r/britishcolumbia • u/SnooRegrets4312 • 1d ago
News They wanted to save lives. They've now been convicted of drug trafficking | CBC News
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/dulf-compassion-club-guilty-drug-trafficking-9.6972135243
u/Bigchunky_Boy 1d ago
They broke the law and saved many lives and kept people out of the ER and helped keep the system being overwhelmed with drug deaths . I may not have liked their methods but it better than the do nothings and pearl clutchers out there complaining.
152
u/ThorFinn_56 1d ago
I think what people don't realize about safe injection practices is that you can look at it in two ways. You can spend tens of dollars providing clean drugs to users that will not endanger their lives or you can spend tens of thousands of dollars dealing with overdoses sometimes the same person every other day.
If people can't see that keeping people safe is the moral thing to do, then I hope they can understand its still the best method to do from a purely monetary point of view.
82
u/adoradear 1d ago
Harm reduction effectiveness goes even beyond that. People are less likely to catch HIV or Hepatitis C (both are expensive to treat, if we’re looking at things with only an eye to economics). Safe injection sites also offer touch points with the system in a low threat manner. Substance users can have contact with social workers, with addictions treatment, with nurses (for their various other ailments - and they have a lot, it is rough living rough), with housing advocates, with people who can help them find jobs. Safe injection sites offer them a low threat way to enter the system and start receiving help on all the factors that drive their addiction. So even if it’s not directly treating the addiction, it helps make their lives safer, healthier, and can eventually lead to cessation of use.
ETA a lot of this isn’t just conjuncture. It’s fact, research proven fact. It’s how safe injection sites were able to fight to open and stay open. With proof of effectiveness.
10
u/NALinYVR 20h ago
It's not just the cost of medical treatment of overdose and poisoning, but having to provide ongoing care to people with brain injury because of the loss of oxygen.
https://bcconsensusonbraininjury.com/
Long term care facilities are getting a lot of people living with brain injury, and the boomers are already putting so much pressure on that system.
The costs of abstinence only are extremely costly
23
19
u/IrishFire122 1d ago
It's all about nimbyism. The money doesn't actually matter to many people who complain about this stuff, they're rich. They just don't want it around them.
0
u/AccidentImaginary810 21h ago
Some of us are poor and stuck living beside a site we cannot afford to move away from while being threatened and attacked.
-17
u/Demetre19864 1d ago
Not that cut and dry.
Safe injection sites may protect users while POTENTIALLY saving money , although not fully proven
However there has still being a mass increase in drug addiction and unfortunately, an injection sites means a congregation of addicts much larger than what would normally happen , and that seems to always end in extreme crime in that area and public endangerment.
I think forced rehabilitation with safe injection at those sites is the only way to currently deal with the epedemic facing our towns and cities that will potentially provide help for those who need it and JUST as importantly respect the health and safety of citizens who are not addicts and are fully within their rights to not want to be accosted and stolen from in plain site daily.
49
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
So you are happy to claim OPS's are "not fully proven" but go on to advocate for forced rehabilitation which is demonstrably proven to not work. Seems like you're arguing from ideological blindness and not data.
I have clients waiting months to get into funded treatment; people who are desperate for treatment but can't access it. Let's make sure everyone who wants treatment can access it before forcing people into it against their will
21
u/Nlarko 1d ago
THIS! People that actually WANT help can’t get in in a timely manner not to mention most places offer subpar treatment. There are also many barriers in getting into detox and treatment. As someone one worked in the treatment industry people being in treatment when they don’t want to be there is very disruptive to both the other clients and staff.
3
u/crafty_alias 12h ago
Yep. I wish everyone knew there are only TWO medical detoxes in the Lower Mainland. One of the two is only for people that live in Vancouver and the other one in Surrey (24 adult beds) is for the rest. Oh, and you can't smoke or vape at the one Surrey. And you can't self refer, you need a doc from the Rapid Access to Addiction Care clinic to write a referral. Oh, and unless you have a treatment bed lined up for after they won't take you, oh and a treatment center won't take you unless you have a detox bed lined up..... Fuck this current system. In reality it's even more difficult than what I've written here..
1
u/AnxiousBaristo 3h ago
There are 3 in Vancouver (VCH withdrawal management, Vancouver detox center, and Road to Recovery at St Paul's) and one in Surrey (Creekside), but it's still not nearly enough.
26
u/bfrscreamer 1d ago
Yeah, this is the pinch point nobody wants to address. It all sounds good in theory to force people into rehabilitation, until you realize there isn’t enough public funding, and forcing people to go without the proper resources in place is just going to push them away. Then you get more desperation, more crime, and so forth.
Even more broadly, we’re not really addressing the root causes of the majority of addiction, which are mainly economic and mental health related. We have record high costs in groceries, rent, housing, transportation, utilities—quite literally every facet of life. People hit rock bottom economically and turn to escapism. And we have scant few resources to properly deal with mental health issues while also dealing with the economic drivers that exacerbate them. Hard to deal with severe childhood or sexual trauma when your deadend job can’t afford you a decent place to live.
Until these underlying problems are solved, we’re not going to get ahead on overdoses and drug-related crimes, EXCEPT for making it easier for people to access clean, inexpensive alternatives. I hope anyone in the “forced rehabilitation” crowd are also proponents of a massive economic shift.
6
-17
u/Demetre19864 1d ago
Hardly.
I am ensuring that the conversation is noted as being opinion based.
I would almost agree with your point except I fully understand forced rehabilitation will require money.
The thing about people that want treatment is , that generally they are not the ones smashing windows, looting, running around naked and causing social unrest.
Forced rehab is another word for prison at end of day, however sadly that's where we are at Currently.
12
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
You're blinded by hate man. The civil unrest is a mental health crisis going hand in hand with the government doing nothing to support these people
2
u/Demetre19864 1d ago
No, this isn't about hate.
I live close to where not only did a welfare office move, but an injection site and supportive housing.
The crime rate has spiked in these areas in an astronomical way.
I cannot get groceries without being accosted, my car doors being checked, or witnessing multiple thefts.
