PhillyPanda t1_j3ddop8 wrote
So what does this mean for SIS? 90% tested positive, knocks users out for hours, Narcan isn’t effective… if a user brings in drugs that test positive for this, you then… let them do it… and if they overdose… you hit them with Narcan… and then let them walk out with the rest (if they have any)? If they overdose on the tranq vs fentanyl would they OD at the site?
Hoyarugby OP t1_j3dgsvw wrote
As far as I understand people aren't ODing on the tranq. The problem with tranq is
- The injection sites create abscesses which get infected
- Tranq's effects look like opioid overdoses, leading to accidental over administration of narcan
nickdamnit t1_j3dxxwo wrote
So I was a dope fiend in Kensington for a while. This shits been going around for years now. While there is 100% an increased risk for abscesses due to the tranq in the dope these days, a huge portion of that rise is due to the fentanyl itself. Shit kills your veins and addicts are prone to keep trying. With that being said, the biggest cause for abscesses is the complete lack of sanitation and clean supplies for the average street dweller out there. I shot up for years and never once got an abscess cuz I was always on top of myself in most regards. I was one of the lucky ones that was able to maintain some semblance of a normal life while being in the mix down there on a daily basis. Furthermore, while I’m sure it’s certainly possible to OD on the tranq itself, I’ve never actually witnessed somebody that OD’d on tranq as opposed to the fentanyl in everything. It’s just far too potent of an opiate in order for the tranq to strike first. Idk what SIS is but this is an article highlighting a problem that isn’t new and is, quite frankly, small potatoes compared to the effect fentanyl has had down in Kensington. Fentanyl’s arrival completely changed the game down there and while tranq will absolutely nod you the fuck out harder and longer on the sidewalk or while you’re panhandling, the fent is responsible for the deaths
Hoyarugby OP t1_j3egj2t wrote
> SIS
Safe Injection Site
Thanks for the perspective, glad you got out safe. Def remember reading stories in local media about tranq at least 3-4 years ago
nickdamnit t1_j3enu82 wrote
Appreciate it. Yeah, it’s a fuckin mess down there with like little sign of getting better. I have no fuckin idea what to do about it in the short term. Long term I would say invest in properly educating the next generation so they have any ambition at all besides selling dope. It’s a multifaceted dilemma that both sides - addict and dope boy - are all too happy to take advantage of
Lunamothknits t1_j3dks8v wrote
You can OD on tranq, though. Especially with these street drugs having more of that then the opiate in them. It just sucks because the ODs look the same.
AbsentEmpire t1_j3dzj8f wrote
It's just another inconvenient fact about why an SIS in isolation, rather than as part of an actual contingency management program, doesn't do much other than further blight the location its in.
Which the organization composed primarily of bored Mainline idle upper class socialites will continue to ignore, along with the Inquirer who will never run an opposition piece or disclose their massive conflict of interest with it.
proximity_account t1_j3ehd2p wrote
>It's just another inconvenient fact about why an SIS in isolation, rather than as part of an actual contingency management program, doesn't do much other than further blight the location its in.
I don't much about how SIS works in the US.
Are there any proposals for SIS that function only as pure SIS? Don't they usually help connect addicts to rehab resources?
There's also harm reduction. The opioid epidemic is going to get worse regardless and I don't think SIS is gonna make people inject more opioids than the addiction will make them inject. At least maybe we can get less people getting raped.
AbsentEmpire t1_j3hquwl wrote
All US proposals function solely as injection sites. They "offer" help to addicts to connect them with treatment sources however; there is no legal requirement for addicts to use those treatment resources, nor the funding even if they did, nor any consequence for refusing them.
So in practice they effectively just enable addicts, while dressing up the dangers of drug abuse with a veil of safety, and turning the area they're in into an open air drug scene, further blighting the community.
Harm reduction is only meaningfully useful when you have the other major pillars of contingency management in place. Just viewing harm reduction in itself as a solution or helpful in any way is delusional, and is not born out by the data.
TreeMac12 t1_j3dfmmi wrote
If they Narcan them twice, it counts as saving two lives that day. Even if the person dies later that day.
familyofgeniuses t1_j3dhxc6 wrote
lol, it drives me crazy how "overdoses reversed" is considered a significant statistic for SISs, as if the streets aren't already flooded with Narcan.
proximity_account t1_j3egitx wrote
I imagine it's only flooded with Narcan in the open drug markets like K&A
familyofgeniuses t1_j3ifzpv wrote
Well, that's not true-drug users and their loved ones have Narcan. But suburban, housed opioid addicts aren't driving into the city to use a safe injection site, so it's not really relevant either way.
largeroastbeef t1_j3esuhf wrote
Generally when people inject their drug they get as high as they will be within a min. It’s pretty rare for someone to be fine then fall out 10 mins later but def can happen if they are really close to overdosing
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments