“When the needle’s thrown outside and exposed to the elements for any period of time, there’s very little virus there,” said [addictions specialist Dr. Leo Lanoie], adding even if someone gets injected with a freshly infected needle, their risk of getting infected is about three per cent.
Lanoie said as far as he knows, there has never been a reported case of HIV picked up from a ground needle in Saskatchewan, and approximately only two cases were reported worldwide.
Really.
So, instead of handing out millions of free needles each year to Saskatchewan junkies, let them recycle the ones they pick up off the ground.
Ask him if he will pick up 20 needles and inject himself? Put your money where your mouth is Dr.Leo.
Awesome idea!!
The “harm reduction” industry would have to look for another source of income should these free shoot-up places close. Not that that would not be a good thing, but those dependent on public money will fight tooth and nail to keep their place on the public teat.
I’m confused (as always with lefty’s lexicon of latent lying) – what exactly is “harm reduction”?
Is this sanctioned law breaking to reduce crime?
My gawd you have to be totally bereft of reason to be a progressive.
I believe the “harm reduction” they speak of is the potential harm to social workers pocketbooks if these BS programs were scrapped.
While HIV is very environmentally delicate (3% is still damn high), other viruses like HepC are actually very robust and transmission from a ‘dead’ needle is quite possible. Harm Reduction still stands.
Only a three percent chance of infection, huh. So an addict who shoots up once a day with discarded needles in just over a month has a 100 percent chance of infection if my math is right (yeah, someone will come up with a statistical argument). How many shoot up just once a day?
Harm reduction programmes are just a feel good way of spending other people’s money to delay the inevitable. The only real harm reduction is getting them off the stuff in the first place.
syncrodox @4:02 – I believe you are correct. The motive slithering around under the ‘concern’words, heh.
I picked up a needle last week that was lying on the sidewalk in front of my place. I thought it may be dangerous to kids running around. Gee,if I knew the risk was way less than 3%,I would have left it, thereby reducing the risk of harm to myself.
The doctor estimates a 3% risk of infection from a discarded needle. Does he have a peer reviewed study a reference for that statistic? Or is he just making that up?
Ask citizens what they would view as an acceptable risk, a created or at least aided and abetted by some bureaucrat’s policy(conspiracy)?
What do the public think is “acceptable” for themselves and their families in public parks?
In a nation run by a self-appointed “elite” public service, what the citizen thinks or what is in their interest, or what citizen rights are involved, that question never comes up.
Please explain to me why the Univ health plan cut lantus (insulin) from their plan, which my son needs to inject to survive, and yet the taxpayer is compelled to underwrite junkies recreational needles?
What is wrong with this picture…?
You may shoot me now…
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
Exactly Jema. As with the simpering from the left regarding “workfare” (previous thread) it seems they are more interested in preserving their fiefdoms then actually helping their “clients”.
“Please explain to me why the Univ health plan cut lantus (insulin) from their plan, which my son needs to inject to survive, and yet the taxpayer is compelled to underwrite junkies recreational needles?
What is wrong with this picture…?”
That is NUTS and WRONG. Where has common sense gone?
Lanoie said as far as he knows, there has never been a reported case of HIV picked up from a ground needle in Saskatchewan, and approximately only two cases were reported worldwide.[/qoute]
“and approximately” are not the words of wisdom, if Lanoie doesn’t know exactly… He should realize such words are those of the average drunk …
Yes, and these so-called “clients” steal from honest, tax-paying citizens in nearby neighbourhoods. I lost over $25K to one of these poor, pitiable, state mollycoddled souls to fund purchases of illegal drugs.
Maybe the good doctor is on to something here.
Let the junkies think used needles are OK and voila!, we get rid of the problem in a few years.
And yes, you can shoot ME now.
I’ll cut to the chase, it’s not about the addicts or preventing desease it’s about ensuring the leftwing activists have jobs that pay them to be leftwing activists.
@ Chutzy & Ralph:
Don’t worry I’m sure it’s an administrative “Fluke-Up”.
No doubt the injectible estrogen birth control is covered…
The notion that the world should be rational is vastly over-rated…
Keep laughing its the only anti-psychotic that needs no underwriter and is free…!!
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
I feel personally threatened by term “Harm reduction”
can U guess what my birth name was?????
Harmond Amour?
I’m glad that my child has only a small chance of getting infected by the needles everywhere. I’m also happy that the junkies will be safe. It’s not fair that my child is safe and the heroin addict is at risk.
We obviously need to redistribute the Hepatitis and HIV, It’s not fair that they get it all! We are the 99% and we demand our fair share of disease!