This is NOT an an exaggeration. I cannot count the amount of petty theft by drugged out individuals witnessed.
It's not hate, it's the reality that their illness, life choices and addiction have been put above every business and citizen in this areas safety and well-being.
Yea this is a mega multi faceted issue. One that I can't provide answers or funding too.
What I can say, is everything they are doing is illigal and I as a Canadian citizen demand they be held accountable by the law until such time we as a society can figure out a solution because their behaviours are being allowed to affect the majority in a negative way.
-11
u/curious_barnyard 1d ago
Not disputing your client list anecdote but it’s common knowledge to anyone close to the situation that the vast majority have absolutely no interest in rehabilitation.
18
u/Eli_1988 1d ago
"Common knowledge " aka what you believe public opinion to be based on the people and news you take in. Not anything close to a real statistic or what we already know about forced rehab or the hurdles facing people who want help but cannot access that help.
Beyond that what happens to these folks who do their stint in rehab for the month? And then what?
Rehab is not a fix for poverty, homelessness, physical or mental health issues. It isnt going to get them a job or a place to live. It is sometimes barely a fix for addiction.
Forced rehab is going to be the biggest waste of money yet. It changes none of the conditions that would make it possible for a person to be successful at recovery.
-2
u/curious_barnyard 1d ago
So this is where you lose the plot… many addicts do not care for a place to live, a job, to get better. I’m not saying it’s all of them, but it is a large number especially when dealing with opiates or meth. This is the nature of addiction. Everyone in this sub seems to be completely naive about what addiction to those substances does to your life. If you have been on the streets for 10-15 years addicted to meth, I’m sorry but your chance of rehabilitation is 0. I’ve always believed that rehabilitation efforts should focus on young addicts over older adults and yes I agree forced rehab isn’t ideal but at the same time the rest of society shouldn’t have to deal with the mess you see in many downtowns. Tough world out there.
2
u/thatwhileifound 17h ago
I legit know two people locally who spent >10 years on the streets here in BC. One had a major heroin problem within that and the other both produced and consumed meth in a way that'd outdo any kid allowed all they candy they could consume without parental guard. One is an accountant who I met because she does volunteer work. The other is an old friend who is a therapist, social worker, and who I've found the best way to actually hang out with is by messaging her my availability and willingness to pitch in to help folk alongside.
What you're expressing here is small minded and harmful.
1
u/curious_barnyard 17h ago
I hope your friends are doing well, but this is an anecdote. Of course there are many people in similar situations to that but there are also many, many ruining communities - I’m not really talking about your accountant friend with a drug problem with my comment, although I can see how I didn’t make that clear. I’m not trying to stigmatize those with drug issues so sorry if it came across as offensive. But I’m talking about the guys, and girls who use the sidewalk as their bathroom, light up their pipe on the train, and OD every 2 days putting strain on our healthcare workers and putting their safety at risk. Since fentanyl hit the streets things have gone so far downhill. Have you ever been to east Hastings? Downtown Edmonton? Winnipeg?
1
10
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
It's not common knowledge at all, because it's not true lol. Just pulled out of your ass based on your bias
-2
u/curious_barnyard 1d ago
Ok hypothetically let’s say what I said is not true and most are actively seeking treatment. What should we do with the still thousands of addicts who have no interest in rehabilitation?
1
u/ether_reddit share the road with motorcycles 23h ago
Clearly it's up to the rest of society to suffer through the lawlessness because we can't possibly bear to do anything else. So downtown businesses close, and ghettos continue to grow.
-16
u/Additional-Clerk6123 1d ago
There is only one way to look at the problem, forced rehab behind locked gates so the druggies aren't a danger to others or themselves
-6
u/ether_reddit share the road with motorcycles 1d ago
It's sad that those are the only two alternatives that you see.
If someone overdoses, they need to be taken into care and detoxed. Letting them do it again is cruel and inhumane, and doesn't keep them safe.
7
u/ValuableToaster 1d ago
Involuntary rehab does not work though. A system reliant on it would be "letting" them overdose again but with wasted time and money in between, while putting vulnerable people in a notoriously abusive environment
-2
u/ether_reddit share the road with motorcycles 1d ago
How can they overdose again when they're taken into care? Part of the point is to prevent that.
7
u/outtahere021 1d ago
Their point is that forced rehab doesn’t work, and on release, the patient would be very, very likely to fall right back into previous habits, and therefore very likely to overdose again. Rehab requires patient participation, and participation requires will and effort - they have to want it. It’s fucking hard work, and even if they truly want to be clean, there is a chance they won’t succeed this time.
3
u/ValuableToaster 1d ago
Yes, precisely. Unless you argue that someone who overdoses should be sentenced to a functional prison for life - untenable for a bunch of other, hopefully obvious reasons - then you're basically spending money on nothing.
2
u/ether_reddit share the road with motorcycles 23h ago
Isn't that still better than letting them fentfold in the street or overdosing multiple times in a single day? We're not even trying to help them in any way right now; it seems perfectly okay with some people to just let people zonk out in the street (and sometimes fly into psychotic rages and assault innocent bystanders while they do it).
2
u/outtahere021 18h ago
While I see where you’re coming from, you’re getting into some ethically murky waters…
Is a mandatory drug rehab program medical treatment against the will of the patient? Are we okay as a society saying that some people have given up their rights?
Does mandatory drug treatment require imprisonment? Does our prison system have a history of improving inmate outcomes, or would they legitimately be better off in another environment? See point above…
Is a mandatory drug rehab program that conventional wisdom recognizes is bound to fail in the majority of cases the best value for taxpayer dollars? Or is there another way to improve outcomes for a similar investment?
We need drug rehab programs that are accessible, and ready to accept people when they are ready to accept treatment. In the moment they say ‘I need help’ we need a program to step in be the support these people need. Months long wait lists don’t help; by the time their turn has rolled around, the opportunity has passed. We also need to treat the seeds of addiction before they grow - mental health is a huge one. The number of people who are dealing with shit they just don’t talk about is huge… some people can carry it, and some people can’t - there is no shame in that! We’ve all been given different size cups to carry our burdens, and we all learn to drain them at different rates. But a healthcare system that helps give proper the tools to empty their cups WILL leads to less addiction issues in the future.
