Denmarks 'Drug Rooms'

[soze]

Meaning I'm smug? Yeah well so would you be matey No answers though, twenty years too long?

I am not falling for that. You know one person who drops pain pills and all of a sudden anyone who can't just isn't trying. My Dad took some really addictive pills for 18 months but never over used them so never got addicted. So he had no problems when they were not prescribed anymore.

 

[throdgrain]

I am not falling for that. You know one person who drops pain pills and all of a sudden anyone who can't just isn't trying. My Dad took some really addictive pills for 18 months but never over used them so never got addicted. So he had no problems when they were not prescribed anymore.

Clearly you have less knowledge than you pretend. Methadone linctus isn't pain pills is it, it's smack substitute.

Just for information, I was a full time intravenous heroin user for 2 years. Had jaundice and all sorts. Got any more lessons for me?

 

[soze]

Clearly you have less knowledge than you pretend. Methadone linctus isn't pain pills is it, it's smack substitute.

Just for information, I was a full time intravenous heroin user for 2 years. Had jaundice and all sorts. Got any more lessons for me?

I am not giving lessons to anyone. It is not my experience but the amount of alcoholics and drug addicts who kill themselves each year suggests that your theory of it being easy to just quit cold turkey is not true for everyone. Which is all I have been saying. And if you think just because you quit everyone can then yes you are like the smug smokers who can just quit because they want to. Not everyone can do it.

 

[throdgrain]

Argue all you like mate, I think I got the higher ground here.

Let's just emphasise ; Methadone isn't a painkiller, it's a heroin substitute. Normally comes in linctus like cough mixture, though also available in pills, and commonly in ampules for injection. In it's linctus form it's obviously very easy to take, it's how lots of people start these days, I know I did. That was many years ago mind, before you were born possibly How long do you support weak people, before they become a liability? My mate has been taking this for twenty years, as I said. He's mostly ok with it, has a job, live with his mum (he's 53), has no bank account, can't even keep his car insured. Literally hand to mouth. But he's one of the good ones don't forget, he is surviving. My point is, don't you think he should be off it by now? How is the state helping him, really? I don't think it's helping him at all.

It's obviously hard to give up heroin, I think that's a given. But that doesn't mean you can't. I am living proof of it. It's also harder the longer you are on it. But at the end of the day, it's either give up, or don't. I knew many many smackheads back in the day, all on prescription heroin, all given clean needles etc and pure methadone ampules or diamorphine as the case may be. Did it help any of them? No. They are mostly all dead, and long dead too. I remember one guy went round to score from a feller one Thursday morning, he dropped dead in the living room. The other people sat looking at him all day, until another bloke I know turned up, and call the police. (He's dead now too by the way. ) Would a drug room have helped him? Maybe it would I guess, but not for long. I knew another bloke, he died aged about 35. His wife I saw a couple of months later, she was also a junkie , with two kids, she wouldn't give up, she said it wasn't the smack that killed him, he had a heart attack .... wouldn't accept that it was the gear that had given him the attack!

I could go on and on. But my point is this, all you are doing after a time is keeping these people alive in a almost vegetative state. You need to get them off the gear, not encourage them to use it.

 

[Aoami]

I am a smoker and I know if I really 100% wanted to give up I could, but everytime I try I fail because my heart isnt really in it

 

[georgie]

Smoker in "I could give up if I wanted to" shocker!

Of course, I can sit here and smugly say that cos I did.

 

[throdgrain]

It's not quite the same thing ...

 

[Scouse]

The more time goes on, the more we make excuses for our behaviour.

With good reason throddy. I know you talk from experience but you clearly had the mental faculties to stop.

What soze said is true:

Not everyone has the willpower to just stop

It's not just a question of rational choice - as @DaGaffer seems to think.


Additiction starts in childhood. And any psychiatrist will tell you "show me the boy of seven and I'll show you the man of 21" holds weight - and that it's incredibly difficult to change that innate behaviour by that point. Your neural pathways are malleable - but base personality is pretty fixed.

This is a really interesting read that supports what I'm saying. It's about kindergartens without toys for children to play with...

 

[throdgrain]

Stop being a leftie just for a minute and get some common sense.

How long do you think the state should subsidise junkies for? Forever?? Is twenty years too long? I've asked that question like three times now, and still no replies

I don't want to get all arrogant or anything, but with respect, all we get on FH year in and year out are opinions, mostly about stuff that the poster has little or no experience of. I actually know about this , it's something that has marked my life, and continues to do so to others, and you really need to stop making excuses for people.

 

[DaGaffer]

With good reason throddy. I know you talk from experience but you clearly had the mental faculties to stop.

What soze said is true:


It's not just a question of rational choice - as @DaGaffer seems to think.


Additiction starts in childhood. And any psychiatrist will tell you "show me the boy of seven and I'll show you the man of 21" holds weight - and that it's incredibly difficult to change that innate behaviour by that point. Your neural pathways are malleable - but base personality is pretty fixed.

This is a really interesting read that supports what I'm saying. It's about kindergartens without toys for children to play with...

No they wouldn't; that's Freudian bullshit and has been widely discredited for decades.

 

[soze]

How long do you think the state should subsidise junkies for? Forever?? Is twenty years too long? I've asked that question like three times now, and still no replies

It is a hard question. Are you talking about just the daily dose of drugs or the on going health problems? Because people who quit drinking could still need a new liver and all the costs involved.

And while I am not a druggie myself I do have an addictive personality as my dentist would tell you. But I do know addicts who are desperate to stop and even with help they are not strong enough to stay on the wagon. And if you want to throw them under the bus and cut them off then the same should happen to other people too. Like people who play sports on a Sunday morning and end up needing a knee replacement at 30 and every 5 years after.

We have free health care and while that is the case we can't deny people help because you don't think they are trying hard enough. If your mate of 20 years was not getting his dose do you think he would just say ohh well and quit on the spot or would he go and buy the drugs instead?

 

[Scouse]

No they wouldn't; that's Freudian bullshit and has been widely discredited for decades.

The two I know and asked personally say that it's largely true.

But either way - the thing I posted isn't related to that.

 

[DaGaffer]

The two I know and asked personally say that it's largely true.

But either way - the thing I posted isn't related to that.

Then you should ask them where they're keeping their time machines because they've clearly ported in from the 1970s. Neuroscience in particular has debunked this idea that personality is largely set in childhood; funnily enough I was only talking about this to a psychologist yesterday; I'm going through this senior management programme that involves 360 feedback and we got talking about all the science about trauma or significant events through your life that lay down new neural pathways that can utterly change your behaviour (basically I got criticism from staff for being too remote and lacking empathy which pretty much stems from being exactly the opposite earlier in my career, with fairly disastrous personal consequences, which in turn lays down new behaviours), but I remember psychology classes as far back at Uni which said all the Freudian/Jungian childhood personality setting stuff was bunk anyway.

 

[Scouse]

basically I got criticism from staff for being too remote and lacking empathy for drug users

Couldn't resist m8

all the science about trauma or significant events through your life that lay down new neural pathways that can utterly change your behaviour

This is true. Trauma and significant events do change a person's behaviour. But without a significant event and/or trauma then the altering of one's base personality through force of will alone just doesn't seem to happen. (Which is what I was talking with these people about. When I said "largely" agreed with I meant just that - there were caveats).

Your childhood is formative. As is the rest of your life - but the bulk of habit and behaviour forming happens in your childhood (as you learn to cope and adapt with a totally new environment). If your learned behaviour tends to lean you towards having an "addictive personality" then that's hard to break. Very hard.

Some people simply don't have the willpower. Rational choices are all good and well in the short term - but it's incredibly difficult to change long-term if you're effectively raging against your own personality.

A bad day, a failed relationship, a shit boss, an argument with a stranger, feeling ill, stress, pressure etc. etc. - all those things mount up. Any combination can turn a well meaning dieter into a binge-eating caker for an evening. They may wake up feeling guilty and recommence their diet with gusto (though clearly many don't).

For a drug user, where chemical withdrawal symptoms are catastrophic? It takes a special person to quit.



Edit: As for the drug dens. They're not about getting people off drugs (though if that can happen all the better) - they're about managing risk, reduction of harm, reduction of criminal behaviour - and it's more cost-effective than the current system of use>rob>buy shit from criminal>use>rob>buy>hospital>use>...

 

[rynnor]

reduction of criminal behaviour

The other points are correct but this is untrue - the addicts in the Denmark trial were still comitting crimes to feed their habits as the lady interviewed stated - all the trial did was give them a clean place to shoot up with nurses on duty in case of overdose.

Edit: to use your example its now-

use in drug room>rob>buy shit from criminal>use in drug room>rob>buy>hospital(lower chance)>use in drug room> until death from one of many complications or overdose.

 

[throdgrain]

It is a hard question. Are you talking about just the daily dose of drugs or the on going health problems? Because people who quit drinking could still need a new liver and all the costs involved.

And while I am not a druggie myself I do have an addictive personality as my dentist would tell you. But I do know addicts who are desperate to stop and even with help they are not strong enough to stay on the wagon. And if you want to throw them under the bus and cut them off then the same should happen to other people too. Like people who play sports on a Sunday morning and end up needing a knee replacement at 30 and every 5 years after.

We have free health care and while that is the case we can't deny people help because you don't think they are trying hard enough. If your mate of 20 years was not getting his dose do you think he would just say ohh well and quit on the spot or would he go and buy the drugs instead?

As I have already written, he has had Methadone for 20 years, from the doctor. Do you understand what this is? I'm not being funny, there just seems to be little understanding in this thread, just loads of opinions based on bugger all but moral judgements.

As for I have an addictive personality, I eat loads of sweets, sorry but that is fucking hysterical mate

 

[soze]

Yes I know what methadone is. This is a discussion forum and people are allowed to come in offer an opinion if we were only allowed to talk about things we are experts in it would be pretty fucking boring.

 

[throdgrain]

Yeah I guess you're right there! However if you don't want to at least take on board the opinions of someone who's lived that life, albeit 30 years ago, I might as well just not post anything.

So, knock yourselves out lads

 

[Scouse]

How long do you think the state should subsidise junkies for? Forever?? Is twenty years too long?

Soz throdlar, got distracted.

Difficult answer to that question. I guess the answer is the one the state's already come up with: For as long as they need it.

The way I see it, if they have a program that keeps junkies from stealing and/or using harmful substances (as in dirty drugs) then that's a good thing. I don't think there should necessarily be a time limit on that.

Some people have the chops to lick it. Some don't. It doesn't mean we should dump 'em, IMO.


If we do, what happens? They start stealing again (or more)? They get ill and die?

 

[DaGaffer]

Soz throdlar, got distracted.

Difficult answer to that question. I guess the answer is the one the state's already come up with: For as long as they need it.

The way I see it, if they have a program that keeps junkies from stealing and/or using harmful substances (as in dirty drugs) then that's a good thing. I don't think there should necessarily be a time limit on that.

Some people have the chops to lick it. Some don't. It doesn't mean we should dump 'em, IMO.


If we do, what happens? They start stealing again (or more)? They get ill and die?

I think you're working off a false premise there; methadone programs don't necessarily reduce crime, they don't necessarily increase crime either, but that's about the best you can say for them, because they're pretty much useless in actually getting people to kick their habit, relapse rates are 70-90%.

 

[Scouse]

I think you're working off a false premise there; methadone programs don't necessarily reduce crime, they don't necessarily increase crime either, but that's about the best you can say for them, because they're pretty much useless in actually getting people to kick their habit, relapse rates are 70-90%.

I had a longer answer which said that we need to invest properly in decent programs, so yeah.