I’m glad that my child has only a small chance of getting infected by the needles everywhere. I’m also happy that the junkies will be safe. It’s not fair that my child is safe and the heroin addict is at risk.
We obviously need to redistribute the Hepatitis and HIV, It’s not fair that they get it all! We are the 99% and we demand our fair share of disease!
What Rose said @ 6:08.
Love the way these leftie professors just pull statistics out of their a*s. Approximate and about are not statistics. Not that it matters because statistics will always be what activists want them to be and they know full well that the MSM would never bother to verify them. The numbers on needles is staggering and here I always thought Vancouver was junkie utopia.
I don’t know what your problem is there in Saskatchewan!
Here in B.C., we were proud to have the very first needle exchange in Canada,followed by the very first shooting gallery!
Now,all those rehabilitated junkies have trained for useful trades,and are off to the Far North to help build those pipelines and LNG plants!
And we have Senator Larry Campbell to thank for it.
Aviator:
Fairly simple to calculate. Odds of NOT being infected (assuming 3% figure is accurate) is calculated from 1-.97^n, where n is the number of trials. Here are results:
Trials chance of infection
10 26%
20 45%
30 60%
40 70%
50 78%
75 90%
100 95%
If an addict doesn’t have access to guaranteed clean needles, assume he uses 3 times a day, and uses an infected needle 10% of the time. 95% chance he acquires AIDS in less than a year.
@ dmorris at March 18, 2012 7:31 PM
Good one. We know nature abhors a vacuum and that explains why the junkie population has gone up in the lower mainland. Sucking them in from the have not provinces. Also explains all the drug busts up north. Making big money and can buy their own. All part of the plan:)
I rather thought that Lanoie was being sensible. If someone finds a needle, he shouldn’t wet himself with fear,
but just carefully pick the fricking thing up by the barrel and put it in a bottle or can; and then wash his hands carefully.
This is beside the point of living in a culture where used syringe needles are left lying around, which is probably a criminal offence and if not should be.
LAS says correctly that pathogens other than HIV may be environmentally robust, and mentions HepC.
I think that that is true of HepB as well. And there are plenty of good old bacteria that are really nasty. Addicts after all are
usually sick, often with multiple infectious diseases.
“If an addict doesn’t have access to guaranteed clean needles, assume he uses 3 times a day, and uses an infected needle 10% of the time. 95% chance he acquires AIDS in less than a year.
Posted by: KevinB at March 18, 2012 7:50 PM ”
And the problem is??????
We commonly reuse needles on our cattle with no problem reported among them. (Although we commonly run water through them before reusing) sarcastic comment to be sure, but true
I think its best to call the Fire Dept. It wastes their time and there is a record of the needles out there. DO NOT DO IT YOURSELF!! If we pick up their needles for them, Health Regions will see the scattered needles as even less of a problem.
Derek, as long as your cows haven’t engaged in sexual conduct with gay Green Monkeys your herd should be fine. (yes, I doubt there are gay Green Monkeys – maybe bi Green Moneys – and yes I am being sarcastic as well).
Down right amazing….discared needles not a hazard….they always have been..but not now, as its the loonie left giving them out paid for by the taxpayer…what about smokes and booze…wacky tobacco…sex toys and birth control..and a bit of extra spending money for what the city does not supply….//
Cheaper overall than free needles, is to put the addicts on buses for farther west. That’s what is done in the Maritimes, Montreal, and Ottawa.
It was quite commonplace, when I took the midnight bus from Ottawa to Toronto as a student, for there to be a derelict on board. The traffic in derelicts was strictly one way.
After Toronto the next step was Winnipeg. It ends in Vancouver, which is easier (warmer) than most other parts of Canada, and the BCers seem to like them.
“Regardless, Lanoie agreed kids should never remove a needle themselves.”
In that case the needles should all be clearly labelled “This is not a toy”
“Harm reduction”?
More like “harm redistribution“.
I still can’t believe needles in parks has become such a problem. I’ve seen the damn things myself, yet disbelief remains. There was no such thing as needles in parks when I was a kid. No way.
What the hell have we let happen here? Where’s my Canada?
“And we have Senator Larry Campbell to thank for it.”
No wonder I think of him as the Barbarian at the Gate.
More myths of the post modern age debunked.
Needles for Junkies but not for diabetics. Besides a little bleach kills all infection. Another liberal voting scam bought by you for votes to them.
All these Junkies will need a drug test to work in the oil fields right? Or will an exemption be made for registered Junkies? Mean while normal people live by harsher standards.Different laws. Just like for Muslims, feminists, or other minorities. So called!!!
Kate’s last line in the thread header nails it.