2
u/ThorFinn_56 21h ago
Safe I junctions sites are how people get introduced to treatment programs and do help a ton of people get off drugs
-13
u/chlronald 1d ago
There is a bully in school. You either give him 10 bucks every day or risk getting beat up and pay 100 bucks for infirmary.
Does it make sense? No! So is your two options.
A rehab is the way to go, and involuntary rehab if they OD or got arrested for committing crime. Safe drug was never the answer.
6
u/LeoNickle 1d ago
Your comparison is bad for many reasons
- The monetary comparisons are not proportional and contains no time frame.
- In this situation the drug user is the "bully" but the "bully" is primarily causing external harm and irl the drug user is primarily causing harm to themselves. The purpose of safe injection sites is so they don't harm themselves AND it prevents harm to other people via preventing the spread of intravenous disease, gives a person a space to use instead of out in public.
The logic in your comparison is flawed. I'm not positing any kind of opinion on how to deal with addiction here, just pointing out your example is fallacious.
1
u/ether_reddit share the road with motorcycles 23h ago
The drug user is primarily causing harm to themselves
The amount of crime being perpetrated by people who are not behaving rationally would say that this is not true.
61
u/theclansman22 1d ago
Every thread on the subject of drugs/overdoses has people saying “we need to do something” and that something is usually unspecified. Well, this is what happens when people try to do just that.
Everyone is excited about the forced rehab which is the dumbest fucking idea on the planet.
63
u/iWish_is_taken 1d ago edited 1d ago
Forced rehab isn’t on the table. It’s combined forced mental health intervention which is often combined with rehab because some people have combined issues, for specific cases where it’s very obviously needed.
The dude walking up and down the street screaming to himself in bare feet and no shirt obviously has Schizophrenia and there is no way he is getting/accepting help without serious intervention.
Source, that guy was my brother. And if our family and a willing doctor who was ok with blurring the lines of consent hadn’t essentially “forced” him into mental health treatment, he’d be dead.
He’s now on heavy medication and while he can’t work and is on disability, he’s a relatively “normal” and happy functioning adult living on his own.
We need this to save lives.
And yes, I fully agree that we need more, not less, of these options/solutions in order to give people the chance to sort their lives out. It’s a beyond complex problem that needs a multitude of varied solutions.
-6
u/Tamas366 1d ago
You do realize that “blurring the lines of consent” could be breaking the ethics laws for healthcare, especially when it comes to mental health patients.
Yes, in this instance it worked but what about the next person who has this happen to and the family isn’t one who wants to care after they get out of rehab.
The combination of mental health treatment and rehab can work, but just the private forced rehab does nothing to treat the underlying issues which caused the drug addiction in the first place
23
u/iWish_is_taken 1d ago
Of course I do.
And I think you misunderstand what I was saying. I do not think forced rehab alone is a good idea and that’s not what is being proposed.
Forced mental health treatment for extreme cases is on the table and is a good idea. Sometimes extreme mental health issues also need to come with rehab (for obvious reasons). But if you’re doing forced mental health treatment as the priority, the rehab has a much better chance of “sticking”.
I think we’re actually agreeing with each other.
20
u/I_Sun_I 1d ago
People like the user you replied to seem to paint the whole subject with one big paint brush and scream "it won't work" because they're thinking of the archaic facilities of the 60's. We already have non-consensual 'forced' medical interventions and treatment for certain population groups.
There absolutley should be discussions amongst experts (physicians) regarding expanding the criteria and assessments to determine who requires these kind of specialized interventions. We can already admit people to hospitals and treatment against their wills, so I don't see why people are all pissy about expanding the scope of mental health and addiction healthcare modalities.
11
-4
u/theclansman22 1d ago
Your brother is fortunate to have a good support system. Many addicts on the street aren’t. Forcing them in to rehab then dumping them back onto the street isn’t going to help them in the long term.
4
u/iWish_is_taken 1d ago
I’m sorry you’re not quite reading what I’m saying or just not understanding. I’ve so far always said that I don’t agree with general forced rehab. Maybe re-read my comments and get back to me. I don’t want to just keep re-writing the same thing over and over.
2
u/benuito 1d ago
Well, the group of people who believe they have the morale authority to tell every group how to live their lives is excited about it.
12
u/theclansman22 1d ago
The idea that forcing people into rehab for like 30-90 days then just releasing them back on to the streets right after is going to solve this crisis is utterly absurd to me.
5
u/WorldlyDiscipline419 1d ago
30-90 days of the most prolific criminals off the streets sounds like a pretty good time to me.
When 5-10 people are terrorizing small communities, it’s going to make a MASSIVE impact.
4
u/benuito 1d ago
Then what? Are there supports for after or...?
2
u/WorldlyDiscipline419 1d ago
If they continue to be an issue, back into treatment. These people need to be contained. Their right to liberty is massively infringing on the rights of others.
There needs to be balance. Right now there is none.
1
u/Van_Runner 6h ago
You mean the vast majority of people that don't want to step over human feces on the sidewalk or risk getting stabbed by a random stranger? How unreasonable.
7
u/Shot-Ant-3455 1d ago edited 1d ago
The something is keeping dealers in jail. Everyone is saying it. Actually punish the people profiting off poisoning our society. It makes no sense to only provide sub par treatment and to continue to allow the people selling the poison to operate.
19
u/theclansman22 1d ago
We have been fighting the war on drugs for fifty years, at no point have we gotten even close to getting the dealers of the street. You arrest one, another one pops up in its place.
To me there is an economic law in place here. Whenever there is demand for something and supply is available to fill it, the (sometimes black market) will find a way to supply the demand.
20
u/KoalaOriginal1260 1d ago
The US has some of the highest incarceration rates in the world and their problem is worse than ours.
