I agree with Mr. Brenner on most points. But I also agree with Mayor Sullivan when he states that the matter is not a municipal responsibility. Toronto (my home) is a prime example of a city teetering on bankruptcy because desires to be all levels of government to all people. In the process, the city is creating homelessness by paying for the responsibilities of other levels of government through a tax on homes.

The municipal level of government could do a lot more than it currently is to deal with drugs (both on the street and in the clubs). Moreso than any other level of government, municipal governments interface directly with the profit-driven mechanism that cultivates drug use & addiction locally....whether that point of contact is through the police department, social welfare service-providers, or business licensing & inspections.

Sullivan's myopic fixation on only one of four mutually complimentary pillars is shared by many. Moreover, the tendency to view drug use as a lifestyle choice or merely a "medical issue" ignores the full scope of this pervasive social pathology. And it *is* a pathology.

Municipal governments - Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa - have enacted a number of unmonitored "experiments" in their efforts to contain drugs while simultaneously cutting costs. Some of these experiments have clearly become co-opted into the profit-driven mechanism that fuels the drug problem in the first place.

For example, why have municipal bureaucracies been permitted to effectively circumvent national drug laws though the creation of legalized drug-rave venues ('non-alcohol afterhours cabarets') that are not subject to standard law enforcement procedures under current legislation? That's certainly how my own encounter with drugs came about, after a totally drug-free adolescence. Virtually everyone I know has been recruited into hard drug use through the this avenue. Who decided that was okay? Why have municipal governments been so unresponsive to the problem? How compromised is their decision-making, licensing and monitoring process? Has this process somehow become part of the profit-sharing apparatus now driving the problem? At what point was this critical shift in policy debated and decided? How much damage has this policy caused, and who answers for it?

And don't you think giving drugs to prostitutes is just a little wierd, what gratification do you get out of it?

Well done. Looking forward for more.
Sorry to hear that your off brand X. Now that Hockey is also off brand X, I'll have to tune in somewhere else.

Until you stop the 'Drug Lords' financing politicians, and they do with gusto, the problem will never end. Grow-op money is 'cleansed' in casinos. Many resurantes and cafes are funded with 'drug' money. Hell, in the hurtlands, whole communities are kept alive with drug money. The politicans let it continue, simply because, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, their rich and powerful friends profits may go down.

The four pillars was doomed from the start as it didn't tackle the problem and now just made the Eastside a shooting gallery! As for Sullivan, he's an idiot who seems more interested in waving Olympic (oh dear can I say it?) flags than tackling real civic issues.

Tom Cruise can reportedly get someone off heroin in 3 days, I say we blanket the DTES with scientologists and e-meters: problem solved.

We must remember that drug addicts and criminals own the city and we must coddle and gladhand them in perpetuity.

The Mayor says:

If this were even nominally true, and if it had even a tiny chance of creating the conditions of alleged 'comfort' that the mayor talks about, the schizophrenic attitude the city actually has about infrastructure in the DTES would put the lie to it.

On this same Tyee site is an essay that purports to show that some departments of the mayor's administration are actively pursuing a policy with respect to SRO accommodations that is in direct contradiction if not opposition to what the mayor claims he believes in.

Even if the mayor were correct about his prescription for normalizing drug behavior among the ‘residents’ of the DTES, and I’m not even addressing that contention at the moment, his formula – in the absence of decent, clean, safe and affordable housing for the objects of his ‘apparent’ concern would come to nothing. He wants, it seems, to be considered a humanitarian and someone who empathizes with the handicapped and disabled but he’s too much of a product of the profit-oriented west side aristocrats who elected him to actually put his money where his mouth is. In other words, as Berner points out, Sullivan is an enormously conflicted and contradictory figure; not just in terms of his reluctance to invest taxpayers money in the most challenged of Vancouver’s citizens and their survival; but also in terms of his positive enthusiasm for that other great ‘project’ of his mayoralty - the Olympics, which may well be far more costly for the taxpayers for whom he is so solicitous in the long run.

I say a full assault by police against drugs is the answer. Only the rich can actually afford drugs. The argument that drugs should be free to addicts is socialism gone wild.
I say lock them up and throw away the key.
And David, I miss you.

Ok, Lte's hospitalize, treat, and provide follow up therapy etc. to these people then, just like Mr. Sullivan got (along with the wheel-chair).

I AM Clueless:
When you figure out a way that only the rich can 'have' the drugs and suffer the inevitable ravages of a few years under their mastery I'll vote for you and your insane approach to problem solving. Then you can turn the cops and dogs you so enthusiastically tout as a 'solution' to the drug problem on your friends and fellow-travellers from the North Shore and the West Side and you can take to visiting them at the crowbar hotel.

Excellent points G West and as pointed out other housing issues around False Creek and Social Housing have been ABANDONED.

And just because Sullivan is in a wheelchair ,it doesn't mean he is any different than other politicians,he has shown he loves Grandstanding and the Spotlights.

Recently he was on The Mercer Report ,being hauled around the North Vancouver hills/Capilano ,like some Eastern Potentate,grinning like a fool.

He loves that power in a way that is going to have him do and say whatever it takes and because he is in a wheelchair people will OVERLOOK anything and everything he does wrong.Becausehe deserves to be where he is,he worked hard to get there and none will Question,Who paid to get him there and keep him there

Their is a difference between addicts and dealers addicts are victims and dealers are the lowest human life-form, living off of human suffering. Most of them have lots of money and a lot of them do not do drugs themselves. These guys need to be taken off the streets.

That is where Grumpy may be right the drug lords are very powerful with money. Money may be the key to why they are still on the streets of Vancouver.

So, Sullivans attitude is: if I can do it, anyone can do it!
That does not hold water, but we heard that shit before, like: When I was a kid we walked 10 miles to school in 5' of snow and bare feet!
I am amazed he does not advocate labourcamps for delinquent teens!

The issue is far bigger than the DTES. The DTES has become a foil that deflects attention away from the fact that the scope of the problem has become much more pervasive. Look at the High Schools. It's not pot & 'shrooms anymore.....cost is no longer a barrier: the kids have graduated to cocaine, G, K, E, meth...Where was their first exposure to this? What forces are surrounding them that lead from first use to chronic use...? Everyone's doing it - that's the probelm. It's not occasional experimentation anymore - it's an entrenched culture, in which *belonging* necessitates *participation*.

The DTES represents a massive failure of will, and shows what can happen when good liberal intentions meet reality and go awry. But the DTES is also a diversion when it comes to conversations like this. We have to snap out of that.

nightbloom
We know the mayor's solution won't work…in fact it’s not a solution or even a practical approach. Has his lack of commitment to 4 Pillars reduced the whole program to rubble? I suspect the funding that was coming from the Vancouver Foundation is running out and I don't think the current city administration is going to get much sympathy from Steven in Ottawa on this file either. So does it wither on the vine in spite of the admittedly small gains it has made like nearly every other one of the many projects that have been dreamed up by folks from outside the DTES? In the absence of some solution to the housing questions, (Woodwards won't do the trick, will it?) what's next? I'm not sure whose "WILL" you're talking about.

It's been pointed out by two other posters that Sam recieve a lot of assistance to over- come his disability, much more than a wheelchair.

Sam should also realize that if wheelchair access wasn't madatory for all public buildings, he would be sitting outside the university, an uneducated person, unable to access the benefits afforded "normal" people. Perhaps then, he would see the flaw in his logic.

No no no. Can we just modify the headline a bit here?

everything.

There's no need to make is so narrow.

Don't get me wrong, I recognize that technically Vancouver's Mayor is really just an administrator and I think the insane level of attention Little Larry Campbell paid to stuff well outside his job was horrible, but I do wish we had a mayor with a vision, a view, and the ability to lead towards it.

Sullivan's just a wimp. A path of least resistance. A milquetoast politician of the worst ilk.

Nothing personal, mind you...he's personable enough, and nice enough...I just wish he'd lead.

I blame the electoral system here in YVR actually, which creates an incredibly fractured council and a very very weak Mayor's chair. We need wards, we just don't need 14 of them as was proposed last year. We need a Mayor with a different electoral mandate than the city councillor's he shares the table with.

Until that happens, we'll keep electing milquetoast. It is the nature of the system.

Public Housing, Treatment and Decriminalization.
Poverty, hopelessness and drug addiction are a massive societal problem. The hopeless, dehumanizing experience of living on the street is perhaps the key reason many people are trapped in the horrific cycle of violence, prostution, drug addiction etc. I urge people to take a walk through the DTES and ask yourself some basic questions. It is not a pleasent experience to realize what this says about our society. The money taxpayers are spending on the massive subsidy for the further enrichment of our corrupt elite (Olympics) could pay for a massive housing programme. Study after study suggests that until this problem is addressed, addictions cannot begin to be treated. When people have a safe, violent free space to live in, treatment will be a viable option.
Unfortunately, the line between users and dealers is often blurry. The best way to remove the power from the big league dealers is to eliminate or reduce the profit incentive. The war on drugs has not worked and it will never work. Trillions of dollars have been spent worldwide since the 80's on prohibition. This must be addressed.
I live in a hurtland (good one) community and it really is sad. So many people in these communities have lost hope. It is no wonder so many people are addcited. The horrific destruction of nature that resource extractors are involved in is enough to make anybody a user. The rate of destruction has increased so rapidy of late, young people have no hope. Escape through the use of meth, coke or other hard drugs is understanable in this context. Young people in these communities are not being taught skills which could help them be involved in the transition of their economy. Again the common denominator is hopelessness. Is our society willing to give these people hope? Are we decent enough to treat the marginalized wtih respect? I hope so, because we all suffer collectively.

