TIME TO MOVE ON SAFE-INJECTION SITE

Vancouver Study Shows Better Medical And Social Results From
Harm-Reduction Approach

How long will it take until the various levels of government bow to
the inevitable and set up a supervised drug-injection site in
Victoria and other cities?

The latest study, to be conducted for the city of Victoria by the
Centre for Addictions Research of B.C., will cost $300,000 -- money
that could be better used to help and/or treat addicts.

Its proponents say the study is needed to support the city's
application to Health Canada for an exemption from Canada's drug laws
so addicts can legally shoot up at the site, wherever that might be.

Yet it is not at all a sure thing that the federal government will
approve the application. In particular, Prime Minister Stephen Harper
is against the idea of safe-injection sites. Let's hope he will
change his mind when presented with either facts or political
realities about drug addiction. The case for safe-injection sites is
a combination of both.

Here's one of the facts: If addicts don't have an indoor site where
they can inject legally, then they will do it anyway, only outdoors,
on our streets and lawns, leaving behind them the detritus of drug
abuse, including used and potentially dangerous needles.

Fact: None of the various punitive methods tried by governments in
North America and Europe have worked to curb illegal drug use. That's
because addiction, as columnist Jody Paterson observes elsewhere on
this page, is a "complex behaviour" that has much to do with
obliterating psychological pain. Indeed, criminalizing drug use only
adds to the pain that fuels drug use.

Fact: The evidence from Europe and, more recently, Vancouver shows
that safe-injection sites definitely reduce some of the harmful
side-effects of addiction, including theft and medical costs. For
example, a study appearing this week in the International Journal of
Drug Policy finds that Vancouver's safe drug-injection site, Insite,
has reduced the number of hospital visits, ambulance calls and addict deaths.

The study says that between March 2004 and August 2005 there were 336
overdose cases at Insite. Previously, each overdose would have
required an ambulance call ($460) plus a hospital stay (at least $1,000 a day).

However, because medical help was available at the injection site,
only 39 per cent of these cases needed an ambulance call, and only 28
per cent ended up in hospital. Doing the math, that's a saving of
$114,560 in ambulance costs, and at least $242,000 in hospital costs.
In terms of the human cost, there were no deaths due to overdoses
during the time period studied. In other words, the savings in
medical costs should cover the costs of running the safe-injection
sites, and these sites also save lives.

Fact: The medical and psychological support at safe-injection sites
increases the ease with which an addict can kick the habit, if he or
she makes that decision.

Political reality: Most Canadians, including those in Greater
Victoria, are opposed to drug abuse because of the damage it does to
the addict and to society. The best outcome by far for the addict and
society is for those who are addicted to become clean and sober.
However, these same citizens are also sick of wondering whether their
car or home will be broken into by addicts seeking money or salable
goods to buy drugs. They wonder whether safe-injection sites will
lower the crime rate, even if they don't reduce the number of addicts.

In general, the answer is yes. Other jurisdictions, particularly in
Europe, have found the thefts and general antisocial behaviour
associated with drug use go down when addicts are able to get their
drugs more cheaply and can use them without the fear of being
arrested. In some cases, even heroin addicts can live productive
lives if they are able to get their fix legally, at an affordable cost.

Enough studies, please, Ottawa. Let's get on with bringing a
safe-injection site into the Greater Victoria area and see for
ourselves whether the problems associated with drug abuse become
greater or, as is more likely, based on Vancouver's experience, less.