Pts have no need to inject it, when it was prescribed by Drs in the 90s the heroin was preloaded (in liquid form) into ciggies and taken at home as and when required.I take your point about safe environments. The rest isn't true though
I haven't read the study, but I presume it was for existing addicts, rather than being offered to new users? IMO using a clinic would reduce the number of first time users?
Yes, it was for proven hard core users, and yes it reduced the occurence of new users by stopping existing users dealing to feed their habits
If we legalised drugs maybe music would get a lot better
To be fair, there hasn't been a study on whether using a clinic would reduce first time users even further? (Or did the study have two groups, one with take home meds, and another with on-site usage? Either way it's a bit difficult to measure any effects on new users outside of the testing group?) - if the sterile environment takes away the "Cool" factor then this could also help.
Haven't read the whole thread, but this nugget of ignorance jumped out.
Heroin is also damaging in any quantity - there is no safe amount.
This is very interesting, because Mrs Daz was given intravenous diamorphine when in labour, and oldest-daughter-Daz was given a diamorphine nasal spray when she got a frozen shoulder. Quite frankly I'm rather shocked that both the maternity unit and the children's A&E unit at Manchester MRI would be so reckless to use an unsafe drug. Who do I complain to?
I did but your answer was betterit doesn't answer how we should implement such a policy.
I think the softer drugs can be monitored as we do with alcohol or cigarettes - lets be honest they are safer and less addictive- and harder drugs such as heroin can be monitored as you suggest.
As i said I am sure it will have weaknesses but it wont be as bad as we have now
Must admit i'm against "monitoring" as standard for hard drugs.