Brain, I agree that users are victims, but they are also greasing the wheels of the nasty mechanism with their $$$. Sure, users are victims, but they are also customers. We can't make it easier for them, or use "outreach" as an excuse to mainstream their activities (this is a problem in targetted communities, like the gay community, where the drive to not marginalize users has actually led to a sub-culture in which chronic use has become *normalized*). The non-users are the outsiders - social norms have been up-ended in a perverse attempt to reach out to those already lost.

We need a system that creates fewer users, not more of them - a system which places the NON-USER at the centre of policy, for a change.

As usual, I'm getting familiar with your technique nightbloom, a carefully worded, and largely accurate critique. But that's as far as you ever go. Just as you wrote about the apathy of Canadian students compared with French ones, you don't seem to have absorbed the analysis beyond the obvious. You’ve dropped enough hints to the fact that you’re an academic – maybe it’s time to get a little more engaged.

It's clear the Mayor's idea of normalizing drug use is painfully inadequate without somehow addressing the living conditions and mental architecture of addiction. Do we bring out the dogs and the cops and herd them and the parasites who live off their 'disabilities' into jails - as some suggest above? Do we ignore their plight for another generation? Do we provide the needed housing and infrastructure that 1/10 of what's being spent on the Olympics would buy?

Just seems to me that the 4 pillars strategy has had some positive results and now is not the time to start knocking legs out from under that table.

"I believe we should ask the addict what he needs from society"

Ummmokay, I'm an addict. Well, a recovering one. I recovered just as campbell was maiking it impossible to go on welfare to go into a treatment centre. 3 weeks in the life of an addict is eternity. Welfare for treatment should be made available immediately. Nowhere else in canada is this the case.

When Sullivan was recovering from his accident, did he not go to a hospital? Did he not go through rehab?

When the human race stops spawning,addictive personalities,we may get a handle on addictions.Til then,we have to recognize that there are also Societal influences that have taught that ADDICT,life is HOPELESS.

Especially,when that societies mantras comprise of gems,like,THE BOTTOM LINE ,PROFIT, WINNER , LOSER and the ENTERTAINMENT is comprised of CRETINS like Donald Trump ,firing people for any ASSININE REASON.

Back in the sixties Timothy Leary,espoused ,TUNING OUT...

things haven't changed at all .

Having lost my son to narcotics, I feel sincerely that those who make a monetary gain (at whatever level) from the nefarious sale of such commodities should be tossed to a tank of hungry sharks! Sincerely, Blueswag

As a disabled person and a recovering addict I understand exactly what Sulivan means. The simple reality is that until an addict wants to change their life, their is nothing anyone can do to make them clean up their hand. An addict will resort to just about any means to get their drugs or whatever they use to mood alter and thus avoid their feelings. Giving them the drugs to stay in this state will not allow the addict to ever develope the desire to get better. So what is the answer? I don't know but I do know that our society is breeding more and more addicts every day. The simple truth is that what we are doing is failing society. Poverty and alienation are the two most powerful precursers to creating addicts. The Campbell government through its neoconservative/neoliberal/bull$hit has created a huge mass of our population who are ripe for the picking for the illeagal drug industry. On one hand we have John Les (what an approprate name) announcing the expenditure of tax dollars to provide ineffective band aid solutions to help addicts, while being a part of a government that has created virtual armies of disenfranchised and empoverished people who spread the results of addiction throughout our province. The results are plain to see and when the world comes to B.C. to see the olympics they will either see the slum like conditions that have been created through misguided governmental ideology, or they will see our jails filled with those who were led into addiction by an uncaring and ineffective government (both provincial and local)who promotes the exact atmospher to create addictions. The growth of the addicted numbers are mearly a symptom of a society that has lost it's way. We need exacty what the neocons fear, and that is large wholesale changes that focuses our attention on real humans and not little pieces of paper with numbers upon the front.

Sam Sullivan's correct and Berner's wrong, of course, but take a look at the opinion of Norm Stamper, once Seattle chief of police:

http://www.alternet.org/story/22227/

This is not a serious problem. It's a serious intellectual failure. There are various groups of addicted people and each group is unique in its susceptibility to the approaches of the addiction fixers. Overall, we'll fix the problem when we view the chronic users in exactly the same way that we view insulin injectors. People dependent upon medications for their well-being.

As for recreational drug users, ignore it as long as they don't impose their silly behaviour on others and break laws.

Stamper even says it's cruel to withhold heroin from a long-term, chronically addicted heroin addicts. I thought I was the only one to think this, but good on Stamper. I wish he would have said this stuff while he was Seattle chief of police, though.

Oops, apparently Stamper did say a lot of this stuff while he was Seattle police chief. Sorry, Norm.

Good article. Addiction is not a disease. And even if it is, it is not incurable. No one is disposable. What Sullivan is saying is that there are people who are superfluous, and they are contained in the Downtown Eastside, and that'w where they should stay. drugged up, contained, docile. People decide to take drugs or drink or smoke cigarettes because they've figured they can't manage to get around without being in some way altered. These substances cause disease and disability sometimes, but taking them is not in and of itself a pathology. None of the four pillars will work to get people who are disenfranchised involved in their city. None of the four pillars are committed to getting people off drugs, educated, housed, cared for and invested in taking up their share of the space, their share of the resources and their share of the responsibitility. Sullivan is, as David says, invested in keeping a sector of people enslaved. They make, after all, a great resource for the "human services industry."

oh yea, it's not just Sullivan, either. It did not appear that Phillip Owen or Larry Campbell were too interested in providing Prevention programs that worked or Treatment options, either.

"Getting people off drugs," eh, peasantwoman. Do you know how many people are using drugs in our society? I rent out a little suite and in the last five years four out of the five tenants used either pot or meth, and the fifth was bizaarly addicted to one of the famous colas. Most of us will get acetyminophen or ibupofen at the drop of a had for acute pain.

Our society is a drug using society.

Forget the war on drugs. Decriminalize them all--and regulate them. Punish people for committing crimes. Make the criminal organization members get regular jobs and stop trying to pretend that we know how to "treat" chronic drug addition. It usually just means talking sessions and methadone. Treatment is a hoax and Sam Sullivan is correct to be hesitant about it. The chronically-addicted do not need to get off drugs--they need heroin.

Stop torturing them!

Ban the police from the downtown eastside--after you've decriminalized drugs, of course.

My brother is a cocain addict. My my mom tryed to get him some help at a rehab clinic they were all full. the only clinic we could send him to was private and cost 10,000 dollers a month. My mom could not afford that who could?
Sam sullivan should not compare his recovery to a drug attics recovery. Drugs take away your mind,friends and family after there are fed up with you. So when a drug addict hits an absolut low he may have lost support from his friends and family. That is why we have a downtown east side because they had no other place to go.

I am sure sam had the support of his friends and family after his acceident.

I should report, though, that continually jabbing yourself with syringes can get you a false-positive HIV reaction, which will render you susceptible (auto-immune response) to the poisonous anti-retrovirals and clincial trials (read BC Centre For Excellence in HIV/AIDS, funded by Merck), (what else?) that the humungous pharmies and governments are pushing. So, there's no free lunch, eh.

I agree, Truman Green. But if you give drug dealers jobs, then they'll just crank out and peddle mood altering drugs and make huge profits off of people down on their luck or unable to cope with life. Oh wait, we already *have* given drug dealers jobs like that - the CEOs of Eli Lilly and other big Pharma.
Quite frankly, I don't see the difference between peddling Prozac and pushing coke: both make you 'feel better' and both are addictive. The only difference is the context in which they are taken. No need to steal a car if you can get your drugs prescribed by your doctor and covered by medicare.

A radical thought, I know, And maybe prozac is justified in certain cases, could it also be that heroin could be justified in a few select cases? Whether you're a drug pusher or a Big Pharma CEO, there's a lot of money to be made!

I agree castilleja. Furthermore I say
Legalize it.
Regulate it.
Free ourselves of the mega-pharma lobby groups who profit from industry control.
Free ourselves of the Hells Angels who profit from prohibition.
(Ethically is there a huge difference between the two latter groups?)

What is the cost/benefit, let alone the moral implication, of allowing people to spiral out of control? The loss of "human capital" and the failing of our ability to attend to the mentally ill speaks volumes about our societty.

Humans medicate, we should get used to it because it has always been that way. Now we have a new rising of the religious Right in North America so don't expect progress soon.

Exactly, Castilleja. But it's not a radical thought. You brain is just actually functioning. We've just criminalized a whole bunch of people for using the wrong drugs, that's all. Let's follow the money, eh. And maybe don't be listening too closely about drug treatment from a guy who was in the business of running a drug treatment centre or even from ex drug addicts who usually have little insight about the whole sorry affair, and like to think of themselves as "survivors". There's no addiction treatment like antibiotics, or something. It's just more counseling. Drug addicts need prescriptions for their painkillers, just like the rest of us. Stop thinking of their addiction as an abberant behaviour. Put them in jail if they break the other criminal laws. This is not rocket science, eh.

When you go to a zoo and your child asks you,what is that monkey doing ? Do you really know ?

Why of course you know,he's masturbating ! Now do you know ,why,that monkey is masturbating ?

Yes,that's right because it feels good and it's about the only thing that monkey can do to alter his mood and after awhile that becomes a conditioned response...an addiction !

