quote:

Originally posted by SIGnified:

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:

quote:

Drug rehab success rates are disma

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Wrong. The rate of success among professionals that have a license is above 90 percent. Adequate treatment these days is 90 days inpatient with followup. Fly by night programs in Florida and conceirge treatment centers with infinity pools have less success.

Not gonna speak to the fly by night types as any illegitimate businesses just that.

I have direct experience with Hazledon (and others). I’ve seen many people relapse. Especially young people that don’t have 20 years of receipts/evidence in their wake. That being said, I do think they are the gold standard in rehab.

I’ll stand by what I said. Show me recidivism rates after five yrs.

The really high success rates I have seen, when I have been able to find actual information about the statistics, have been questionable.

They tend to be the rehab facility evaluating their own success rates by calling their patients on the phone after 6 months or a year and asking if they are still clean.

There are some obvious problems with this methodology, to say the least.

“Hi Mr. Doe, this is XYZ rehab clinic. It’s been six months, we were just wondering if you’ve started doing heroin again. No? Great!”

There may be places that actually achieve that kind of treatment success, I don’t know, but there are also places that claim it that are not credible.

You think locking them up stops them from getting drugs? Drugs are nearly as available in prison as on the streets. And trying to lock them all up would bankrupt us. We tried locking them up and ended up with a couple million people in prison. It achieved NOTHING.

Face it, dealing with this as a criminal justice matter is a complete failure. It's time to admit that an come up with different ways of trying to control the damage.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
As someone who has narcanned and saved the lives of numerous junkies, only to get cussed out, fought with, battered, and spit on (currently midway through a series of screening tests to make sure I don't have hepatitis or HIV from the last one of those), you'll have to forgive me if I don't buy into the addict sob stories.

The legal system might have half a chance of doing some good if there were actual penalties and legit jail time (or at least long-term, mandated, lockdown rehab) to keep them away from the dope on the streets for a while, but instead they get probation, and don't even get violated when they fail drug tests or re-offend. We deal with the same people over and over again, and the legal system, even in conservative parts of the country, just spits them back out on the street to continue victimizing the rest of the general public.

The idea that's it's a victimless crime is a joke, too. These people don't just keep to themselves and do their dope in the privacy of their own homes. The walk the streets, assault random people, break into houses, steal cars...you name it. Not to mention the truly sad stuff...like the little kids growing up with these shitheads for "parents", and have to be around their tweaking and squalor and criminal behavior every day of their lives.

I don't hate people, and I don't wish death on anyone, but it's pretty hard to feel bad when you find some junkie who's been victimizing members of the community for years dead in some crackhouse with a needle in his arm. I still do my part, give the narcan, and risk exposure doing CPR, but sometimes even with modern miracle drugs the natural consequences of your depraved lifestyle will catch up with you, and there's nothing anybody can do to bring you back.

Yes, exactly. In the end, a dead junkie is a solved problem.

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:
I’m a former LEO. My opinion is based on my experiences. ALL drugs should be 100% legal with no restrictions at all. This includes all pharmacy medications and antibiotics. Cheap legal drugs should be mass produced by big pharma, and sold at the local CVS for a $5 copay for a 90 pill supply of narcotics.

This accomplished a few things. First , property crime practically disappears overnight. Why steal and sell copper wire if you can get your high legally for $5?

The murder rate drops 50% overnight. Most murders are drug/ drug dealer inspired. Again, no need to kill your competing dealer because dealers are now out of business. No need to rob and kill for your fix when you can get your fix, legally, for $5.

There are downsides like overdoses. But honestly , I’m ok with these idiots killing themselves off in a mass exodus. Society is better off without a bunch of drug addicts running around.

What we are doing now isn’t working. Time to try another approach.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BBMW,

quote:

Originally posted by CPD SIG:
We thought the Murder rate would drop with the legalization of Cannabis.
We thought it would force the guy slinging dime bags on the corner to go away.

Didn't happen. They're still shooting each other over illegal cannabis, and Dude is still standing on the corner.

You got to beat the price point of the "sidewalk pharmaceutical salesman". Can't do that when the Government taxing stuff.

Leave it to the gov't to make producing, distributing, and selling an otherwise highly profitable product so expensive via various operational hurdles, legitimate business can't compete with established groups.

We need better politicians who rather than squeezing citizens for even more money, opt to cut out more programs instead.

This isn't a cash cow, this is a legit attempt to reduce crime, which only works by being more competitive at pricing than the established criminal players.