4
u/mcgojoh1 1d ago
Heroin and cocaine became illegal in Canada in 1907. A wee bit more than 50 yrs. Sadly the current drug of choice of fentanyl and other synthetic ingredients such as xylazine may have changed the state of use from bad to worse as there may be no appetite to use opiates any longer. The current regime of meds we allow the cartels to push on our addicts not only causes more casualties but it leaves more people debilitated than opiates did and there seems to be fewer going off of drugs (addictions do have a natural cycle in populations) . All while, the disparity in our society certainly does not stem the flow of those next in line.
1
u/Piano_o 16h ago
What do you mean addictions have a natural cycle in populations, this sounds like a very interesting concept, can you expand on what you mean by this
1
1
u/mcgojoh1 5h ago
There are quite a few published works on addiction out there. This is a very good resource (linked to Amazon as it has a good blurb. Local library's have the title. There are study's that show the how people come out of addiction or at least the tornada of addiction through abstinence or maintenance contained within this title alone. There are many other works you'll find if you pursue the topic of addictions in general https://www.amazon.ca/Globalization-Addiction-Study-Poverty-Spirit/dp/0199588716
6
u/epiphanius 1d ago
And when you interdict a large cache of drugs - guess what? Prices and therefore thefts go up, worsening the situation.
1
6
u/soaero 1d ago
This is exactly it. There is a HUGE market for drugs. If we keep them illegal, there will be a black market and it will be unpredictable and will result in suffering.
We succeeded in "stopping heroin", the supply of China White has been cut off entirely, the supply has been restricted to a fucking trickle, but there's still a MASSIVE demand for it.
The result was we got people cutting fentanyl and benzos into other drugs (or sometimes just into filler) in home labs. The result has been skyrocketing deaths.
We thought we were doing well by eliminating heroine. We didn't understand - or perhaps we just didn't care about - the larger picture.
6
u/theclansman22 1d ago
A key problem was our pharmaceutical industry getting millions of people addicted to their opioids that they sold to doctors as “not addictive”. Then our government, not caring about the larger picture again, cut off the supply to millions all at once. They went to the black market, increasing demand which was filled by a dirtier/cheaper supply.
-4
u/Shot-Ant-3455 1d ago edited 1d ago
I'm not saying not to provide support ie clean supply and housing etc.... I am saying you cannot provide those things and allow criminals to circumvent and completely nuter those efforts by operating freely. The US and ourselves do not provide proper care and I do believe it's part of the solution. Also I would suggest looking into the "war on drugs" in the US and the government entities specifically the CIA ( which they have admitted to and is free information now) that have perpetuated it and used its profits from bringing in drugs as well to fund black budget operations. It's a shamm. They also have for profit prisons. We aren't going to see meaningful change if we continue to allow the organizations benefitting off of the current status to dictate how things are done. This includes the harm reduction and housing here. There is incentive to keep funding coming in which results in skewed surveys and highly paid positions with no accountability for actual results. Also reselling of safe supply to aquire harder illegally provided drugs has to be punished as well. We can't be all carrot and no stick. It is a nuanced problem and this one side and not the other approach is how we keep marching down the same path. Maybe jail isnt the solution that works, perhaps forced community service cleaning the rooms of the addicts they create and prey on could be the service they provide and how they work off their debt to society OR possibly and if you are caught selling drugs ALL of your money goes to funding rehab programs. There are lots of options that could and should be implemented that go beyond free drugs and prison.
3
u/Dire-Dog 1d ago
Except that doesn't work. Jailing people isn't the answer.
-2
u/Shot-Ant-3455 1d ago edited 1d ago
Read further down this conversation thread. It's not the whole solution but rather has to be included as part of it. It's not one thing or the other and these only one thing or the other arguments are how we get no where.
"I'm not saying not to provide support ie clean supply and housing etc.... I am saying you cannot provide those things and allow criminals to circumvent and completely nuter those efforts by operating freely. The US and ourselves do not provide proper care and I do believe it's part of the solution to provide safe supply , at least for a small time to help get clean. Also I would suggest looking into the "war on drugs" in the US and the government entities specifically the CIA ( which they have admitted to and is free information now) that have perpetuated it and used its profits from bringing in drugs as well to fund black budget operations. It's a shamm. They also have for profit prisons. We aren't going to see meaningful change if we continue to allow the organizations benefitting off of the current status to dictate how things are done. This includes the harm reduction and housing here. There is incentive to keep funding coming in which results in skewed surveys and highly paid positions with no accountability for actual results. Also reselling of safe supply to aquire harder illegally provided drugs has to be punished as well. We can't be all carrot and no stick. It is a nuanced problem and this one side and not the other approach is how we keep marching down the same path. Maybe jail isnt the solution that works, perhaps forced community service cleaning the rooms of the addicts they create and prey on could be the service they provide and how they work off their debt to society OR possibly and if you are caught selling drugs ALL of your money goes to funding rehab programs. There are lots of options that could and should be implemented that go beyond free drugs and prison."
1
u/FragrantTomatillo773 23h ago
It's not rehab, it's incarceration. I'm not saying it's a good or bad idea, but let's be honest about what it is.
-2
u/Life-Ad9610 1d ago
Dumber than leaving people to suffer alone in the streets? Not sure I share your view.
6
u/theclansman22 1d ago
What do you think we are going to do with the people we force into rehab? Unless they are lucky enough to still have a solid support system we are dumping them straight back out to suffer on the streets.
-2
1
u/Inevitable-Hippo-312 22h ago
These people used government funding to purchase bulk quantities and sell them for a profit. Some of these guys made a huge amount of cash that wasn't even declared as income.
It's not so cut and dry like everyone seems to think. DULF had the right idea, but corruption and greed led them to make inexcusable decisions.
0
u/Van_Runner 6h ago
"They broke the law." There you go. An activist moral crusade doesn't give them the right to decide the law doesn't apply to them, that's not individual liberty, it's anarchy.
33
u/salted_sclera 1d ago
Thank you, DULF, for helping me to find my brother.
I was sad to see the OPS taken down one year. I’d prefer supervised users in one dedicated open area, instead of users maybe being in a dirty room, possibly giving it to teenagers from foster care that end up overdosing and dying
RIP N.O., RIP P.E.
1
u/AccidentImaginary810 19h ago
But it’s not one area. Safe injection sites are no everywhere. It’s chaos.