Humans are the same,smoking,drinking,huffing,injection,etcetra and we are not even talking about high level addicts that work in stressfull jobs and overeat or jog or jump out of planes or any other risky behaviour that becomes addictive,gotta get that adrenalin fix.

Some have addictive personalities and will get sucked into the black abyss,others like me will have non addictive personalities and travel those same mean streets wondering where you went,how you died and why .

Until we realize,not everyone,wants to play the games,or can play the games,we are going to keep dropping the ball.People are being produced that have faults and we as a society are lacking in our EDUCATION AND COMPASSION of our care of each other.

You will never get rid of addictions when the BOOB TUBE turns you and your kids into PAVLOV'S DOGS and passive consumers whose ultimate goal is to out do the JONES.

And when you cannot out do the JONES and life is a pain,and you want an escape,what are you going to do ?

What i just wrote is very simplistic and is known by many in the governments,police,social services,etcetra.It was known back in the fifties...so,what's happening ? who is making money off the misery in our society ?

Why is there no will to really live in a better world ?

I would suggest that one thing that adds nothing to this discussion is "addictive personality". What pray tell is that supposed to be? Some may be more inclined to be addicted due to some biological fact, but that is nothing to do with "personality". "Personality" is nothing more than a hypothetical construct, a tool for categorizing and stereotyping.
Oh, gee, I have an addictive personality, so I use heroin - what a cop out!

until we abolish the idea that addiction is a sickness and treat it as it is, a lifestyle choice the taxpayer will continue to support wimps like our illustrious mayor. too bad he had turned politician so quickly, where's that camera?

Interesting point, greengreen. I've used that term myself, but with only slight conviction. One can, of course, be absolutely confident in using the term if it is mean to describe a current condition. That is, anyone who is addicted to a substance can assume that addiction has become part of his or her personality, and that would be an indisputable fact, but to suggest that there was some kind of "a priori" character flaw that CAUSED the addiction is probably a serious stretch.

Good one! Maybe anyone is susceptible to drug addiction depending on the luck of the draw of life circumstances and experience. It is, afterall, just a method of surviving intolerable psychic experiences which can't be handled while one is sober.

I would say you were a psuedo intellectual with real problems reading and defining situational devices meant for anyone to understand.The definition of personality follows,remember it next time your mouth starts working before your brain kicks in.

http://www.answers.com/topic/personality

My cousin is a prostitute, crack and heroin addict living somewhere in the E. Vancouver / Central Park area. She ran away from home to get away from a step-father who was emotionally abusive. She was 16. She hooked up with a young man (aka scum of the earth) who continued the emotional abuse by telling her she was fat. She convinced herself that she could take "just a little bit" of heroin to lose that weight. It didn't take long for her to become addicted to heroin and crack. The scum then became her pimp so that she could support their drug habits, sometimes even that of his friends. She now has Hep C and if she isn't HIV positive yet I'm sure she will be soon. She has been beaten over the head with a hammer by "customers", sleeps in stairwells and under bridges, she has sores all over her body, is so very thin it is painful to look at her, there is dirt embedded in her skin that I don't think will ever go away, her personal hygiene (even when she does come off the streets for short periods) is non-existent, developmentally she is stuck at 16 and she is now 27.

Yes, she made her choices but there were extenuating circumstances. Yes, other people who suffer emotional abuse handle it differently but she found what she thinks is the love she had been searching for on the streets. I believe she is just as addicted to life on the streets as she is to the drugs. Yes, she has a family who loves her very much ... who celebrated when Willy Pickton was arrested because he was jailed before he got to my cousin ... a family who would do anything to help her whenever she calls or we can find her ... a family who suffers right along with her (although in different ways). But how do we help her when we do find her???

My cousin is extremely lucky because she remembers the manners that were taught to her as a child. These serve her very well on the streets as there are some wonderful police officers, nurses, doctors, etc. who have helped her survive for so long. She has been on the streets for 11 years now and, from what I've been told, that is much longer than most. One police officer told me that it is a miracle that she is still alive.

Last April, my Aunt (her mother) passed away after a long illness. We couldn't find my cousin to tell her. I phoned every police detachment in the area and begged them to help us find her. In July, I received a call from a police officer who had found her. My Mom picked her up from the police station and I rushed down to Vancouver to help. My cousin told us then that she wanted to get clean because she knew my Aunt wanted it so badly. We knew it wouldn't last because she wasn't doing it for herself but you can't help but hope that maybe this time it will work. No matter how many times she goes back to the streets, no matter how many times she steals from us ... if you love the person who is an addict you can never give up hope (at least we can't).

My cousin went cold turkey with my Mom, my brother and I taking turns staying up with her. I called detox centres and they were full. I phoned Social Workers and doctors ... there were waiting lists. There was no one to help us immediately. We can't afford $10,000 for rehab either. After two weeks, she phoned a friend because "they are probably worried about me." It didn't take that "friend" long to lure her back to the streets and we haven't seen or heard from her since.

I have spent countless hours doing research on rehab centres. I believe that my cousin needs a long-term care facility that can help her get off the drugs, teach her life and job skills, provide counselling, help her with this addicition to life on the streets, etc. She told me essentially the same thing last summer. I want to help her once she has completed rehab and maybe a halfway house. I would do anything to have the money to help her but I just don't have it and either does anyone else in my family.

continued ...

Mayor Sullivan has obviously not felt the pain that my family and others have felt. He has not been my Aunt whose death was sooner than expected due to the stress of not knowing where her daughter was. He has no idea how it feels to always wonder if she is dead or alive. He has not watched my cousin deteriorate over the years. He has no idea what he's talking about. If my cousin was given free drugs I don't think it would make a difference in her life. It would probably kill her. I don't even know if she would stop prostituting herself. His head is up in the clouds if he thinks his plan is going to work.

I don't know whose responsibility it is to provide more treatment centres (municipal, provincial or federal goverments) but someone has to do something. The pain goes far beyond the addicts themselves.

If any of you happen to be around the E. Van / Central Park area and you see a girl (long blonde straight hair, approx. 5'7", blue eyes) who goes by the name of Samantha (that's her street name) please tell her that Tanya loves her very much and wishes she would call collect.

The compassion I see here for drug users could be transferred to any other pain in the ass problem we have.
It;s about responsibility for ones own actions.
No matter what challenge anyone has this rings true.
Some resources should be available to help anyone in crisis, the problem is who is going to be God and what is his agenda regarding drugs and the destructive affects they reek in our society.
To me, I believe in humans prevailing obsticals.
We must make it difficult to become a drug addict.

IAMC
You really are a waste of space. I'm surprised someone hasn't given you a good poke in the nose long before now - you're obviously having some difficulty just being a human being. Why don't you swallow some of that bile that bubbles to the surface every time you get near the computer.

My 33 brother died a year ago, a crack addict. I learned some key things from him over the years:

1. He never intend to be an addicted- everyone in highschool in the 80s was doing coke, but only he was the one unable to stop- he made juvenile, irreversible choice that ruined his entire life.

2. There is absolutely no high in smoking crack after so many years. It was simply an addiction that ruined his life and gave him no joy whatsoever yet he was compelled to keep doing it.

3. He insisted you could never ever give a crack addict enough free drugs- it would never, ever be enough. There is a constant craving for more, always (unlike say heroin). Each drug is different- crack is a bottomless pit that de-criminalization would never resolve.

4. Drug addicts will often do and say whatever they have to get their drug. Their life, relationships, motivations all evolve around this one singular goal. And its a very long, challenging and hardworking life to get one's drug.

5. There is no difference between most users and addicts- everyone is buying and selling, and moving the stuff around. Its how you survive.

6. Addicts can come from loving, middle class, 'normal' families. You needn't a f**ed up childhood to end up on the streets.

7. Rehab can work for some. And rehab need NOT be voluntary. It gave my brother years of sobriety at a time that changed his life and our relationship with him. His best friend who he met the first time in rehab is still clean yeras later. But VERY few make it. And even those that do, every day is a struggle. He lost the struggle. Research shows not much works for many long term and so much more research is needed.

8. Making life comfortable for an addict only pushes away the desire for rehab and a chance at change.

9. There is not at all enough or readily accessible rehab.

10. Rehab has to be longterm, live in, and comprehensive. It can be funded entirely by the welfare checks drug addicts receive (this is how my brother did it).

11. My brother did not want to die. He was terrified of dying. The doctors said if he smoked again he was dead (his lungs were so badly injured and damaged and he came close to dying several times before he did). Even THAT threat of losing his life was not enough. That is addiction.

12. Not all drug addicts are liars and thieves. He was not. He was a decent person, hardworking person who loved his family, and who never crossed boundaries no matter how desperate he became.

I guess the blankets that were given to the natives,you know the ones that were contaminated with smallpox,were the responsibility of the first nations,eh .

And the jews rounded up and poisoned in all those concentration camps were responsible for their own actions,eh

To think,people really have a choice is one of those NEVERENDING DEBATES.

And to voice a BLANKET STATEMENT without knowing the situations of the individuals is heartless and shows a true lack of intelligence.

Then again there are a lot of your type out there,hiding in your homes,paranoid and scared sh!tless,pounding out your hatred for anyone,not like you .

