however ive got to admit, its getting better, its getting better all the time. (it cant get much worse)

i meant drinking. ive got a long night of drinking ahead of me. my bad. im on my 5th jack on the rocks, and i started my night off with 4 beers, so appologies for any typos-- im guessing ive had about 12 or 14 'standard drinks'.