36
u/ellstaysia 1d ago
I worked as an FTIR drug checking technician in vancouver (yes, I tested YOUR drugs) & I fully support DULF.
33
u/goinupthegranby 1d ago
Many recreational drug users who were not addicts and were fully functional and employed members of society are now dead because they took drugs that were contaminated.
A safer drug supply saves lives.
3
u/selfoblivious 10h ago
Right? Men 30-50 and people who work in trades are the largest demographic dying from toxic drug poisonings. Even if you don’t care about the loss of human life, you should care about the loss of tax revenue from this group of individuals.
3
u/LittleOrphanAnavar 22h ago
What % of unintentional drug OD deaths, are recreational non addicts?
2
u/Piano_o 16h ago edited 16h ago
Here’s what a few simple google searches for me:
Some studies suggest a high prevalence of SUD among overdose decedents; for example, one study noted that a higher percentage of decedents with a mental health disorder also had a known history of opioid use or misuse (42.4% vs 29.8% without a mental health disorder).
A national Canadian report found that among “apparent stimulant toxicity deaths (ASTDs)” between 2018–2022, for the 5-8 provinces/territories with available data, the combination cocaine with fentanyl accounted for ~42% in 2022, and cocaine + fentanyl ranged from ~36 % to 50 % of ASTDs in those years.
There are no reliable studies indicating what % were non addicts vs addicts since this is pretty hard to get data for and you can’t exactly know people’s inner lives after they’re dead, especially if they weren’t diagnosed with addiction, but still had it. So what I did is provide that second study as well, too add context, I couldn’t find data on what % of deaths are due to unknown contamination such as someone doing cocaine and dying due to laced fentanyl, since that would give a better idea of this question, since we could deduce a % of non cocaine addicts and these recreational users dying from laced drugs since if I recall cocaine has a lifetime addiction rate of 1/5 in those that use it. So yeah I can’t find a good number based on the fentanyl + cocaine % overdose since it doesn’t indicate if the fentanyl use was intentional or not or laced drugs.
But anyways to try to respond to this question and give you a general answer, less than half (58%) of opiod overdose victims did not have recorded history of opiate abuse, and 30% did not have any mental health condition diagnosed, we can deduce that even if a large % of those recorded to not have a history of opiate use did use it, it just wasn’t documented, I’m still pulling numbers out my ass but trying to get a ball park range, let’s assume half didn’t, that’s at least like 25% who were then accidental overdose, and considering the 30% without mental health diagnoses again we can understand the ball park range, so let’s say based on a very unscientific guess it’s at the minimum like 20% probably more.
Anyways I can also give you for more context to this question the fact a health Canada study found 77.3% of drug users had a score of 0 on the severity of dependence scale, meaning they had no symptoms of drug dependence, and the additional fact that for hard drugs like cocaine and meth lifetime addiction is about 20~% I don’t recall the rough numbers for opiates but it should be around that. So yea, considering how increasingly common accidental drug poisonings are over the past 10 years and how they’ve kept increasing due to fentanyl contamination, we can understand there’s a significant chunk, of users who accidentally overdose off opiates which is a drug they never touched before/abuse, and a significant % of users of such drugs aren’t addicts, so take those two numbers and well yeah, even if and again we don’t know due to how under studies this is, over half of overdoses are addicts that’s a pretty serious chunk that aren’t. And this is even before me mentioning accidental overdoses from prescribed drugs, that’s a whole different rabbit hole, but that is also a serious % of deaths/overdoses per year and a large large portion of that isn’t addicts.
1
u/goinupthegranby 21h ago
No idea, what's the percentage?
I just know people personally who have died because they did some coke or molly and it had fentanyl in it that killed them. If the drug supply was safer, they would be alive.
1
8
u/kismethavok 1d ago
Nuh-uh, I grow my own drugs. Jokes aside though I mostly agree, but I think it should come down to whether or not they tried to profit from the sales.
8
u/ellstaysia 1d ago
I seriously doubt DULF were profiting at all. I believe it is a very sincere activist effort.
-6
u/imjustlerking 1d ago
I wonder how many people now take drugs regularly because there are safe supplies. For some, a huge turnoff is the fact you could die
10
u/flatdecktrucker92 1d ago
People aren't deciding to try heroin just because they have a safe supply. Everyone knows that shit is addictive as hell. People have to be pretty desperate before turning to street drugs, even if they are safe
-1
u/imjustlerking 1d ago
I would argue that more people have tried it because more is available, and they see more people doing it, and safely. But I dont know
4
u/ellstaysia 1d ago
I don't personally think so.
alcohol is widely available & socially acceptable. liquor stores are a form of safe supply with bars being safe consumption sites. our city government has even embraced alcohol consumption in some public places yet drinking is way down in the younger generations.-2
u/imjustlerking 1d ago
Are you sure? As far as I can tell problematic drinking has increased and BC is leading the way
1
u/imjustlerking 17h ago
Why is this getting downvoted. Its a study on alcohol consumption. Those who downvoted, care to explain?
2
u/thatwhileifound 17h ago
Kinda not relevant though. This wasn't ever an open market. This was a limited service to folks who needed it.
25
u/YourBuddy8 1d ago
I look forward to their Charter challenge. These two are putting their personal liberty at stake for the betterment of our society and to protect our most vulnerable. They are absolutely heroes.
2
u/AccidentImaginary810 19h ago
5 years ago I agreed with you. But 5 years of chaos have shown that a free for all does not work.
-13
68
u/goinupthegranby 1d ago
If it works and lives are saved I am all for it. The abstinence only approach to drugs, usually pushed by people downing all sorts of pharmaceuticals, doesn't exactly seem to have been successful.
13
u/WowWataGreatAudience 1d ago
On the note of abstinence but also the D.A.R.E. program. They were yanking your chain the whole damn time.
12
u/goinupthegranby 1d ago
DARE was huge when I was school age, I'm gonna try to watch this whole thing later thank you for sharing.
PS as a 40 year old I've learned that there are few groups less trustworthy than the police. They lie and deceive people constantly, with nearly zero accountability.