No, Trueman....someone who gets addicted...it isn't part of his "personality". Is "personality" inherited? Learned? Changeable?. This is more than a matter of semantics. The whole concept of personality has been a money- maker for sure, and we accept it as a given, something that actually exists. And then we dream up concepts like personality disorders.
How would you "repair" someone for whom addiction has become part of his personality? Operate? Where is this damaged "personality"? Some drug?
I would think that addiction is to do with chemicals in conjunctiion with our biological system. I think it has been proven that some are more "biologically set-up" for this than others. Bringing in "personality" is a dead-end street and will lnot lead to understanding/help.

All i know is that it isn't a good decision to get abdicated to drugs,and I question those that say it;s a decease.
It's an excuse for bad behavior.
Please don't glofify to be anything else.

gg, I think the idea of personality is a valid thing, otherwise we'd be susceptible to waking up in the morning not knowing who we are--or in fact, being someone else for the day or the week.

I think I just said, in agreement with you, that using it as an excuse or cause of addiction may be an error, and as a very fine point, that it is probably accurate to think of an addicted person as having an addictive personality--at least while he remains addicted.

I smoked cigarettes for thirty years. Quit ten years ago. Looking back, I must honestly admit that addiction to nicotine was a huge part of who I was. I tried to quit--seriously for ten years--sometimes lasting a few hours or a few days--more than a few times thinking I'd made it only to end up in the middle of the night going through my garbage trying to rescue some butts or some whole cigarettes I'd torn up in a fit of over-confidence.

I was seriously addicted. It was part of my personality--I craved a smoke when something good happened and when some kind of crisis arose. I virtually couldn't read a blueprint at work without a cigarette in my hand.

I think it's reasonable to think of this as part of my personality. But the personality as a "cause" of addiction--who knows? I doubt if anyone really does.

I'm not sure what lengths I would have gone to to get nicotine if it had been illegal when I was in the most hard-core era of my cigarette addiction. Thank god, I chose a legal substance with which to become addicted!

Like most commentors say, there's no standard drug addict. Everyone's different. I think most heroin addicts could benefit from mere decriminalization, (with prescription availability) but as nestingtree says, long-term crack addiction is a much more difficult thing with which to deal.

I can't speak for the mayor, of course, but I think what he believes is that there are at least some long-term addicts out there on the street for whom nothing is going to work except acceptance.

Truman
I don't disagree with your basic position, but I'd be less likely than you to accept what I think is a bit of a cop-out by the mayor.

This is how Berner quotes him:

I think that little exchange says it all for me. The mayor has a particular attitude and one that, as you say, is consistent with the idea of calling addiction a health concern which may or may not respond to treatment.

But, and here's where I have a problem. He knows, (especially as a handicapped person) that there are many things people can't handle completely on their own - among them being stranded in an airport without a wheelchair for example - and so therefore there is a need for various kinds of public assistance. Even though he knows this, his essentially libertarian politics prevents him from recognizing the role that the municipal government has in responding to the needs of these particular citizens - i.e. addicts who need good health care, proper nutrition and a decent place to sleep (in addition to treatment or, at the very least, some kind of maintenance level of drugs).
I think his attitude is suspect because he's trying to sluff off the city's role in caring for and covering the costs of the necessary minimum of assistance for these people. Especially in light of the kinds of expenditures the city is and will be incurring for the Olympics - basically a two week party just less than 4 years from now.
What do you think?

Sam is partially right and partially wrong. Drug treatment, 99% of the time is ineffective. As a result this is very expensive. I am very happy to help those that want, need and deserve our help.

However, the truth be told - most of these people are losers and I don't mean to be offensive. These people can't be helped and they don't want to be helped. This is statistically proven.

We have to look at the bigger picture - why does Vancouver has such a big drug problem? I have been to cities throughout the world, and the only place that compares (other than US ghetto's - where truthfully, I haven't visited) is Amsterdam. The problems in the US is caused by a whole different set of societal problems, which I don't want to get into in this forum.

Our drug problem is shameful, and can't be excused. I think our first priority sould be ensuring that our kids are safe and that there isn't a next generation of drug dealers. OUR LIBERAL DRUG POLICIES ARE NOT WORKING.

This includes toughening sentences for dealers at all levels, and mandatory 10 year sentences for distributors. Also, a three strikes you're out policy. If these offenders get caught three times, they clearly aren't doing anything for society and should be removed for a period of time - maybe in jail they'll clean up.

Social programs are not working, and this is a classic instance where we need to toughen the law.

G. West, an interesting comment. As I said, I was a drug addict for 30 years. Of course, I happened to pick a legal drug--nicotine. I think we should keep our eyes on the ball. The word, "treatment" implies that there is some kind of drug-addiction-specific prophylactic apparatus for the benefit of addicts, which, if they could only get access to, would solve their problems.

Treatment programs are mainly a respite from the horror show of police harrassment, dealer and criminal organization intimidation, the horrifying prospect of going into withdrawal, "tough love" and rejection by those who should be welcoming addicts back into their homes; after all the main reasons families end up not knowing where their addicted children are is that families don't want to be associated with the criminals with whom the "street addicts" must associate to get their drugs.

It's a huge cyclical syndrome, the most powerful preserving element of which is the criminalization of the drugs and the addicts themselves.

G. West, did you read Norm Stamper's article?

Capitalists are hopeless. They are total losers, although one hates to say this because it hurts their feelings. Those who are willing to change their ways should be introduced to the real world in small, gentle and careful doses of fact. Those unwilling to change need tougher treatment.

If they cannot be weaned off their dependence upon special rates of taxation, lower rates of taxes for the kinds of things they pretend are necessary to build a fair, equitable and safe society for all and a continued special relationship with the aspects of the government their criminality has taken over then it is time for decent society to force them to change. They want a free ride to continue passing their inherited pathology from one generation to another. They cannot be convinced that government should not be providing them with special deals to continue practicing their bad habits and, in fact, pretend, when confronted with evidence of their pathetic and dependent existence, that they are the engines behind the economy. How sad.

This is a shameful situation, honest people concerned for the health and wellbeing of everyone, including these parasites on society, must demand a change in the way they play their dependent role - harming both themselves and others. CAPITALIST ECONOMIC POLICIES ARE NOT WORKING.

It is time to deal with these losers so their illness is not passed down to another generation of hard-working citizens. If capitalist offenders continue to succumb to their multiple pathologies they must be removed from society for a time and permitted an opportunity to clean up their selfish and self-serving acts.

Understanding has not worked; this is a classic instance where we need to toughen the laws against theft, greed and usury. These people need help, whether they know it or not.

We have to look at the bigger picture - why does Vancouver has such a big drug problem? I have been to cities throughout the world, and the only place that compares (other than US ghetto's - where truthfully, I haven't visited) is Amsterdam. The problems in the US is caused by a whole different set of societal problems, which I don't want to get into in this forum.

Unless you went to these cities to study their drug problems and social policy I can't see how you can make these claims. Where is the evidence to back your position up? What cities are we talking about here? Are you a drug policy expert, or have you reached these conclusions based on a few business trips?

How can you make claims about US "ghettos" you haven't even visited? It doesn't bode well for your argument when you want to exclude the US from this discussion -- a country known for its strict drug laws. Could it be because the US experience contradicts what you're trying to tell us?

I have no problem with getting tougher on the big time dealers but the street level ones are usually addicts themselves, trying to feed their own habits.

"Social Programs" are not the problem here, unless you mean a lack of them (think treatment). I won't claim to be an expert but from my reading of things The War on Drugs has been a failure... that's verifiable.

Alcibaides - very clever!

I suppose we are addicted to wealth, and achieving more. However, it is silly to compare those who give to those who take.

The wealthiest people in society are often (though not all the time) the healthiest, most physically fit and among the happiest. They are generally living meaningful lives and most want to help those less fortunate. So, call them parasites if you want - however, they are doing something right!

The problem is that they are used to seeing efficient operation which deliver results. The programs in place are often administered ineffeciently and ineffectively (clearly).

This is very evident, and these people know it can be done better.

I don't know how to solve the drug problem, but I do know that what we are doing is not working. We tried heavy taxes in the 90's and it didn't work. Drug use escelated, poverty increased and now we have Meth.

I am merely commenting that I believe we have to make that life is painful as possible to spur change. Also, we have to demonstrate this pain to our youth.

Verso - fair enough - I have no direct evidence or support. My journeys are not evidence, and they are probably biased in the first place.

That being said, I don't think it takes an idiot to figure out we have a major drug problem. This CAN be supported by the highest drug related HIV infections and the 2nd highest property crime rate in NA - the massive number of car thefts and the sheer number of drug abusers.

While you may be right that I am no social scientist....please...

Did you mean Linda C. Sobell and Mark B. Sobell? It took me forever to find that reference. It also seems that their most controversial study was conducted at Patton State Hospital in San Bernardino, California, in 1970-1971, and therefore unlikely to be funded by Canadian taxpayers. (The team was working in Toronto between 1980 and 2000.) Their study was covered in Time March 15, 1971 Vol. 97 No. 11, but didn't make the cover.

I hate to stick up for Sam Sullivan, but maybe it's not so surprising he hadn't heard of the study described by Berner?

THANKS FOR CATCHING THIS. TO AVOID FURTHER CONFUSION, WE HAVE REMOVED THE ENTIRE REFERENCE TO THE SOBELLS. TYEE EDITOR.

While you may be right that I am no social scientist....please...

Where did I claim we don't have a drug problem here?

As usual maybelle/Capitalism, you are up to no good. This is your real mantra, stick to it:

Don't think you have much to teach anyone about addictive and irresponsible behavior.

