Definition Rewrite- Pinkmonkey32

Give Addicts Their Fix

Give Addicts Their Fix

The drug overdose epidemic is one that is sweeping over our country and many others. Over the past few years overdose rates in some cases have tripled. Many countries have resorted to punishment and forced rehab to try and clean up their streets and reduce crime and death rates, but the outcomes don’t seem to be working. We need to try something new. Canada has taken a different approach, Through a thoroughly selected program 26 people have been receiving drugs from the government as a way to help them. This program (called Insite) lets addicts go to special medical popups that will provide them with clean and sterilized needles as well as, to some, the heroin dose they crave. This program has decreased the overdoses in the Vancouver area as well as crime rates.

The Insight program is not meant to enable addicts but instead hopefully stop them from resorting to street drugs and street crimes just to get a high. “Street drugs” are drugs that are sold illegally on the streets. Street drugs often are laced with other synthetic opioids or chemicals such as fentanyl.“When you use street or club drugs, you’re taking a lot of risks. The drugs are dangerous, and usually there’s no way to know how strong they are or what else may be in them”, As WebMD states in, “Street Drugs: Know the Facts and Risks”. In that article as well they speak about how “It’s even more unsafe to use them along with other substances like alcohol and marijuana.”  A lot of addicts resort to “getting crossed” which is the use of 2 drugs at once in order to gain the satisfaction that they first got when starting their drug of choice. This increases the risks of overdose as well as many other health issues.

Addicts when coming down from a high or are going through withdrawal they crave the need for more. In the article “Drug use changes the brain over time” by the Genetic Science Learning Center, “ after the user has “come down,” they will need more of the drug next time they want to get high.” Addicts will result in stealing from family or pickpocketing on the street, they also will buy drugs that are less pure just because it’s cheaper and what they can afford. This is the behavior that Vancouver is trying to prevent, and succeeding in doing, and the rest of us should follow in their footsteps.

From a Neurological standpoint of the brain, when doing a drug your brain is getting an immediate release of high dopamine. Over time your dopamine receptors in your synapse begin to accommodate for the drug and start altering around it to compensate for the amount of dopamine it creates leaving you with even less dopamine when you’re not high then your originally started with. The Pathways connected to the synapse also get rewired during this period. According to, “Drug Use Changes The Brain Over Time” by the Genetic Science Learning center, “Over time, brain regions responsible for judgment, decision-making, learning, and memory begin to physically change, making certain behaviors “hard-wired.”.” These addicts can no longer make clear judgments and justify their crimes. These addicts aren’t hard criminals, they just don’t know the basis of reality anymore. By sustaining these addicts with their choice drug we can help redirect their focus from finding their next fix to perhaps finding a job.

Rehab is often the most pushed upon treatment for addicts. Forced rehab along with voluntary do not have the best rates when it comes to staying sober. In a study conducted called, ”Factors associated with relapse into drug use among male and female attendees of a three-month drug detoxification–rehabilitation programme” is a study done by The Harm Reduction Journal. Harm reduction is an effort to reduce negative outcomes through practices or public health policies in order to reduce crime or negative human behaviors. In this study they found that the “Median times to relapse were 45 days for men and 20 days for women. Most of the relapses occurred during the first 30 days after discharge in both sexes.” This study also found that 71.9% of women relapsed versus 54.5% males. More than half of both men and women found that this program was unhelpful, yet it’s still the first thing we offer to addicts. It’s near to impossible to help and end everyone’s addiction, but harm reduction offers us the ability to at least help the addicts’ addictions we can’t end.

Not only does Harm Reduction help the addicts addictions we can’t end, but it also lessons the harm of the rippled issues caused by addicts. These include, pit picking, overdose, theft, as well as issues like overcrowded emergency rooms, courts, and medical intervention that would be wasted. All of these issues could be reduced through this Harm reduction program.

Rehab is not effective for most but it becomes even less effective when we take addicts off the streets, get them clean, and then stick them right back on the street. Addicts who are admitted to rehabs from loving families or homes have a much higher success rate. Addicts who live on the street more often than not are on drugs because of their living conditions. From the same study done by The Harm Reduction Journal they found, ”For both male and female subjects the findings highlight the importance of stable living conditions. Additionally, female PWUDs need gender-sensitive services and active efforts to refer them for opioid substitution therapy.” Drugs are the only way that addicts know how to cope and once they are put back out on the street they are going to need to cope again and we have the opportunity to help them cope.

When understanding the jump to giving addicts drugs instead of rehab, we have to understand that this program will not be offered to just anyone who wants clean drugs. There are qualifications that must be met in order to get into a program like this. Some of those include: Multiple attempts and rehab, Continuous effort to kick addiction, unstable living conditions, and you must be a steady user or addict. This program is not created to give drugs out to everyone or people who want to try for the first time. ANd just like the benefits from Harm reduction, this program would give us those results.

Helping addicts does not have to be a one solution problem, some addicts can benefit from rehab and that may be the best choice for them but others need the drugs, they are completely dependent, and it makes their lifestyle more bearable. Unless we can get every homeless addict off the street and into a home then we should be using our medical resources to give them pure safe and medically administered drugs.