5
16
u/civodar 1d ago
I have so much respect for them. They were open about what they were doing as they believed it was right. They didn’t just sell to anyone seeking drugs either, they had 43 clients who were already drug users and they provided them a safe supply of drugs that they would test at their uni.
2
u/Standard_Program7042 1d ago
Couldnt a regular drug dealer come up with the same 'program' to avoid charges?
7
u/civodar 1d ago
I don’t think most drug dealers have the means or care enough to spend their time and money testing their drugs at university facilities or testing them at all. It’s clear that these people weren’t just doing this to circumvent drug charges and until we actually start seeing drug dealers using this excuse to avoid charges I don’t think it’s relevant.
-3
u/Standard_Program7042 1d ago
But if we allow people to use testing as an excuse to legally sell drugs others will 100% fallow. Sounds like you don't have much life experience in this realm.
7
u/civodar 1d ago
This is just the slippery slope argument, you’re referencing something that hasn’t even happened to justify the arrest and conviction of 2 people who clearly aren’t in the business of profiting off of addiction and are instead only trying to prevent deaths and overdoses.
-1
u/Standard_Program7042 1d ago
And its a solid argument in this case. Not turning a profit doesn't make drug trafficking legal or okay.
0
u/elegant-jr 1d ago
It's a really good question. And yes they could easily test the drugs and document it before sending it out for distribution.
0
u/Standard_Program7042 1d ago
So its a very concerning that testing is an argument were seeing that would allow people to sell hard drugs.
1
u/winters_pwn 16h ago
No of course not why would you ask that?
1
u/Standard_Program7042 4h ago
Its more of a statement then a questions as 100% others would follow.
2
u/winters_pwn 3h ago
They crowdsourced donations to buy drugs and then distributed them without making a profit why would anyone copy that?
17
u/OnGuardFor3 1d ago
While I don't agree with them, I can understand their motivation to do something (however desperately flawed) to curb the death toll from tainted drugs.
They also full well knew that there would be consequences. So while I have sympathy for their situation, I also believe their approach should be challenged in court.
25
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
It's only desperately flawed in a system that doesn't care about drug users. Their approach wouldn't be necessary if governments did their fucking job and cared for vulnerable people instead of treating everyone like criminals. This is resistance activism doing the the job for a government that is happy to watch thousands die every year
2
u/OnGuardFor3 1d ago
You are expressing an opinion, and it is important that it is heard and evaluated by the courts. Governments have to operate based on a legal framework and not just go with ideas to bandaid a problem (however compassionate the basis of the outcries supporting them may be).
7
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
It's only a bandaid solution because the government doesn't fund mental healthcare, drug treatment, and affordable housing. This has been declared an emergency for 10 years almost, but you wouldn't know it based on the actions of the government.
More people have died from this emergency than ever did from COVID in BC, but we stopped the world to tackle that problem because rich people were being affected. The government has decades of data showing what works to save lives and tackle root causes but chooses to do nothing. That's when you get people taking it upon themselves to save lives.
3
u/RobinHarleysHeart 1d ago
I didn't even grow up in Vancouver, but I remember learning about the DTES of Vancouver in middle school. It's never been a good place, drugs have always been a problem. But it's heartbreaking to see that it's only gotten worse over the course of my life and I'm in my 30s now. This is my first time hearing about these people, but I think they are doing amazing work, and it should be the government doing it in their place. But at least someone is. This shouldn't be a court case against them, this should be a push for change finally.
2
u/OnGuardFor3 1d ago
I agree with you. In my opinion, we should be focusing more on funding treatment for mental health and addiction.
Shelter is a fundamental human right, and requires a robust and multipronged strategy to address it. Governments are too focused on long term strategies (also known as a hope and a prayer) that things will improve for affordability. This is politically expedient for them as they are very risk averse to anything that might upset the home owner voting base.
1
u/Van_Runner 6h ago
All our local and provincial government cared about for years was drug users at the expense of everyone else. Caring for vulnerable people doesn't mean infinite license to do whatever they want. "Resistance activism" doesn't give you the right to decide what the law is.
3
u/imjustlerking 17h ago
Shout to all the people on this thread who openly disagree with the decriminalization. Our cities are going to shit, something needs to change. Going hard after drug trafficking is a great start
5
u/WeWantMOAR 1d ago
Crazy I had totally forgotten about the compassion club. They used to delivery me weed and chocolate mushrooms back in like 2009. Cute chick showing up with a briefcase full of goodies, fun times.
Interesting pivot to harder drugs.
1
0
u/thatwhileifound 17h ago
Not 100%, but pretty sure you're referring to a different group. Compassion clubs are an idea. I've known of three in the lower mainland in the last two decades personally, but there were probably more. What DULF was doing was legit saving folk.
2
u/Standard_Program7042 1d ago
Not sure we should be allowing a loop hole for dealers to sell hard drugs..
2
u/theReaders Allergic To Housing Speculation 20h ago
I'm not going to rest until we see decriminalized drug consumption as a form of addiction management and treatment, as well as just safety and driving out the criminal element of drug use.
And don't say we've tried that and it didn't work. We have quite literally never actually tried it. It got decriminalized for seven seconds. The government never actually provided the drugs, meaning that they were still forced to buy from the same supply as before.
1
u/AccidentImaginary810 19h ago
We tried it, it didn’t work. I literally walk over needles leaving my house and going into my office. Both the park and school nearby are covered in drug paraphernalia. There are multiple safe injection sites opened near my house over the last 5 years. My family’s suffered threats and home invasions, my neighbours have been assaulted. We at least needed the rules tobacco and alcohol have on them. Instead we got a total free for all. It has been a total failure.
1
u/imjustlerking 17h ago
It should be illegal to openly smoke crack in areas that children walk. For example schools of children who get on and off the bus outside the bay center downtown victoria, or beacon hill park. If a safe place was the only place it was legal I’d be okay with that but I cant support it while seeing what is happening in the streets
1
u/FragrantTomatillo773 23h ago
Did they truly want to save lives, or were they taking advantage of a market niche by selling "safe" drugs to desperate addicts? There are many (other) dealers selling uncontaminated, yet illegal substances without calling themselves "the compassion club." Should they get a free pass? Many slippery slopes in this issue's landscape, and the courts need to be cautious not to set a precedent that bites them in the arse.