Only on the Tyee can someone hate-monger the way Aliciades does, and get away with it, and get support! (Capitalists are hopeless. They are total losers...blah blah blah)
This person is not clever Verso, but prejudiced ,rude and ignorant. Unions are market capitalist and big/small/medium business is capitalist and anyone competing for a market share is capitalist. The errors that are wrapped in this hyperbole are too numerous to mention, it should suffice to say that hate-speak does not advance any cause except to garner more hate.
The happiest people are those that have more. That is part of being human, so since unions support a status quo inversion and want to control labour markets through typical capitalist means are they evil and losers?

Maybe we should all be part of the public sector and provide health care to a societty so that the pharma-giants can continue to profit with us from our prohibition. It seems obvious that our societty needs a better solution to the drug problem than expensive wars, useless laws and massive expensive public sector plans to provide the help that has become a part of this dysfunction.

Alciades lacks the intellect to provide a solution, and the rest of you that support him lack the intellect to see the hate and gaps because this is the Tyee, where hate is acceptable as long as it is pointed at the traditional enemy of the "Left". Our Left is a bunch of Lenninists that claim they are Marxists who have little positive or constructive to say about anything. Scratch the surface on this lot and you find a bunch of people adicted to the public purse and who spread hate against those that fill it for them. I sense self loathing, not intellectual discourse or social advancement.
The problem is more than 'to whom shall we direct our ire' it is that our political and therefore social system has been hijacked by lobbyists and therefore big pharam and oil etc.
How do we repair this?
It has little to do with capitalism per se, it is about politicians getting funds for re-election, big money. Most of our employment and tax revenue comes from medium and small businesses that hold no sway over election results and policy change. SO dump the hate-speak pseudo-Lefties, the problem is that we have allowed our societty to be run by companies that have no borders and no community.

DavidN
you didn't read Capitalism's posts then, did you?

And Capitalism isn't addicted to:
dividend tax credits; taxes on only 50% of capital gains; flow through royalty credits and depletion allowances; special deals for family trusts and minimal taxation of estates; tax breaks for companies being enticed into markets; forgiveable loans; subisidies and extensive write offs; and on and on and on?

And you claim you believe in competition?

Capitalism's dependence on corporate welfare and the myth that it is not addicted to rich food, BMWs and lies about the poor and the working class are the real problem in this society. Not the sorry state of the flotsam and jetsam washing on the shores of the DTES whom your buddy 'Capitalism' was so sympathetic about.

And I haven't even touched on the lie at the heart of the international banking and finance system which has become nothing more than a ponzi scheme to keep you parasites comfortable so you and your pawns in Victoria and Ottawa and Washington can continue to exploit the people in places where you and 'capitalism' wouldn't dare set your gucci clad feet.

This QUOTE is exactly the kind of medieval thinking that MACHIAVELLI would espouse and shake your hand ,calling you a real PRINCE.

That is why there are the HOMELESS and the ADDICTED on the streets,with their children.

To scare the rest of us SH!TLESS,HAVE ANY OF US LOOKED AT AN ADDICTED HOMELESS PERSON AND SAID,WOW ! I ENVY ,THAT LUCKY BASTARD !

NOT LIKELY!

I wonder sometimes about the VERACITY of the statements coming out of ANY politicians mouth even someone as compasionate as Sam Sullivan,after all he is a politician,NOW...

I also wonder whatis happening in the British Isles with the HEROIN MAINTAINANCE PROGRAM,Scotland was getting fabulous results from life long JUNKIES ,some of whom actually are back in the workforce with drug maintanance.

We have this system in us that thrives on chemicals and when we are in pain it delivers a painkiller and puts us in shock,MARVELLOUS CREATURES ARE WE NOT ?

We also use that system to deliver endorphins to our pleasure receptors,they have been doing this for ages in mice to study ADDICTION AND BEHAVIOUR MODIFICATION.

Some people get addicted to inflicting pain upon them selves and then having that drug/endorphin take them to that euphoric place/state that leaves everything else behind.

IT IS CALLED ESCAPISM,you do it watching television or listening to music or a million other things,some are legal escapes others are not,some are safe escapes ,some are deadly.

What you pick is part of the disease,the more you trigger the euphoric state,the less control you have.

HOW DID YOU GET THERE?Were you taught?Or did someone offer you a QUIK FIX ? WAS IT A DOCTOR OR A DEALER/PUSHER ?

READ,the other commentors on this or any other site and you will find out,WE MAY LOOK ALIKE,BUT WE ALL ACT/THINK DIFFERENTLY.

And that is the problem in our society,WE ARE ALL EXPECTED TO FIT THE MOLD,THE COOKIE CUTTER ,PIGEON HOLED ,DESCRIPTIONS ONLY THE SIMPLE MINDED CAN UNDERSTAND.

Because we all have to either smarten up or dumb down to get along with the rest of society and in doing that we lose a lot of players.

As an ex pyschiatric child care nurse trained in behavioural modification,i can tell you,holding a young teen that just commited suicide aint fun,feeling death rattle the body and the seeing the light behind the eyes extinguished because of some drug really puts a damper on everthing for both those left behind and the victim.

I LASTED 18 MONTHS IN THAT JOB ...all that education,all those high hopes,only to be dashed by the pathetic resources and the small minds of those in charge,that was 1972

THINGS HAVE NOT CHANGED AT ALL, IN 2006 YOU FIND THE SAME HURDLES

DavidN - these sample people accuse the right of fear-mongering. These are very negative and very frustrated people. All are clearly intelligent, but I presume most feel envious and very resentful of those who have accomplished a great deal in this society.

Quite frankly, I don't know what they are talking about half the time and most are out-to-lunch with their conspiracy theories. Some are very rational, left-leaning people, but then there are the likes of Alcabaides and Frank...

Alcibiades - you can post that quote all you want. I see nothing wrong with wanting to have some fun and blow off some steam every once in a while. I truly feel sorry for you, if you don't do so yourself. I am not necessarily taking about gambling or drinking - but binging in one form or another.

Further - Alcibaides - you are demonstrating your attitude of entitlement. Take from the rich and give to the poor. We don't live in an era of oppression. I agree that the wealthy should pay tax AND THEY DO!!!!

A guy making a million bucks a year is paying 400K in taxes. You are very ungreatful if you can't recognize the contributions of these individuals.

Haroldkann has good points.
I agree that we are trapped in our concepts.
Our societty is run by a pecious few wealthy, and increasingly global and non-domestic organizations and people. That does not help.
The pharmacutical companies do not profit from intervening in this teens life early and providing support, they and our doctors profits from selling the therapies. And the public sector benefits by having this person addicted to drugs so we can have wars on drugs, pay for huge police forces instead of mental health professionals, and social services that dysfunction along with this moronic dependency on drugs and prohibition are a mssive part of the problem...although they decry that they are socialist which they clearly are not.

The true capitalist believes that the cost benefit in not intervening early as a societty is obviously poor, however our system does not provide intervention and true health care because the motivation behind the political machine comes from big international businesses and massive public sector organizations that do not benefit from a healthy societty, they benefit from a predicatble addicted society.
That does not mean Capitalism is bad. It means our political system is not functioning properly. Many people that are involved in capitalism also have social(ist) tendencies and desires. Capitalism is used as Left-speak. Capitalism and socialism are not mutually exclusive, but if you take the ability away from people to be rewarded for excellence then you destroy economies, and then the health care professionals have no income. Few will work hard if the reward is to take the procedes and give it to people that would rather be idle.

I hurt myself today
to see if I still feel
I focus on the pain
the only thing that's real
the needle tears a hole
the old familiar sting
try to kill it all away
but I remember everything
what have I become?
my sweetest friend
everyone I know
goes away in the end

Trent Reznor

My cousin worked for revenue canada as an auditor and he would agree they should be paying hefty taxes,but through loopholes rarely pay anything and thats what made his job so interesting.

Doing an AUDIT on some millionaire and finding the dogfood for his chiuahua on the expenses as a guard dog for his business security.THIS WAS IN WINNEPEG...some guard dog.He also had his son's new alfa romeo written off as farm vehicle.NEEDLESS TO SAY,he did some time in CLUB FED,but he got away with some really awesome eye openers that even my cousin was unaware of because his lawyer hired an ex auditor to help get him off.

CORPORATE WELFARE,SMALL BUSINESS GRANTS,TAX EVASION...yes those people happily pay their taxes in the mind of a fool,hire a lawyer/auditor and he/she is paid for in one loophole after another.

Small wonder there is no money for social programs when politicians are handing out grants/subsidies/welfare to their friends.

BTC,you gotta stay away from that stuff,it's really addictive.

I know,i have been addicted to it all my life and need my daily fix at a high decibel level at times.AND IT'S A REAL BITCH...picking between Tom Waits and Mozart some times .

And listening to Johhny Cash's version of Hurt really puts me OUT THERE .

you`ve posted some powerful stuff here Harald..
powerful stuff.

Trueman...
"anyone who is addicted to a substance can assume that addiction has become part of his/her personality"
How do you define "personality"? If I walk a lot, do I have a walking personality? My eldest brother was similar to you in his unbelievable addiction to cigarettes...I never thought of him as a smoking personality.
"I think personality is a valid thing, otherwise we'd be susceptible to waking up in the morning not knowing whe we are, or, in fact, being someone else for the day or week"
This is saying that personality is the cause of our daily lives -I couldn't disagree more. Personality is a hypoithetical construct, nothing more than a labelling technique. It is extremely dangerous to use it as an explanation for behavior.
"I was seriously addicted. It was part of my personality." No, it was part of your everyday activities, nothing more, nothing less.