This release of information is for one purpose in Massachusetts, to kill any chance some of the centrist leaning left crowd won’t vote for Jeff Diehl, the Republican running for Governor. The current AG, who checks a lot of boxes, female, lesbian, leftist, married to a woman, now divorced will sign this into law in a flash if passed by our Democrat majority Legislature. This is a tease to those who like getting high, to know to vote for Maura Lou, and not Trump’s guy. Trump’s guy won’t legalize drugs. Spineless Baker would’ve probably signed the law if it didn’t get held up, but that wouldn’t help Maura Lou.

quote:

You think locking them up stops them from getting drugs? Drugs are nearly as available in prison as on the streets. And trying to lock them all up would bankrupt us. We tried locking them up and ended up with a couple million people in prison. It achieved NOTHING.

Face it, deal with this as a criminal justice matter is a complete failure. It's time to admit that an come up with different ways of trying to control the damage.

I'm not suggesting that we throw every person caught with a baggie or a needle in prison, but we need to stop treating drug use as an excuse for criminal behavior. It ought to be an aggravating factor for sentencing, not a mitigator, because these people are more than likely going to re-offend once they're released. When some junkie gets high, steals a car, and then leads the cops on a pursuit through a populated area during rush hour, or breaks into someones home and steals their stuff, or batters a cop, or negelcts their children to the point that they're starving covered in bug-bites and sores and living in squalor, there ought to be real consequences. Instead, they get a slap on the wrist because the belief is that they weren't fully responsible for their actions because they were high. It costs money to lock people up...but it costs money and sometimes lives to leave them out, too.

Yes, you can get drugs inside. Anything that people are willing to shove up their vagina or rectum to get into a place is going to be hard to catch 100% of the time. It's happened in our local jail, and they really do everything they can to keep it out, but sometimes some gets by. Despite what the media would have us believe, though, it's not as easy to get inside as it is on the street. I just recently encountered a former frequent flier who just got back from 3 years downstate. He was a hard-core user who was strung out literally 24 hours a day, and every time I dealt with him he looked to be near death. When I saw him last week, he was cleaned up, sober, healthy, and looked better than I've ever seen him. I'm not optimistic it'll last long...he was hanging out with known users, and he'll probably be back off the wagon in short order, but prison was obviously good for him.

It's my job to protect the public through enforcing the law, not fix addiction. If I'd wanted to do that, I'd have become a doctor or a therapist or a social worker or something. I know we can't legislate or arrest our way out of this mess as a whole, but when an individual's drug-fueled behavior seriously endangers or harms other people, the only means at my disposal to address that is to lock them away from the public and keep them there. My job is a losing battle because the justice system won't do that. They put them back on the street in 48 hours on thier own recognizance, then spend a year prepping for trial at which point they either give them a plea deal with some obscenely light jail sentence or probation, and as a result we see the same people victimize our communities over and over again. And sadly, it usually only ends when they either kill somebody and get locked up for good, or OD and take themselves out. The problem isn't an overly harsh justice system...it's an overly lenient one.

All for it, let MA have at it, if they want legal drugs, then, let them be the test case for that policy, pro states rights, a constitutional solution.

We can watch from afar, see how much crime drops, costs of drugs down, reduced illegal drug sales, it's all going to be nirvana...

We need a bell cow for this solution, many think it's the way to go, so have at it MA, lets see if you can prove your point!

quote:

There may be places that actually achieve that kind of treatment success, I don’t know, but there are also places that claim it that are not credible.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No. I am referring to the 90 percent success rate for licensed professionals. Those programs have intensive five year followup with mandatory AA sessions five times per week, random drug screens with daily check ins etc. If the professionals come up positive it is back to rehab or loss of license to practice. Most states have these programs in place. Hazeldon and Betty Ford both do pretty well.

quote:

There are some obvious problems with this methodology, to say the least.

“Hi Mr. Doe, this is XYZ rehab clinic. It’s been six months, we were just wondering if you’ve started doing heroin again. No? Great!”

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Again fly by night clinic. That is not followup by any means.

quote:

Originally posted by the_sandman_454:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by CPD SIG:



This isn't a cash cow, this is a legit attempt to reduce crime, which only works by being more competitive at pricing than the established criminal players.

Sorry, I got confused for a section, which "established criminal players" are you talking about?
The Drug Dealers or the Politicans?
Once $ is on the table, EVERYONE, and I mean EVERY ONE wants a chunk of it.
We're talking about a, currently untaxed multi billion dollar a year enterprise. That's Billion, with a big ole "B"! Every politician from D.C. to Pigsknuckle AR is going to want some in their pockets.
You know it's not a cash cow, I know it's not a cash cow...
Now all we need to do is convince a bunch of Politicans that it not a cash cow.

Even better- it's a choice between cash and a junkie.
There's your answer.

Fairly sure Hazeldon owns/runs Betty Ford.

Like I said I believe they are primo.

But there is no way in hell I’m believing 90% recovery.

