British Columbia Epidemiologist Calls For Harm Reduction Strategy
That Can Save Lives Now In Opioid Epidemic
“It Doesn’t Have
To Be This Way,” Says Speaker
In a compelling TEDMED talk made available online this
month, the executive director of British Columbia’s Center for Disease
Control has made the case for acting effectively now to address the
opioid epidemic. Calling the epidemic a true public health emergency,
epidemiologist Mark Tyndall says a harm reduction strategy
which provides a clean dry space with fresh needles surrounded by
people who care is the appropriate response and the first step in
truly dealing with the epidemic.
Tyndall calls the scale of the problem “unbelievable”
with some 54,000 deaths in the United States alone in 2016 and drug
related deaths now the leading cause of death for persons between the
ages of 20-50 years old.
Experience
Tyndall first encountered the drug problem some 20
years ago in Vancouver and saw first hand the benefits conferred by
creating a supervised injection site for drug addicted persons. Yet 20
years later, this type of harm reduction strategy is still a radical
concept, he says, despite going against everything we have as
evidence.
Opponents
Critics give many reasons for their opposition to
injection sites, but Tyndall counters that they are truly the first
step in treatment and recovery. He attributes what he calls the
“paralysis” in thinking about drug addiction to populations being
bombarded with images of guns, jails, and handcuffs and thinking of
drugs as a law enforcement problem when instead it is really a public
health issue requiring social and health interventions. He cites the
example of Portugal which decriminalized drugs. Drug use is down
dramatically, overdoses are uncommon, and the number of persons in
treatment is much increased, according to Tyndall.
Supreme Court
The
BC epidemiologist describes and counters the arguments of critics of
harm reduction strategies and makes clear that societies need to
change their ways of thinking to be able to see the ample evidence for
the effectiveness of harm reduction interventions. He cites a 9-0
decision of the Supreme Court in Canada in 2011 which voted in favor
of these programs saying “The effect of denying the services of INSITE
(a harm reduction intervention service) to the population it serves
and the correlative increase in the risk of death and disease to
injection drug users is grossly disproportionate to any benefit that
Canada might derive from presenting a uniform stance on the possession
of narcotics.”
Tyndall concludes “It does not have to be this way.”
To listen to the TED talk, visit:
https://tinyurl.com/ycs9ahnw
■
|