The War On Drugs Is Over (If You Want It)

neversickanymore

Moderator: DS
Staff member
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
32,757
Location
babysitting the argument in my head
The War On Drugs Is Over (If You Want It)
Ben Collins
5/8/2015

1431113344279.cached.jpg

Robert Nickelsberg/Getty
​


Want to end the war on drugs? Lobby your local police department. They’ve quietly had the power to end the whole thing this entire time—and some are doing just that.

This week, sick of an opioid overdose crisis that had killed four people in his town of 30,000 since the first of January, Gloucester, Massachusetts Police Chief Leonard Campanello wanted to make certain he didn’t have to investigate another one.

“We are poised to make revolutionary changes in the way we treat this DISEASE,” he wrote in a Facebook post. He wasn’t kidding.

Starting on June 1 in Gloucester, any addict who walks into his police station seeking help will get it—and they won’t face charges. They’ll be assigned an “angel,” like a sponsor, to help them through the transition. And nasal Narcan, which helps in the immediate aftermath of an overdose, is being made available at potentially no cost without prescription or insurance. Campanello swung a deal with a local CVS to make it happen.

“The reasons for the difference in care between a tobacco addict and an opiate addict is stigma and money,” he wrote. “Petty reasons to lose a life.”

Campanello wants to fix the drug problem in his city, not punish those who fell victim to it.

It’s now been 44 years since Richard Nixon declared he would “wage a new, all-out offensive” on drug abuse in what many called the beginning of the War on Drugs. In Massachusetts last year, more than 1,000 people died of opioid overdoses alone—an increase of 33 percent from three years prior.


“Police departments have started to realize through the years that, from a policing perspective, what they were doing simply wasn’t working,” Leo Beletsky, an assistant professor of law and health sciences at Northeastern University, told The Daily Beast.

“They’ve tried going after people who use drugs and small-time dealers, and they’re starting to think, ‘Well, we’re out here trying to help people—and the tools we have available are not seeming to help people at all.’”

So police departments all across the country—especially the ones dealing with a new opioid epidemic that academics believe began with increased use of prescription painkillers and cuts across all demographics—aren’t waiting for elected officials to help them out.

Want the War on Drugs to end? Don’t lobby Congress. Don’t petition the president. Don’t even ask your state legislator.

Just convince your police department. Talk to your mayor.

Sound too simple to ever be a reality? Well, it’s already happening.

“We are seeing this as de facto decriminalization,” says Kris Nyrop. “Local government and police departments really do have the power to make phenomenal changes that could chip away at the drug war. I had no idea how much prosecutorial discretion existed before we started (LEAD) and am consistently impressed.”

LEAD is the Seattle-based Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion program, and it’s a way to use that prosecutorial discretion to get those busted for drug abuse help without ever affecting the user’s rap sheet. It's still operating on a pilot basis, but it goes like this:

“Your officer can tell the guy, ‘Door Number 1 is the King County Jail. Door Number 2 is case management,’” says Nyrop, a public defender who is LEAD’s program director. “Then, if they pick the second one, it’s a direct handoff straight from the officer to the case manager. They are then officially in LEAD. Totally harm-free, and the person who needs help doesn’t have to plead guilty first to get it.”

And since it’s been operating on a trial basis—there are “green light” times that give officers the option to send offenders into the “research pool” for LEAD, and “red light” times that don’t and serve as a control group—the results of the experiment are just starting to trickle in. LEAD is working.

“We just completed the recidivism portion of the evaluation and we now know those who are diverted into LEAD are less likely to reoffend,” says Nyrop.

LEAD members are 60 percent less likely to reoffend, to be exact. The real test, however, might come in the next part of the trial: a cost-offset analysis to see how much LEAD is really costing. In America, the drug war is a $51 billion-per-year gambit, and private prisons take in $3.3 billion of that money annually. So LEAD needs to not only work—it needs to be cheap, too.

“We’re seeing early on that doing LEAD costs less,” says Nyrop. “The results aren’t in yet, but we’re very hopeful. Especially if you brought it to scale, it can cost less. You can close down a facility, or a wing of a jail.”

But Beletsky isn’t sure that money, in this very rare instance, will be the overriding factor for change. In this case, it doesn’t matter if the prison industrial complex is real or not—because cops just want another tool in their toolbox.

“I think the tide is shifting,” says Beletsky. “I think what is absolutely the truth is there was inertia about making changes to this system for so long. Whether there was a vested interest from a purely monetary standpoint, or if it’s path dependence—to use a political science term—that creates its own interest groups, or if it’s, 'This is how we’ve done things, let’s always do things in the same way.’”

“But what law enforcement officers frequently talk about is a language of tools.”

Basically, Beletsky says, cops would love another option to keep drug users off the streets, but he says “Drug treatment in this country is so absolutely abysmal”—the handoff between officer and treatment usually so strained and loose—that the abuser is more likely to fall through the cracks and reoffend without immediate help.