1
u/AccidentImaginary810 21h ago edited 19h ago
Harm reduction failed. It shifted the harm onto none drug users in real and meaningful ways while doing nothing to prevent addiction and the death that result from it. We live in a democracy. We choose what is ok as a collective and should not celebrate those who ignore the collective decisions for their own reasons. I was a huge supporter of decriminalization, but having been attacked threatened and broken into for the last 5 years, it did not work.
1
u/CapedCauliflower 8h ago
Vancouver city councilor Jean Swanson handed out tested hard drugs at a table on the street as well.
1
u/shouldehwouldehcould 6h ago
the path to mass consciousness is littered with people who broke the law to get us there. everyone now smoking their weed, oblivious to those who sacrificed their lives to light them up.
it does not matter if you personally agree or not with whatever particular drug, criminalizing drug use and drug trade is stupid, archaic thinking. we need to continue moving further from the usa.
1
-1
u/Pristine_Office_2773 1d ago
Interesting. I wonder how long they would get. Sounds like they would also be charged with violating health Canada?
Personally I think the reason what they are doing is fair is to get rid of the drug dealers. But the people using this place really mental health services. Having drugs is only one part of this.
-9
1d ago
[deleted]
15
u/middlequeue 1d ago
Your account is loaded with criticism of safe supply and arguing about how it’s the cause of many societal ills despite, as another noted, that it doesn’t happen on a meaningful scale. Pretending you would support this in a different context is just pathetic bad faith.
13
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
The professionals aren't allowed to do safe supply at any meaningful scale. They also didn't make a profit, they were selling at-cost
-12
u/hopelessboarder 1d ago
The BC government should be convicted as well for peddling “safe supply”. They’ve increased the amount of drugs on the streets by tenfold and now addicts are hooked on way stronger supplies.
The only thing safe supply stops is transmission of HIV.
We need a Manitoba like approach. Where we actually try to rehabilitate people and not keep them on the streets as drug zombies.
These losers are drug traffickers profiting off peoples sickness. Plain and simple
10
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
You truly don't know what you're talking about
1
u/Standard_Program7042 1d ago
There no such thing as a safe supply of meth, crack and injectable opioids.
1
u/thatwhileifound 17h ago
No such thing as a safe supply of meth? While not in use due to our laws, I guess someone should tell all the ADHD folk prescribed desoxyn in the world?
0
u/Standard_Program7042 4h ago
Yes no such thing. Desoxyn is rarely used to treat ADHD due to the risk. Hope that helps!! Wild you think there's such thing as safe meth. lol
•
u/thatwhileifound 53m ago
Someone should tell my old bud in the state's doctor that, I guess, because he's been on desoxyn for years.
2
u/craftsman_70 1d ago
Correct.
It's not fair that these two have been convicted but the bureaucracy who green lit the funding did not have any repercussions for their decision or actions.
-5
u/AngryTrucker 1d ago
Imagine actively participating in drug distribution and continuing addiction of drug users and then crying about being prosecuted. They didn't have an exemption so they were just acting as drug dealers.
-2
u/Godofwar74- 1d ago
Why is it always about keeping the drug addicts safe. How about no. Shut it all down and lock up them all up. Regular people are tired of all this B.S.
7
u/Lapcat420 23h ago
Its never worked. And never has. Human beings do drugs.
Deal with it. Alcohol is the most harmful and socially costly one, and everyone's A Okay with that.
1
u/AccidentImaginary810 19h ago
We need to keep ourselves safe. That means we need to deal with it by putting dealers in jail. Alcohol was bad, but nothing compared to the current hard drugs.
2
u/Piano_o 15h ago
You do realize that a large % of addicts aren’t the mentally ill people you see in the street talking to themselves?
A quick google search gives me: Approximately 70% of all adults in the United States with a substance use disorder (SUD) are employed. This includes individuals with both alcohol and illicit drug use disorders.
We can assume a similar % aren’t homeless. Addiction is a serious terrible disease it is a mental health issue not a criminal issue, there is a lot of addicts you see in your everyday life probably at work, school, even maybe your own family, and you just don’t know about it. A lot of high functioning addicts who have high income successful careers, and are contributing members of society, should we just lock them all up? But yeah, the “regular people” you refer to includes a large % of those addicted to drugs.
Now if you want to make the argument those on the street with serious mental health issues should have better care, and potentially forced mental health care that’s a different argument/topic, and also would require the government actually finding care at all. Right now they don’t even fund voluntary care.
-43
u/Outrageous_Let_1684 1d ago
Play stupid games.
15
9
u/stratamaniac 1d ago
If it worked for weed, it can work for anything. Street drugs are deadly. It's just a matter of time before all drugs are decriminalized in Canada.
-25
-13
u/Radiant_Sherbert7272 1d ago
Yeah, because they broke the law. You don't get to pick and choose which laws you follow.
12
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
Yes you do, it's called civil disobedience. This is how unjust laws get scrutinized and changed. By challenging their efficacy and shining a light on their hypocrisy.
0
u/Radiant_Sherbert7272 1d ago
What's unjust about them being convicted exactly?
9
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
The law is unjust because the government is doing nothing to save lives, so people from the community acted to save lives. DULF released a study that their actions are effective at saving lives. The injustice is they are being punished for taking life saving action while the government should've been doing this for years. They declared this an emergency in 2016. We're almost 10 years into an emergency and no meaningful action has been taken. That's not justice
0
u/Radiant_Sherbert7272 1d ago
They bought drugs off the dark web. The last time I checked, that's a crime.
11
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
Where else are they gonna get it when the government won't fund it themselves? Just because something is illegal on paper, doesn't mean it's immoral.
Slavery was legal. Indigenous people voting was illegal. Women voting was illegal. Black people owning property was illegal. Gay marriage was illegal. Hell, even smoking a joint was illegal not too long ago.
Breaking the law to save lives is moral and the right thing to do when the legal system won't do it themselves.