References

Maehira, Y., Chowdhury, E.I., Reza, M. et al. Factors associated with relapse into drug use among male and female attendees of a three-month drug detoxification–rehabilitation programme in Dhaka, Bangladesh: a prospective cohort study. Harm Reduct J 10, 14 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7517-10-14

Genetic Science Learning Center. (2013, August 30) Drug Use Changes the Brain Over Time. Retrieved April 02, 2023, from https://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/brainchange

Science Direct (Volume 16, Issue 4, April 2016, Pages 1323-1327) R.A. Rudd, N. Aleshire, J.E. Zibbell, R. Matthew Gladden https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1600613522008991

Street Drugs: Know the Facts and Risks, WebMD Editorial Contributors (March 13 2023)https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/addiction/street-drugs-risks

This entry was posted in Definition Rewrite, PinkMonkey, Portfolio PinkMonkey. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Definition Rewrite- Pinkmonkey32

  1. davidbdale's avatar davidbdale says:

    I don’t know if you’ll find this useful, PinkMonkey, but as I was reading your Introduction, thinking about whether we really need more than one type of “robot personality,” the analogy of the wall of hammers occurred to me.

    Clearly, if every carpenter could use the same hammer for every nailing and pounding job, Home Depot wouldn’t offer dozens of styles.

    An analogy doesn’t have to be perfect to have rhetorical value. Maybe you’ll come up with a better one.

    Like

  2. davidbdale's avatar davidbdale says:

    This is OK, PinkMonkey, but thin on content. Your sources are few, and not deeply utilized. The most comprehensive citations were dictionary listings of terms most readers will not need defined. You manage to get 1000 words out of just a couple of observations: that introverts and extroverts feel more comfortable with robots of like “personality” aspects. My one sentence there pretty much covers the territory.

    There is SO MUCH research material available on this broad topic of human-robot interaction, PM, that you shouldn’t have any trouble overwhelming readers with tons of fascinating findings. I hope you will.

    If you’re willing to conduct an experiment with me, I will condense your paragraphs to their essence, one by one, and reveal how much you can cut without losing content. I’m guessing we could lose easily half of your word count and still communicate the same ideas. But maybe you already know this. I’ll need your permission to proceed. I don’t want to waste my time or yours if you know you’re wordy.

    Graded. Always eligible for a regrade following substantial revision. Put the post back into Feedback Please when you’re ready to interact again. And please, PinkMonkey, always respond to feedback. It’s the primary benefit of the course, and I love the conversations, but I tire of them when they become one-sided. Thanks!

    Like

    • pinkmonkey32's avatar pinkmonkey32 says:

      Good Afternoon I have posted my definition argument on my new topic here, Im sorry it took me longer then expected, I kept going back to change things. If I could have some feedback of direct things you would like me to change that would be great! Also would you like me to post this new original in my old Definition post as well?

      Like

  3. pinkmonkey32's avatar pinkmonkey32 says:

    Hello, looking at my feedback I find that I am a very wordy person so I don’t think the experiment will benefit me but per your suggestions I will go back and take out places that even I feel I’m too wordy. I will look deeper into different topics to add in to deepen my argument, Do you have any suggestions as to what ideas might fit my argument best to add, I find that I struggle which sources fit under a argument I fear adding new ideas that stray from my main idea.

    Like

    • davidbdale's avatar davidbdale says:

      There are several Definition/Categorical topics to isolate and address here, PinkMonkey.

      1. Harm Reduction. You refer to a journal by that name, but you don’t address it as a separate topic. Search it as a Google Scholar term combined with addiction for new sources. You’ll want to indicate to readers that some jurisdictions use Harm Reduction as their primary motivation for a drug program. Sure, it would be great to end everyone’s addiction, but if that’s not possible for Every Addict, then let’s Reduce the Harm the addiction does, measured broadly. What could harm reduction Reduce? Muggings. Breaking-and-Enterings. Home burglaries. Prostitution. Illness. Overdose deaths. Wasted police time. Wasted medical interventions. Clogged courts and emergency rooms. See?
      2. InSite Participants. Readers need to know that NOT EVERYONE who wants clean heroin can get it. The program Qualifications are worth a paragraph or more. Is it available to someone who has never used heroin? Only to steady users? Only to addicts? Only to those who have tried rehabilitation? More than twice? Only to those who keep to the schedule? Only to those who keep a job?
      3. Social Benefits. These are worth identifying, PinkMonkey. For a reader who thinks “breaking the cycle of addiction” is the only worthwhile goal of an anti-drug program, you’ll need to demonstrate the Other Benefits that InSite offers. Fewer arrests for B&E, muggings, prostitution; smaller court backlogs’ reduced emergency room visits: whatever numbers the jurisdictions that use these programs can report.

      While you’re at it, your third paragraph is highly Causal, and there’s causal material in other paragraphs as well. Clearly, overlap is inevitable, but you may find you want to shift some material to a different post to align it with the “argument categories” we’re committed to: Definitional/Causal/Rebuttal.

      Is this helpful, PinkMonkey? Please Reply. You can place this post back into the Feedback Please category following substantial revision.

      Like

Leave a reply to pinkmonkey32 Cancel reply