From anyone. I mean look at all the damn MDs and “experts” say that Covid was only a disease of unvaccinated just 9 months ago.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...nstream%20addiction%

Read that.It is a five year longitutidinal study. There was a MERGER between Ford and Hazeldon, not a purchase.

The rate of relapase among nonprofessinals is 40 percent. They do not get the intensive followup physicians and licensed professionals do. That is why it is higher.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
The rate of relapase among nonprofessinals is 40 percent. They do not get the intensive followup physicians and licensed professionals do. That is why it is higher.

So what is the rate for licensed professionals?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
About 90 percent success. Ten percent relapse.

Here is an example:

Texas Physician Health Program
The Texas Legislature created the TXPHP as an independent, confidential program to serve physicians, physician assistants, acupuncturists, surgical assistants, medical physicists, perfusionists, respiratory care practitioners and medical radiologic technologists affected by substance use disorders, physical illnesses and impairment, and/or psychiatric conditions.


TXPHP provides education, recognition, and assistance in diagnosis and treatment for participants through a recovery program adapted and monitored according to their specific needs.


Overseen by its own governing board of eleven members, it receives administrative assistance from the TMB. Click the following link for more information about its members: TXPHP Governing Board Member Biographies


For more information, including contact information and answers to frequently asked questions, click here: http://www.txphp.state.tx.us/

Legalize all the drugs you want but if you overdose then so be it but do not call 911 for help. If you are going to play then be ready to pay the ultimate price.. ........................................drill sgt.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...nstream%20addiction%

Read that.It is a five year longitutidinal study. There was a MERGER between Ford and Hazeldon, not a purchase.

The rate of relapase among nonprofessinals is 40 percent. They do not get the intensive followup physicians and licensed professionals do. That is why it is higher.

The nice thing about studies like this is that you get lots of subsets of the data, so you can slice & dice it as needed to claim results that actually misrepresent the actual results in MANY cases!

For instance you can look at the subset of 477 out of 515 'Licensed Professionals' (or 92%) that completed their contract AND did not 'relapse' and say that's great, but is that 'really' valid statement? Well NOT exactly...

Actually, 904 'Licensed Professionals' started out in the study, but 102 moved, so they're out and are NO longer even counted.

Then, of the 802 that remained in the study, only 515 (or 64%) actually completed their program.

Soo, of the 802 'Licensed Professionals' that started (and remained in) the program, only 477 actually successfully completed it and did not 'relapse'...That sounds a lot more like FIFTY NINE PERCENT to me!

THIS is often the problem with studies, but math is still math, and there is significant disparity between 59% and 92% no matter how you slice it!

I’d be over the fucking moon ecstatic if recovery rates were at 90% (or even 50%). But sadly, IRL they are not.

I just spent a week in Denver for work and was blown away with the amount of “crazy homeless” (high yelling at a lamp post, randomly swinging fists and flailing around types) and open drug use, counted 93 people in 2.5 blocks. We were staying in a nice hotel on 15th and I found out the hotel next door was turned into a shelter. The city pays $90 a night plus $25 a day for food. I was told It is a “low threshold shelter” where you won’t get kicked out for drug / alcohol use. I walked about a block one morning to get a coffee and counted 7 needles on the sidewalk. Walking around in the day, I smelled weed and urine at least once a block. They had a power wash crew out in the middle of the day hosing down the sidewalks around the 16th street mall. When I was talking to one of the hotel valet guys, he said they have constant trouble with the people there. I asked what did he think was the cause of all the homeless trouble. He said that Denver always had a homeless problem, but it really picked up when they legalized weed. I lived in RI and worked in MA for a bunch of years and know every city has its rough areas, but this is the kind of crap that MA residents are looking at if that passes.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The folly of the Democrats. Portland, Seattle and San Francisco and now Denver. My daughter was there on business a few years ago and said the same. MA is a Democratic haven. I actually hope the legalizaton happens. It will be interesting to view from afar.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The folly of the Democrats. Portland, Seattle and San Francisco and now Denver. My daughter was there on business a few years ago and said the same. MA is a Democratic haven. I actually hope the legalizaton happens. It will be interesting to view from afar.

The whole nation is waiting for Chicago to stop murdering its children. Every weekend. 30-60 shot.

An insane amount of violence in your segregated ghettos; never ever occurs in the Pacific Northwest.

Honestly, I’ll never understand this regionalism that exists on this forum. I actually grew up in Chicago in the 70s.

People love to hate the state they don’t live in. Probably because they know nothing about it other than the news. So your daughter visited once! BFD.

Is she a CIA spook who can read city culture?

Why don’t you just fix your own damn home first and let us worry about where we live.

Will fight for our nice homes/lives as we expect you will do the same for yours.