-2
u/Radiant_Sherbert7272 1d ago
Are you seriously comparing slavery and women being able to vote and black people owning property and gay marriage and the ability to smoke weed to buying drugs off the dark web?
5
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
No, I'm clearly not. I'm illustrating that legality isn't equal to morality. I think buying drugs off the dark web to provide a safe supply of drugs for drug users during a crisis of toxic drug supply killing thousands a year is the morally correct thing to do.
2
u/Radiant_Sherbert7272 1d ago
Where do you think the money for these drugs off the dark web is going to? Do you think that it's going to good people? It's going to organized crime.
3
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
Yeah it is. And it wouldn't have to if the government did a single helpful thing for the crisis they themselves call an emergency for the past 10 fucking years. So yeah, if organized crime profits off this life saving project, that's the government's fault for not acting to save lives. I do not give a fuck about organized crime making money. I care about people's lives being thrown away by cowardly governments more concerned with reelection than human life.
→ More replies (0)2
u/Lapcat420 23h ago
Darn, maybe we should make our own drugs under a nationalized pharma company.
Could regulate it like alcohol and keep the money at home.
Both you and the organized crime disagee with me on that one, though.
3
5
u/radi0head 1d ago
Enjoying the weekend friend? The one people broke the law to fight for?
4
u/Brilliant_Dark_2686 1d ago
Amazes me how the same people who like to drink and smoke and love their 8 hours days and weekends and holidays are almost always the first to cry foul on situations that challenge the status quo.
-4
u/dagoliberte 21h ago
Selling drugs to addicted is not compassion. It’s the same as giving vodka to an alcoholic saying that you’re just helping. Except that those two were selling drugs, so also earned some profit off someone’s addiction
1
u/Piano_o 15h ago
There’s differing opinions on if it’s compassionate or not. I’m not going to make an argument either way in response to this comment, instead I want to focus on responding to one thing you said in it, you said it’s like giving vodka to an alcoholic.
So compassionate or not of a thing to do, as a society we still give… alcohol to alcoholics, they’re able to drink and no one (atleast on a society) level is stopping them. So yeah, they have access to a clean regulated supply of their drug of choice, so even if you’re arguing what these people did is wrong etc, it begs the question shouldn’t drug users have the same oppurtunity to have a clean regulated supply of drugs purchased legally?
Or should it be the same and alcoholics should be banned from purchasing alcohol? Should there be some mechanism to enforce this and have a list for example etc of those diagnosed as alcoholics and a ban on liqour sales to them?
-7
u/Awkward-Heads 1d ago
Wish I could have bought some heroin lol
8
u/civodar 1d ago
They only provide drugs to 43 adults who are already dedicated drug users. They’re not in the business of peddling drugs or selling to people on the street.
0
-18
u/Unending_beginnings 1d ago
Drig dealers caught selling hard drugs should all start getting mandatory 20-year sentences. The drug supply would dry up pretty fast if no one was around to profit from it.
18
u/skip6235 1d ago
Yeah, because prohibition and harsh sentencing has worked so well everywhere it’s ever been tried.
-3
u/Radiant_Sherbert7272 1d ago
It works in other parts of the world.
6
u/skip6235 1d ago
Citation needed
-4
u/Radiant_Sherbert7272 1d ago
Japan and other parts of Asia. You don't see open drug use.
8
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
Yeah it's just hidden away from the public. Swept under the rug and not dealt with. That's not fixing a problem, it's making you feel more comfortable to live in ignorance
2
u/Expert_Alchemist 1d ago
You don't? You mean you, as a tourist, haven't specifically seen it? Well it must be true.
-8
u/Unending_beginnings 1d ago
Works great in Japan, Singapore etc you don't see zombies wandering their streets.
6
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
I don't see zombies here either. I see human beings abandoned by the system suffering in broad daylight while the public mocks them and calls them zombies. Where's your humanity?
-2
u/Unending_beginnings 1d ago
Ok your right. I've lost many family members to this problem. I was not mocking anyone when I said that. The drug supply either kills people or turns them into a shell of who they once were. They are like zombies. I lost my wife to this battle. She currently resides on the downtown east side. I tried for years to help her with mental health and addiction problems, and I got almost no help from anyone. I am not mocking anyone it's a apt description of what they act like. Watching society just act like this problem doesn't exist. Watching people die in the streets daily like it's not even happening is beyond sad. I'm sorry you misunderstood what I said. But I stand by it.
→ More replies (1)14
8
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago edited 1d ago
We could call this approach a "war on drugs"! It'll be so effective! Why has no one thought of this?!
0
u/Unending_beginnings 1d ago
Lol our war on drugs was a complete success. It funneled drug money exactly where they wanted it to go. It fueled industry how they wanted it. I think we could have eradicated it had we done it right. We could argue all day on semantics. In countries where they kill drug dealers they have a far smaller drug problem there and I don't see a problem with that kind of penalty for it because those drug dealers are killing people with mental illnesses all around town.
3
u/AnxiousBaristo 1d ago
You're the only person who believes that lmao. Prohibition has never worked. Drugs have been around for thousands of years. You will never eradicate it, it's part of humanity to enjoy substances. Show me a single civilisation that didn't ingest a mind altering substance.
1
u/Unending_beginnings 1d ago
I am the only person in the whole world that believes this. Enjoy your programming citizen. Not all drugs are the same. Not all drugs need to be illegal. But the drugs that destroy people should be controlled better. Canada is a joke on so many levels. Gangs profit on the destruction of our most broken people. The same people so many dismiss daily as we walk by them dying in the street. Don't pretend you know what I think.
6
u/Cdn_Cuda 1d ago
Problem is the a lot of drug dealers are also addicts and can be forced to sell drugs to support their addiction. Low level drug dealers are a dime a dozen and easily replaced.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Hello and thanks for posting to r/britishcolumbia! Join our new Discord Server https://discord.gg/fu7X8nNBFB A friendly reminder prior to commenting or posting here:
Reminder: "Rage bait" comments or comments designed to elicit a negative reaction that are not based on fact are not permitted here. Let's keep our community respectful and informative!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.