Not with LEAD, however. Not with the Gloucester situation, either. Not with cops who want to help drug abusers—which is almost all of them. In these scenarios, cops are just adding to their own toolboxes.

“The philosophical and rhetorical discussion is shifting,” says Beletsky, “In other words, Gloucester’s not the first place to try this. There’s good evidence in the U.S. that the police want things done differently.”

Want proof? Ask Barnstable, Massachusetts, Sheriff Jim Cummings.

Nine of his town’s residents died of opioid overdoses in just the first nine months of 2014. That’s the most of any town on Cape Cod. For years, he was desperate for ways to help.

“In the past, we’d release the inmate at 10 in the morning,” Cummings tells The Daily Beast. “They’d have counseling at 2 in the afternoon and they wouldn’t show up.”

Barnstable, like Gloucester to its north, is a port town. (Gloucester, remember, is the site of The Perfect Storm.) So the problem doesn’t always start with heroin.

“Those who work in manual labor and, say, the fishing industry have a lot of physical pain. Some tend to self-medicate for that pain, oftentimes with prescription painkillers,” says Beletsky. “You see that up and down the coast.”

But in late 2013, Cummings, too, had had enough. Too many people were dying. He started a program in his jail called Residential Substance Abuse Treatment. Abusers got access to a drug, but not the one they wanted.

It’s called Vivitrol, and it blocks the sensors in the brain that emit the euphoria that comes with heroin. The shot lasts for a month. It’s non-narcotic. There’s no high.

Here’s the thing: It worked. Only 9 percent of those in the program recidivated. It worked so well, in fact, that he came up with a similar solution to the one in Gloucester this week.

“We’ve had calls from parents of people who are addicts about it,” he says. “We’ve been able to hook them up with treatment.”

Cummings pulled off a deal just like the one setup with Gloucester's CVS and worked personally with a local provider, the Duffy Health Clinic, to make sure the $1,000-per-shot medicine was affordable, even for an addict.

continued here http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/08/the-war-on-drugs-is-over-if-you-want-it.html
 
Last edited:
1000$ per shot?? Why the hell is it so expensive? Its just a nalaxone depot injection right?


A pharmaceutical company bought up sole rights to produce it. I posted the company and the move a while back. I also encouraged people to buy their stock. Some did and made a very nice profit.. well I have not looked at the stock price recently but a few people i know made money off the greedy big pharma sickness.

Pharmaceutical Company With Monopoly On Lifesaving Treatment Jacks Up Prices
BY SAM P.K. COLLINS POSTED ON MARCH 3, 2015


Big Pharma is so scummy id kill myself if i were a part of it.
 
Last edited:
Yea they are scum. At my last doc appt a drug rep from Astra zenica was in there shilling for some med that reduces opioid constipation. And the way they repack shit right before the patent runs out and others can share in on the greed is crazy too. They took immitrex and aleve and combined them in a new migraine pill! Why not buy a bottle of aleve and get an Rx for generic sumatriptan (immitrex)??

That's what I do
 
Amphastar is up like 40% since its IPO.

Big Pharma is so scummy id kill myself if i were a part of it.

I admit that they're dirty capitalists, but they also save literally billions of lives through innovation. Practically every therapeutic drug we have is due to pharma. The US government has never discovered a single drug I think (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Just think of antibiotics. Everyone today is at least related to someone who is alive because of antibiotics.
 
Amphastar is up like 40% since its IPO.



I admit that they're dirty capitalists, but they also save literally billions of lives through innovation. Practically every therapeutic drug we have is due to pharma. The US government has never discovered a single drug I think (please correct me if I'm wrong)

From my understanding the majority of innovation comes from the researchers and universities and these are often funded by publically founded grants and such from the government. The results of these studies and then published and used by big pharma to acquire "wealth."
 
It'd be interesting to track down the sources for each of the top 200 drugs (or whatever) but I know that industry R&D does a fuckton of pre-clinical research. Even a lot of the popular recreational drugs are pharma products. LSD came from Sandoz. MDMA came from Merck. Heroin came from Bayer. PCP and ketamine came from Parke-Davis. Etc.

I would imagine that the majority of these discoveries come from private industry. That sphere is predatory and Darwinian and ruthless but it seems to create stuff more prolific than the public sector.
 
From my understanding the majority of innovation comes from the researchers and universities and these are often funded by publically founded grants and such from the government. The results of these studies and then published and used by big pharma to acquire "wealth."

Eh, yes and no. A lot of novel innovation research is done in academia, but researchers don't have the funds for production, large scale human trials, or research on existing patented drugs. All of that is done by pharma companies.

I recognise that pharma companies are pretty evil, but their products and research save millions of lives. They also do a lot of work funding advocacy and education projects (yes, this is a PR exercise, but it's incredibly valuable work.).
 
How many ground breaking multimillion lifesaving drugs have they come up with in the last 25 years. Also how do these compare to the products that dont work or bairly work, the ones who's side effects ended up being worse then their benifits, and the ones who turned out to be total mistakes.
 
Top