Mr Capitalism sez

You must be retarded. You are proposing the same approach as they have taken in the United States of Greed, but then you do call yourself a foul name (Capitalism). If you can honestly say that the tough approach, 3 strikes you're out etc has proven it's effectiveness south of the Border, you're dumber than rocks. Or maybe Mr. Capitalist you are an investor in a privatized prison company and trolling for more business. Go kiss Little Stevie "Wonder Bread" Harper's ass while he is kissing the ass on the Chimporer!

Since you don't like hate-mongering...provide the evidence for this.

rkewan - i won't result to personal insults, however will tell you that you are uninformed.

3 strikes you're out has greatly reduced crime rates. The issue is the cost and the fact the definition of serious crime. Opponents believe that the crimes classified as serious, are not indeed serious. Also, there have been cases of wrongful imprisonment.

rkewan - the US of A does many things wonderfully right, but many things wrong. We can learn from them in many ways. It can't be that bad of place when net migration between our countries is significantly in their favour.

Motivated Canadians are lining up in numbers to get good jobs in the US - I can assure you that the reverse is not true.

This is a PRIME EXAMPLE of my statement about people either having to SMARTEN UP or DUMB DOWN to be able to communicate in our society.

ANYONE,who has studied the human pysche,THE ID,THE EGO,THE SUPEREGO...knows,there is a spark inside every person that defines that person and to DUMB IT DOWN,FOR THE CONSUMERS EVERYWHERE...IT IS CALLED,YOUR PERSONALITY

if you want something,if you need something,if you absolutely NEED to have that...you are considered NEEDY.DUMBING IT DOWN,YOU ARE A NEEDY PERSON/PERSONALITY.

mental traits of a person

When you put this information to a reader and they cannot understand the subject at hand,it is no small wonder,THINGS NEVER CHANGE...

Because these people permeate society and you will never get through to them.

Capitalist, you are so super retarded, and you probably think you are intelligent, but that is just your stupidity that you hear.

I'm not surprised, you don't know shit!

You don't know shit, like I said.

What are you even talking about, the rich and the corporations have been shedding tax liability since the late seventies till now - we're to the point where all we can afford is bread and circuses for the rich like the Olympic party for the rich. Take away the "affirmative action for the privileged" that Rafe was talking about a couple weeks ago" and they wouldn't do very well. To be perfectly frank, if society continues in the direction it has been going the last few decades the poor, and fitter, will be EATING the rich before long. So bring the H & P with you, *******!

,
Is that an instestinal ailment?

Stupid, the Nazi's had meth, the US pilots that killed the Canadians in Afghanistan were taking the equivalent to meth, what's your point? Oh, right, I forgot, you're too stupid to have a point. I'm surprised you can remember how to breath, and wouldn't care if you forgot how.

Capitalist, don't pretend to be gracious, just reading your spew is insulting, in itself. 3 strikes and you're out, and any other US strategy to fight "crime" is not responsible for any reduction in crime rates in the US. You are correct that crime rates have come down(though watching the MSM news one would never think it is so), but the main reason for that is simple demographics, the baby boomer bulge is now past it's prime time for crime. Young males up to a certain age are most likely to engage in criminal behavior and today that segment of society is smaller. Some right-wing racist's also credit access to abortion for inner city women for lowering the crime rate. Even tho they are still Pro-Life, from the moment of conception to the moment of birth.

I say hooray, and the more Canadians who think the United States of Greed is the promised land and get to go there, the better for Canada. I am not uninformed about the US, having spent decades of my life there in highly varied parts of the country. I have family and friends there, but you would have to pay me a hell of a lot more than I could ever be worth to get me to live there by choice.

rkewan - i refuse to respond to your posts. you are clearly a misguided, angry, unhappy person.

you are one of those negative "energies" that people are better off distancing themselves from.

i saw too much anger, hate and jealousy in those rants. i shall never respond to your garbage again.

there wasn't even a point there but to call myself, americans, the rich and everybody else with any success names.

Capitalism, you don't have a problem with me, you have a problem with facts and reality.

If you don't understand what I mean, just because you say something doesn't make it so. The US plan on Crime and Drugs is a failure, all it does is enrich the privatized prison industry. The United States that you love so much has a higher proportion of it's citizens imprisoned than any country in the world, including China, Iran, Iraq under Saddam (of course more Iraqis are now in prison under US management). The richest country (how appropriate for the home of the greediest thieves) has worse health outcomes than Cuba, Cuba for Christ's sake, virtually a third world country thanks to US economic embargos put on because Cuba prefers not to be run by American gangsters. Give me a break Capitalist and spare me your pretend graciousness - but I am not offended by your hate and ignorance, I just find it sad.

The one common thread to most of these posts is that they are writen by those who have absolutely no first hand knowledge of addictions. This is also the problem as our politicians lack the personal knowledge or the willingness to talk to those who are actually addicts. Sam got in trouble for doing this earlier but he was on the right track. If we really want to help addicts we need more than twenty eight day "spin cycle" programs. Addictions are a life problem. Addicts can't live their lives without mood altering. Thus we need to teach them(Us) how to live and deal with our problems instead of running. Long term care programs are needed to detox addicts (it takes longer than 28 days!) and then teach them a new way of living and an understanding that their feelings will not kill them and they must be available when the addicts are ready or they don't go. Unfortunately, this cost money. This is why we must change our society so that we reduce the number of people who fall prey to addictions. In the long run this will be much cheaper as bandaid solutions only cost money and delay the enevitable. Natuarlly, the neocons will support jailing or even killing addicts since they see them as a waste of resourses but, this will never solve the problem as a new group of addicts will only pop up to replace those killed. (Personally I'd perfer that we kill the neocons so that we can get back to fixing society).
As far as the so called "war on drugs' this is mearly a propaganda tool as it could never work. How can a group who are rigidly controlled by laws and limited funds compete against organized crime who have no rules and unlimited funds. The structure of the upper drug trade are no different than those of a highly organized corporation. Computer controlled inventories and future projections of the number of addicts available to consume the product are light years ahead of the police. Like health Authorities,layers of people are placed between the dealers (usually addicts themselves) and those who run the opporation. The police arrest dealers and the occasional low level gang member but in the drug trade this is just a cost of doing business and the real criminals who are behind the huge profits place their profits in banks in the grand Caymon Islands just like our corupt C.E.O.'s who fraud the public. The war can not be won. Only through programs like those in Amsterdam can we cut the illeagal profits and remove the insentive to enter the drug trade. Until we recognize these truths we are only spinning our wheels and wasting tax dollars to make the politicians look like they are doing something. These are the truthes behind addiction as writen by a addict with six years clean and extensive knowledge of how the dope business runs and flourishes.

Realist, you've hit upon some really relevant points. You allude to the "upper" levels of the drug business, which most people prefer to ignore.

Why is opium production at record levels with the added value production of Heroin happening in Afghanistan now, when it was almost wiped out under the Taliban? Is that what Canadian soldiers want to fight for, profits for drug lords in suits?

What about Air America, the CIA front that flew weapons to the contras, and DID NOT return empty - guns down - coke up. Some of the establishment in the US of today made their fortunes during Prohibition (of alcohol) - today the people making the real money from the prohibition of drugs certainly don't live in the Downtown Eastside. Remember that the Raid on the Legislature was triggered by an investigation into organized crime and drugs, hmmmmm. Will we ever know much about this?

EVERYONE HAS A MONKEY ON THEIR BACK.

Comfort and a hot meal is the biggest,just look around and you will see the masses ensconced in their cocoons.

Haraldkann, your comments inspire me to share one of the most useful quotes I have ever run across: "stereotypes can assume a life of their own, rooted not in realilty but in the myth-making made necessary by our need to control our world." Sander L, Gilman
What we have come to call personality is indeed, "a totalilty of qualities and traits", "patterns of collective characteristics", and "mental traits"
We have grouped together qualities, traits and characteristics and come up with labels, which help us in everyday discourse, in a sense, to control our world. But to suggest a person is such and such because of his personality is circular reasoning at its best (or worse).
If you think that personality is a little spark inside you, you must believe you are born with a personality that unfolds as you develop. I happen to think this is utter nonsense.
Cheers

But as a recent article from Reason looking at heroin shows, addiction is not merely a matter of physical dependence. Physicians and addiction experts define addiction as compulsive use of a substance or activity despite on-going negative consequences. Physical dependence may be part of the problem, but it is neither necessary nor sufficient to define it.

The definition of addiction as compulsive use despite consequences developed as research made abundantly clear that physical withdrawal symptoms are not what keep addicts hooked. The psychological drive to get high has been found to be far more important. This is why cocaine is considered highly addictive even though addicts don't get physically ill when they stop taking it.

It's also why Mark Twain's line about quitting smoking has become a cliche: "Quitting is easy, I've done it a hundred times." The real problem is not getting through the initial withdrawal - it's not starting again later.

Furthermore, if physical dependence on a substance was all that were needed to define addiction, all humans would have to be labeled air, food, water and shelter addicts.

PUSHED THE WRONG BUTTON,SHOULD BE ATTACHED TO MY TOP COMMENT

We all have a DEPENDENCY ,of one form or another .

acknowledging our frailty ,is acknowledging that we all need BETTER EDUCATION in our life ,because better education leads to a better choices in our daily lives .

