In case you haven't heard drug overdose is now the leading cause of death for people aged 10-59, with fentanyl being present in 9 out of 10 overdose deaths. Be safe out there and also be aware of what's going on around you as fentanyl is powerful enough to kill people at small doses, even through accidental ingestion or contact.
We don't know what our limits are, so to start something with the idea of being limited actually ends up limiting us.
Ellen Langer
Drug toxicity, not overdose. Fentanyl is so potent that lack of quality control in the illegal market supply is leading to deaths because people don't know what they're buying, or how potent it is. This is the argument for safe supply. Surprisingly, criminals aren't great at mixing drugs; this is why Walter White made such good meth.
Also the risks of death from skin contact are very overblown.
Yup/\. I remember a time as a teenager our super reliable drug dealer friend gave us a joint surreptitiously packed full of cocaine, you know, for laughs. Glad fentanyl wasn't around then.
Could be worse...? Here in US it's (still) guns that are the #1 cause of death for kids.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/03/29/health/us-children-gun-deaths-dg/index.html
Posted by: Hepcat
Yup/\. I remember a time as a teenager our super reliable drug dealer friend gave us a joint surreptitiously packed full of cocaine
crack is whack
Posted by: Squint
Drug toxicity, not overdose. Fentanyl is so potent that lack of quality control in the illegal market supply is leading to deaths because people don't know what they're buying, or how potent it is. This is the argument for safe supply. Surprisingly, criminals aren't great at mixing drugs; this is why Walter White made such good meth.
Also the risks of death from skin contact are very overblown.
Yeah, I'm just not a fan of the term toxicity. But to that point, a lot of deaths are happening to recreational/inexperienced/new drug users who can't handle fentanyl, which is reflected in the leading cause of death for 10-18yr olds as also being drug overdose, or toxicity. Part of my issue with the toxicity label is that it carries certain connotations and is typically applied to specific users groups. It seems that people in Vancouver/BC tend to think of addicts as a homeless or unstably housed person who is also a street criminal, but the issue is further reaching than that. Plus, with the current state of housing this issue is probably going to continue to get worse as the vulnerably housed and even those working full time lose their housing and run the risk of ending up on the street. I'm starting to wonder if people have become immune to the issue or are trying to ignore it due to the stereotypes that exist. There is a lot of stigma in society cast towards people who are addicts or die from overdoses and it seems like there is far more interest on fixing the street crime issues associated with homelessness and addiction than there is on fixing the causes of homelessness and addiction.
All that is not to say that the issue deserves more attention because "regular" people are dying or the associated crime is becoming worse - quite the opposite in fact, but I think it's important that people who aren't regular drug users are aware of how dangerous drug use can be these days.
My issue with "overdose" is that it seems to imply user error; "you just took too much". Too easy to blame the victim and discard the argument that the drugs themselves are increasingly potent and inconsistent.
Absolutely agree that the stereotypes and implied criminality have given license to ignore or downplay the issue, instead of recognizing a lot of this drug use as a medical issue and that the criminality makes the whole situation worse. We've been fighting the war on drugs since the 70s and have been losing from the start. I don't know how much more evidence we need that the money spent on housing and detox support more than pays back, but I fear some are just never going to be convinced that the lives of those perceived as "sinners" aren't worth it.
Posted by: Squint
My issue with "overdose" is that it seems to imply user error; "you just took too much". Too easy to blame the victim and discard the argument that the drugs themselves are increasingly potent and inconsistent.
Absolutely agree that the stereotypes and implied criminality have given license to ignore or downplay the issue, instead of recognizing a lot of this drug use as a medical issue and that the criminality makes the whole situation worse. We've been fighting the war on drugs since the 70s and have been losing from the start. I don't know how much more evidence we need that the money spent on housing and detox support more than pays back, but I fear some are just never going to be convinced that the lives of those perceived as "sinners" aren't worth it.
Yeah, there are going to be people who won't even shift their thinking based on the economic argument that it will cost us less to deal with this issue.
And yup, neither overdose or toxicity accurately describe what's going on. This needs to be addressed as a medical issue and not a choice as too many people are apt to believe. Unfortunately are borders are so porous that stopping the drugs from getting in is an exercise in failure. Solving this problem is going to require changing the way we thing about and moving from rehab to prevention that starts even before people are born. So families get the support the need to raise healthy children that don't end up becoming substance abusers. Until we do that there is going to be a steady supply of humans headed for a life of misery.
Squint, you'll probably be interested in the article from the Tyee if you haven't seen it already. It's a good talk on where we're failing and what we need to do with the drug crisis.
https://thetyee.ca/News/2023/10/06/Catastrophe-No-Sense-Crisis/
If they just wore a mask and got jabbed a half dozen times, the science would totally turn this around
Forum jump:
