SAFE INJECTION SITE RANT DISPLAYS COLUMNIST'S BIAS

Re "Something terribly wrong" (Column, June 5)

Something is indeed terribly wrong with this ill-conceived,
unresearched and poorly thought-out piece of work in which Dr.
Gifford- Jones calls into question the use of safe injection sites.

Gifford-Jones would not have had to look very hard to find ample
information, discussion and research on the efficacy of safe injection
sites and other harm reduction strategies in the treatment of drug
addiction. If he had looked for example, at publications by the Centre
for Addition and Mental Health (CAMH), or even Health Canada, he would
have found that a harm reduction approach to helping people who
struggle with drug addiction works.

Gifford-Jones states ". . . another safe (injection) site will not
solve the medical, social and economic problems resulting from the use
of illegal drugs." On the contrary, the demonstrated evidence and
empirical research indicates that safe injection sites lead to more
admission into addictions treatment, reduced health costs, reduced
crime, fewer deaths and lower rates of HIV and HCV, with no increase
in drug use or relapse of former users.

Had Gifford-Jones looked a little further, he would also have
discovered that safe injection sites do not actually provide heroin to
users. Perhaps if he had known this detail, he would have chosen a
different position from which to launch his rant as it is this point
upon which he hangs most of his arguments.

Perhaps too if he had done a bit more reading, his world-view and
understanding of people coping with addiction might have expanded,
allowing him to avoid the embarrassment of having to admit that he
actually knows nothing about "these heroin addicts."

Unfortunately for Gifford-Jones, his points about the right to decent
health care and the medical use of heroin for persons suffering from
painful and difficult diseases are completely lost in this uninformed
and biased article.

Jordon Hale

Warsaw