AND THERE ARE SCORES OF EX-ADDICTS DOING GOOD WORK OUT THERE.

Realist:

I agree and that is why I said I was no social scientist and qualified my opinion by saying so, and that I didn't know how to fix the problem.

I was blasted by some people, when I merely stated an opinion.

Well, greengreen, I think most scientists and researchers would agree that in order to define we must be able to make predictions. My consideration of my disgusting nicotine addiction, I think, can at least reasonably be said to meet the criteria for it being, at least temporarily, as I said, part of my "personality."

Anyone studying my behaviour could accurately predict that I was going to get up in the morning and, as a first priority, start searching for my cigarettes, and sucking a sufficient amount of nicotine and thousands of other poisons into my lungs and on their way to my brain to quell whatever unease that I couldn't seem to control without them.

Obviously this is no longer a part of my "personality". If it seems more reasonable for you to use the word, "behaviour", that's fine, too. We both agree that "behaviour" or "personality" can change.

But I think we're all just playing with semantics in this regard.

Well,the person inside you is made of the two people that spawned you...do you not have,your mommas eyes and your dads nose ? If you do ! YOU ALSO HAVE THEIR genetic makeup FOR MENTAL FUNCTION OR DYSFUNCTION.

YOU HAVE THE TRAITS OF ...THAT PERSON,THE GENETIC MAKEUP...GENETIC MARKERS

IT DOESN'T GET ANY SIMPLER .FUNCTION OR DYSFUNCTION...GENETIC SHIT OR GENETIC BENEFITS,FROM THAT PERSON/PERSONALITY...

but i would not expect YOU to understand,because as you have shown,YOU HAVE A DISPOSITION THAT IS ,I AM RIGHT,EVEN THOUGH THE DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS SAY I AM WRONG AND LOOKING AT THE SYNONYMS,IS JUST TOO LABORIOUS.

WOW! I can see why you would want to DISTANCE YOURSELF FROM THOSE THAT SPAWNED YOU...THOSE PERSONS/PERSONALITIES/THOSE GENETIC MARKERS,that decide who you are and how YOU function .

GEEZ,Mabellbc/Capitalism,I thought you were made of STURDIER STOCK

lighten up...

THE SAME SH!T ANY DISEMBLER/TROLL USES TO RUIN GOOD COMMUNICATION...

stupidity

Heraldkann, I still think it is mostly a matter of how we define the word, "personality."

Your definition of me as a "disembler/troll could as easily be used to define you as me.

After all I admitted that my understanding of he word, "personality" is probably arbitrary.

You seem to think yours is god-given, which puts you in line for the narcissistic personality disorder award.

http://www.stats.org/record.jsp?type=news&ID=456

This is the university site i took the quotes from ,it also deals with pain killer addiction which,for all purposes is really an area that has been studied as much as Heroin/illicit drugs.

ONLY,THE DRUG USAGE IS BETTER MONITORED AND THE RESULTS HAVE TO BE UTILIZED FOR LIABILITY PURPOSES,THEREBY MAKING THESE IMPORTANT IN ADDICTION DISCUSSIONS

NOT calling truman green a disembler...

greengreen...YES

as you said,SEMANTICS,but ,lets not go off on a tangent...

as greengreen wants to do

No, you were blasted for making some of the dumbest assertions I have ever had the misfortune of reading. This, for example...

...is possibly the stupidest statement ever. Please, Capitalist, show us the study where it has been "statistically proven" that "these people" can't and don't want to be helped?

The fact that someone could make such a statement might even be funny if it weren't so bleakly moronic.

So all the bickering aside, what's the solution for helping / dealing with addicts? Obviously what's happening now isn't working. For those addicts who do have families who care and are willing to do whatever it takes, what can be done to help the addicted person?

spedteacher
you`ll have to get her as far away from the "scene" as you can..with people who care. How you do that I don`t know...there should be treatment centres now with the huge number of users out there...Heroin itself is not that harmful..its the lifestyle that goes with it that kills...Crack Cocaine, Crystal Meth..thats another story.. these drugs can do damage..with the prevalence of these drugs All levels of Government are going to have to get serious about genuine caring treatment. We have Safe/treatment houses opening in Squamish and I presume elsewhere in other small towns.. getting your niece out of the city would go a long way..but she has to be willing. She has to break free of the circle that holds her captive. Look into " Out of Town resources"
http://www.lookoutsociety.bc.ca/

These people are good..you can trust them...they will put you onto what you need to help find her..and find a suitable way to proceed. Good Luck.

Hi Lynn
I don't quite understand what you meant by "Since you don't like hate-mongering...provide the evidence for this."
If you mean that I don't believe we have a true Left, I believe we do not...at least in meaningful numbers. Unionists call themselves Left when indeed they are market capitalists. If you intend to say I am a hate monger also, then I assume it is a crime to be critical?
I doubt that is what you meant.

I think socialism (the real Left) has stood for the liberation of working people from exploitation. The Leninist intelligentsia (some or most of the Public sector) have a different agenda. The true left would work to save the lower classes from this slavery toward a system that is itself enslaved to the political machine which is pimped by the major lobby groups, Pharacueticals being a biggy. When the Pseudo-Left rise up in Canada it is only for more money. That is what I meant.

DavidN
If you don't think there's a true left growing in this country you haven't been paying attention. You can't come in to dinner in the middle of the last course and have any idea about the whole experience. The left I'm talking about has nothing to do with money, believe me.

bob the cat,

Thank you very much. Sooner or later something will have to work. She is too good to lose.

I grew up in Squamish :-)

spedteacher
lotta good folks from Squamish - you did fine on the teacher's site by the way - kudos.

I pray things will work out.

spedteacher, I know well the situation you are in. So many variables, but I'd like to ask you why she won't keep in touch with you and alleviate some of YOUR suffering. A phone call is a pretty simple thing to do. And I know how much it would mean to you to at least know that she's okay.

As you know, spedteacher, sometimes things don't turn out well in these circumstances. If you google my name you can find a similar story. I wanted to help too, in fact more than anything else in my life, but nothing I did made any difference in the long run.

Yeah, took me years to develop that nefarious "technique"...

'Progressives' don't usually like what I have to say on the subject. I'm not a specialist in this area (and don't pretend to be), but I definitely have experienced the dark side of the club-drug phenomenon (obviously quite different from the whole DTES experience, which is why I lament the use of the DTES as a foil to obscure the problem of pervasive youth & "middle-class" drug use).

Nobody can get someone out of that hole unless they want to come out. Discarding or eroding those barriers that still do exist as some sort of experiment in Relativist Non-Judgmentalism is not the answer. The realisty is that some people are sometimes lost & beyond hope - and not just through drugs. The best that 'society' and service-providers can do is provide an ambient environment that makes the catalyst less accessible and which contains in-built stops when someone starts to go down that road. We've been ripping up all those stops by their roots for a long time now. Progressives are correct when they point to co-factors like employment opportunity, economics, race and class...but they're wrong to stop there. It goes much further. We've done something that has made it impossible for the individual to create an identity that is resistant to these traps, and we've placed the individual in an environment that does everything to encourage going down that road.

Service providers are just that - It's not incumbent on them to start tinkering with social norms at the policy level. They are there to provide the leg-up once users have made the radical decision to change themselves. They are not there to "show the way" to an enlightened society, as they seem to think - they're not qualified to do that.

Turning society into an open drug-zone filled with touchy-feely enablers from an ever-expanding social welfare sector is not the answer. Apologies for the non-academic language, but we're spent the last thirty years trying to loosen society's collective ******* - now it's time to start tightening that sphincter up again.

Lest the point be lost, that finally line should have read something like:

"Apologies for the non-academic language, but we've spent the last thirty years trying to loosen society's collective a**hole - now it's time to start tightening that sphincter up again."

reuben:

that quote may have been a bit dramatized, but stop being ridiculous. It is a known fact that over 90% of drug addicts relapse despite enormous resources made available to them. This is what I meant by they can't be helped. In fact, most go through rehab several times and are back on the streets. Less than 1 in 10 who originally enter rehab stay clean for life.

the remainder don't even seek treatment in the first place.

i can't find the time to track down a source, but we should all know this is common fact.

now - that is not to say we shouldn't do anything altogether, we should. i think we should focus our efforts on prevention as opposed to pampering.

According to you, dumb****, everything you spew is a "common fact" and you can't find the time to track down a source, because you don't need to. You know everything already, or think you do. That's why you think I'm insulting you. I'm just pointing out the fact that you know virtually nothing and merely spew stereotypes and ill (or not) thought out mispelled words set in a context of horrible grammar, both of which are an accurate relection of your confused illogical barely functioning brain, or maybe that overstates the case and I should say swollen node at the top of your spinal column.

Like I said rkewen - you are a miserable man. I feel sorry for your wife, although something tells me you don't have one. I feel sorry for your siblings or friends, although something tells me they don't like you.

I am sure it is a miserable household you live in given the anger of your words. In fact, reading them almost gets me angry, but anger is the least productive emotion of them all.

My mispelled words are poor grammar are a reflection of my dyslexia, which has not hindered me in anyway - other than a few college essays and a few meaningless posts on this forum.

nightbloom
I never quite know what kind of critical analysis you're inviting in your posts. Suffice to say that you're 'mixing' your metaphors this morning. Again though, you still refuse to engage. I think you have something interesting to say about the way young people could begin to participate more intelligently in the action of their own lives - something positive. I can't understand why you're so unwilling to go the extra mile and actually spit it out. You're obviously closer to that scene than many of us; why not stop being an academic and write what's actually on your mind.