PM Harper should have immediately invoked the “notwithstanding” clause on the Supreme Court’s ridiculous Insite decision of last fall.
HIV and HepC are both quite fragile viruses and the chance of getting them from a needle that’s been outside for a while is close to 0. OTOH, HepB is quite infectious and survives for quite a while. Most people are vaccinated against HepB now, but 5% of the population can’t form antibodies and thus become HepB carriers if they are exposed to the virus. A needle stick from a week old discarded needle with no visible blood would be capable of causing a HepB infection.
At the very least, anyone who lives in an area where discarded needles are found should demand a free HepB vaccination from the health department (assuming they haven’t already been vaccinated). If they refuse to do so, raise shit. Another way of letting people know the extent of the problem is to mail any used syringes found, postage free, (needle inserted into a piece of cork) to NDP and Lieberal MP’s letting them know one of their voters seems to have lost this item in a playground and if they could return it to them.
I expect we’ll see an increase in HIV infections in BC in the near future now that the government seems to be trying to reduce the number of employable people on welfare. HIV is still the “stay on welfare forever” disease and, with antiretroviral drugs provided for free in BC, it seems like the perfect solution for a lot of people on welfare.
Justthinkin:
The problem comes from socialized medicine. If a junkie develops AIDS, naturally, he’ll be treated at great expense by our medical system. (Let’s not debate socialized medicine here; many of us are against it, but it is the reality right now.) So the question becomes, given the odds I posted above, is it less expensive to provide relatively cheap syringes (say $0.10 each?) or to pay for hospitalization, retroviral drugs, etc., while clogging up the health system for people who DIDN’T self inflict their diseases? I mean, the cost of syringes is about $12/yr; one night in the hospital is at least $120. So, in theory, you could provide a junkie with needles for ten years for less money than it costs to keep him in the hospital for a single night.
I don’t want to get into long arguments with anyone over the morality of “assisting” anyone with a drug habit; I just want to focus on the overall costs. (Maybe loki can provide some figures?) What would it cost us to treat hundreds, if not thousands, of AIDS patients, compared to the cost of giving them needles? If there were hundreds of HIV-infected people who are perhaps still relatively casual (and clandestine) drug users (you don’t become a full-blown addict over night), how many non-drug using people might become HIV-infected from sexual contact with them? What would it cost us to care for them? And of course, the more people who get HIV, the more chance that it mutates again to be resistant to current drugs.
As reluctant as I am to encourage injection drug use, it might well be far less expensive to society as a whole to give the needles away than to deny them.
How hard is it to sterilize a needle with a cigaret lighter? 2minutes? But junkies can’t be bothered. What makes anyone think that they use free needles as intended ?
I’m not reading this the way a lot of you are. I’m reading 3 percent chance if junkies are passing a needle around the room – freshly infected.
Negligable after it’s discarded.
As for the junkies will get AIDS in less than a year stats, they’d have to be shooting up with infected needles every time to have those kind of odds to get infected.
That said I still would rather see needles kept off the street – ANY chance of a child falling on a needle and getting infected is way to high. Junkies know and accept the risk before they ever start.
Harm reduction =df. I am forced to pay—i.e., my property is taken from me, by force of law—to reduce the risk to others of risky behaviour they knowingly engage in.
They told me that political union meant that the members would share one another’s fate. They sold this as though it were a good thing.
Separation, anyone?
…and yet I have to pay for both my insulin and the “junkie rig” I use to inject it.
“…and yet I have to pay for both my insulin and the “junkie rig” I use to inject it.”
Posted by: FREE at March 19, 2012 11:39 AM
Have you considered blaming your diabetes on “society”?
We need to harness the disinfecting power of haystacks. I see no obvious practical difficulties.
If the needle is contaminated with Hepatitis C, chance of infection for a ” freshly injected needle ” is north of 90%.
Is Lanoie so stupid that he thinks the only risk of disease from re-using needles is HIV? Or is he deliberately ignoring the huge risk from a Hep C contaminated needle?
He is saying if you see a needle, picking it up by the barrel and putting it in a bottle is a pretty safe thing to do – ie, you don’t need to call the fire department to have them do it.
He makes no comments at all regarding the needle exchange being a bad thing. He is not even talking about reusing needles – just if you see one you can carefully pick it up and put it in a bottle.
He does not say anything about HIV in any quotation marks – he may have been asked specifically about HIV by a reporter and given a response specifically about HIV. The 3% number is also not in quotes – maybe he was asked about the risk of getting HIV from a freshly infected needle.
There’s not enough quotes from him in this article at all to call him “stupid” or that he is “deliberately ignoring” anything. Just stating some facts.