You know what annoys me nowadays - "relapse rates of 70 to 90%". Which is it? Is it 70% or 90%. They've started quoting percentages like they're a range rather than a single figure. Off the top of my head I'd have thought a relapse rate of 80% would have been a better answer

 

[throdgrain]

Methadone programs will mostly increase the amount of junkies, as most people with a scrip will sell part of their scrip in order to finance it. I expect they still give amps out as well, meaning new users can learn how to fix with medical utensils, well how caring society is

 

[rynnor]

You know what annoys me nowadays - "relapse rates of 70 to 90%". Which is it? Is it 70% or 90%. They've started quoting percentages like they're a range rather than a single figure. Off the top of my head I'd have thought a relapse rate of 80% would have been a better answer

Different studies come up with different rates thus the range.

 

[Scouse]

Methadone programs will mostly increase the amount of junkies, as most people with a scrip will sell part of their scrip in order to finance it. I expect they still give amps out as well, meaning new users can learn how to fix with medical utensils, well how caring society is

I dunno how it will increase junkies (the fact that there's methadone programs isn't an incentive to try heroin), but I can see them failing by and large to reduce the numbers effectively.

There's obviously a lot of scope for different programs to help people - but the point still stands. You asked if 20 years is too long - and I say no. As long as they need help they should receive it.

The type of help is up for debate, tho

 

[throdgrain]

I dunno how it will increase junkies (the fact that there's methadone programs isn't an incentive to try heroin), but I can see them failing by and large to reduce the numbers effectively.

There's obviously a lot of scope for different programs to help people - but the point still stands. You asked if 20 years is too long - and I say no. As long as they need help they should receive it.

The type of help is up for debate, tho

Think about it, what's easier for a newcomer, sipping two teaspoons of cough mixture-like syrup, or jabbing a big needle in their arm? I'm going to assume you agree it's the former. Then you do that a few times, and you're getting the hit ok, but the junkie who's selling you the methadone is saying yeah, linctus is great, but it takes an hour or two to come up dont it? If you fix you're stoned in seconds. And the rush! Mate you've never had anything like it ...

And so a user is born.

 

[Chilly]

Temporary derailment:
Throd: I simply can't imagine any scenario (ignoring gun to head type stuff) where I'd voluntarily take heroin. What made you get on it? If that's too personal, just tell me to fuck off.

 

[Gwadien]

Temporary derailment:
Throd: I simply can't imagine any scenario (ignoring gun to head type stuff) where I'd voluntarily take heroin. What made you get on it? If that's too personal, just tell me to fuck off.

Drinking alcohol kills you yet why do you it? (I'm going to take some large stereotypes here) I'd imagine he was in a rocker/biker crowd, and in a sub-society different things are more acceptable, but I'm sure he as a much more interesting story

 

[throdgrain]

It never much occurred to me I went on a fortnights piss up in Crowborough, with my club, and there I met a bloke who was fixing coke. So I thought, what the fuck, and gave that a go. No big deal really, other than the injection bit

Then when I got home, I thought I'd do some more, but there was no coke, only gear, so I thought shit, it's all over rated anyway. How wrong was I Also, it was a big thing around that time, 1984 ish, and lots of my mates were doing it. Most of us survived, as far as I know. The worst thing I did, was to bring it into the club, that was quite disastrous. I still feel pretty bad about that even now.

The two week part in Crowborough, that's another story. Mental

 

[Chilly]

Thanks Throd, interesting. Personally, I've tried all sorts of drugs but never any via injecting and I don't intend to. Maybe the propaganda (it's not really propaganda, though, tbh) aimed at me when I was young worked. Although that hasnt stopped me doing all sorts of other questionable substances. I just cant imagine myself sitting down one evening with all the bits and pieces and actually thinking "this is going to be great and I won't end up like all those other wankers". Were you drunk when you first tried it?

 

[throdgrain]

Can't remember mate tbh It's not propaganda though, don't do it. I try to explain occasionally, and people don't listen (just like on this thread lol ) but it really is a massive massive jump away from anything else, crack excluded. At that time, early eighties, smack was really popular for some reason.