[buck4roo]

You speak as if you've never read about the US opioid epidemic and how we got here. Do realize, this makes you sound like a religious prohibitionist extremist..

Your proposal is bunk. Someone who became addicted to prescription opiates does not deserve to play roulette with their life by being forced to buy street drugs after their own physician arbitrarily decides not to provide any more.

A prescribed drug, mind you, where one of the known side effects (of opiate consumption) is addiction, but the physicians prescribing aren't responsible for curing the addicts they create. Because <regulations, guidelines, prescribing practices, etc> mandate they cut patients off. This is "Just say No" all over again, but now it's the doctors saying "No."

What utter BS..

And to think that possession of fentanyl testing equipment is illegal in dozens of US States. It's as if the laws are designed to funnel humans to be slaughtered by adulterated product. Under the revenge-ethics banner of "they deserve it".

The US system: - humans that are too poor to pay an expensive private doctor get to buy street drugs.

- Rich folks get private doctors that will prescribe what they physically depend on.

Ex: Prince didn't accidentally die from taking Fentanyl-poisoned street drugs. He was adequately supplied with whatever he needed, for years. Years! While also functioning!

Prince was a functioning human, while also being addicted. There, I said it.

What harm to society was he? Why must we eliminate all addicts as you suggest?

[clnq]

I am not only aware of the opioid epidemic, but my family is strongly involved in rehabilitation clinic work in Europe.

My proposal is to reduce use through education, rehabilitation (including tapering/MAT), and not facilitating continued use. I also propose not using language such as "safe use". Please see the approach Portugal took in 2001 where narcotics possession was legalized but interventions such as rehabilitation were enforced — this is my proposal. The approach can be supplemented by harm reduction, but harm reduction alone is ineffective and selling it as a "safe" alternative to rehabilitation programs is malicious, as can be very evidently seen in the US.