Obviously, you have some serious questions about what’s gone on in the past 30 years – a period that more or less coincides with the disintegration of the nuclear family as a normative value in this culture. I do too.

You suggest a process of tightening up is necessary – is this to come from some new agency or will it be imposed through some existing group? I need to be convinced that the kind of thing you’re talking about isn’t just a further reliance on the technical means, the worship of which I’d say had an awful lot to do with getting us to the place we are now: Police, armies, guns and jails.

We sure can’t rely on family values to get us out of this mess around drugs and self-destructive behavior. Isn’t it at least possible that the fundamental capitalistic and materialist values of the elites that have gotten us to buy into the ponzi scheme of a constantly expanding economy and the myth of rising water lifting all boats is the real problem? Those kinds of pressures have become, I’d suggest, far more destructively normative than anything else in North American society. No wonder kids lie down and give up. Those values are the problem, in my opinion. Tightening the screws in some misguided form of ‘enforcement’ could be the worst possible solution without some real changes in the way we look at the world.

I'm not sure what you're getting at. I've been very outspoken on this issue within my community and on these threads (the latter to the point that I suspect it's become tiresome for some of the other readers). Outspokeness on the drug-issue by a lone citizen within a minority community that is saturated with drugs (and where the distribution network is pervasive in gay social space) is liability enough for one person caught within such an incestuous fishbowl (not diss'ing my community here - just telling it like it is). Anyone who has followed these threads and has also paid attention to how this issue has unfolded in the gay community over the past four years will know exactly who I am. I've put my money where my mouth is, and have made lots of enemies and few allies doing it.

The problem is threefold: the availability of the drugs themselves; the ambient culture with relativizes and normalizes their chronic usage; the treatment and enforcement apparati which have inadvertly become intregrated into the self-justifying profit-sharing cycle through both legitimate and illegitimate means, and which have been swayed by enabling ideologies. One illustration of the latter point is the reaction of the AIDS groups to the meth/hiv problem - they're tripping over themselves trying to mine the issue for the potential windfall in government grant-money that it represents to them, but in doing so they're deliberately deflecting criticism away from the North American gay drug-circuit and the means by which it is promoted, protected and reinforced by municipal policy and profit-sharing law enforcement. It's a local issue that's become continental. Don't just look at Vancouver - the AIDS groups from NYC, Miami, T.O., Montreal have all adopted the same line. $Protect Our Drugs$.

I'm not arguing for the "drug war" - there has never been a drug war in Canada in the American sense of the word. People who use "drug war" in the Canadian context have another agenda quite apart from the objective facts. Drug laws haven't been effectively enforced for about 15 years (only the most visible users flouting the system have been targeted; only the club-networks who get totally out of hand have been targeted).

Even the most mild wrist-slappings by law enforcement within my community have brought veritable howls of protest from the gay press, the drug-outreach service-providers, community leaders, and ideologically mobilized citizens. We act as though drug-use should be a protected sub-culture in itself, like it was a whole new minority that should be inducted into the Charter of Rights.

As for the DTES - that's a nasty machine that serves to institutionalize the problem in concentrated form. It should be dispersed.

spedteacher,regardless of how you feel,it is her decision and only her decision that will free her from her hell.

As others have pointed out,some you lose,some you dont.ONLY,THE ADDICT CAN MAKE THE DECISION TO QUIT AND CLEAN UP.

you WILL NOTE,that i mention that TWICE,some are hard of hearing when it comes to FAMILY.
In my family right now ,we are trying to help a life long friend who for the last decade has been a very nasty CRACKHEAD.Had you known this man in the time he was a QUIET,KOOL,CALM,COLLECTED AND SUCCESSFUL MAN,you would never know him on the street.He bounces from drugs to rehab,like a YOYO...
Even though the rest of his family and my family,and he was my brothers lifelong best friend,have given up,i still hold hope.EVEN WITH MY EXPERIENCE,I HOLD HOPE FOR THIS PERSON.

So .if you want to go through hell and back the rest of your life,PREPARE YOURSELF,then again,MIRACLES DO HAPPEN...

keep the faith,you will need it

nightbloom
Given the disastrous consequences of the drug war in the US, I'm pleased you're not suggesting that alternative. With your traditional affection for discipline and the military, I’m never sure what you’re talking about when you mention ‘tightening’ up.

Surely there are other alternatives between that (the US option) and this:

Somehow or other those kids that Alcibiades observed you saying were 'protesting' by pretending they were dead have to be convinced to get up and start looking after themselves and their own future. And not just within your ‘community’, surely.

Trueman, I wish we were just playing with semantics. However, I think the terms we use lead us on in our thinking and we need to be very careful about these terms. (to clarify this point, I would suggest that training and educating are not synonymous, and the very terms lead to different ways of passing along skills, information etc.)
I look at personality - introvert, extrovert, sociable, outgoing, etc.- as labels for sets of behaviors. It is not something we are born with nor is it the cause of our behavior. I don't think people "have a personality" which causes them to behave in certain ways. They behave in certain ways according to their own personal logic, their way of seeing the world. When such behavior is out of the norm, we may conclude the person has a personality disorder as if there is something wrong with that little personality thing inside him/her.
I guess I am just trying to say we better be very careful when linking addictions(how this all started) with personality, without questioning our understanding of this term. We could be led down some very unproductive trails with absolutely no better understanding or assistance for those suffering from addictions.

Haraldkann, okay, you think personality, like eye-color is genetic. Do you have some proof of this? Do you believe that values and attitudes are also inherited?
I see your need to stereotype me as a "disembler" Now you don't have to think about what I am trying to say. I must repeat, "Stereotypes can assume a life of their own, rooted not iln reality, but in the myth-making made necessary by our need to control our world"
By labelling me, you are controlling your world and shutting out some opportunities to see things in a different light. This is not becasue of your personality, just a survival technique that we all use to deal with information overload.
As for me ruining good communication, I would suggest that your comments of 22 hours ago do not even make any sense, capitalized or not.
Cheers

I dunno, greengreen. You write that training and education are not synonymous. I think one could make a fairly decent case that they are. And as far as your point that personality is not something that we are born with, well I've given this issue huge consideration, (who hasn't?) and, at least concerning myself, I think I was born exactly as I am now. (Afterall, what better research subject, eh)

In fact, I think it is mind-boggling how firmly entrenched the personality of each human being is. Maybe some are not as entrenched as others. Mine is. Yours seems to be. (You REALLY want to win this argument, dontcha? See what I mean?)

I bet I could pick out Nightbloom's stuff--and Alcibiades', and certainly G. West's, although now that he's invited a certain poster for a nose punching and called another an "idiot", I'm not totally secure in making this claim. When I lost it and called him "stupid" one of the editors came on and took up for him and offered me mild redirection.

See what I mean? I can't stop trying to be clever and funny. That's me; it's my personality, eh.

Thanks, by the way, for insisting on adding that "e" to my first name. I can't deny that it's quite complimentary, and encourages a certain "a priori" assumption regarding the veracity of my opinions.

heraldkann, while I agree almost exclusively with you, you write that spedteacher's cousin is living in her own "hell"--and it would appear that way. But as reality may have it, it is also possible that she's living an incredible adventure and indeed the only life that she knows how to live. I have this litle mantra that, at any given moment, we are all doing the very best we can.

You have difficulty understanding the plain english of the definitions i linked...it says nothing of values and attitudes,or of any other learned responses.

So,me,calling you a troll and disembler is fairly obvious that i am not STEREOTYPING you.

just telling it like it is

geez truman , i hope there are no life coaches here,they will always tell you,you can do better...now here is my bill for counselling you and have a super good day !

Um, I think that Sullivan comes off pretty well in this interview. Berner is trying to get him to agree to have more treatment, and Sullivan is politely dancing with him, but not agreeing that every "addict" needs "treatment."

We would all like every addict to have a good life, whatever that means to each of us. But it's far from clear that every addict needs to be rescued. If your hair has caught on fire, that's an obvious disaster that requires rescue. If you've been caught doing a burglary, that's an obvious criminal act that requires sanction.

Taking a proscribed chemical has elements of both, without being clearly disaster or criminal act. It is more like slow suicide.

Suicidal people should certainly be offered services, support, understanding, and medicine when requested.

But if the suicide is determined to do it, then society does not and cannot really get in the way.

I dunno. Is that too simple?

Hey Truman,
been away all day - nice to know you got me all figured out dude!

Anyway, I'm curious and I know this is waaaay off topic, but just where and when did 'this' take place?
I missed it.

Not the stupid part, which doesn't particularly bother me, but the redirection - must have been sleeping!

Truman,

I have no idea why my cousin doesn't call. The girl I knew before she went to live on the streets (and even in the beginning before the crack) would have never done such a cruel thing. The Drug and Alcohol Counsellor where I live told me that developmentally she would be stuck at the age that she was when she started using drugs. Maybe she's so selfish and self-absorbed now that she doesn't think of us. Maybe she's so consumed with the thought of that next high that we don't even cross her mind. I've told her countless times that she can call me collect no matter what time of the day or night. Everytime she disappears for a long time like this, I think she's dead. She used to always appear at every school holiday, knowing that I would be in Vancouver then. We knew that she had hit bottom when she stopped doing that.

Even when she came home for two weeks last summer, I kept reminding myself that this might not be "the time". The fact that she didn't seem to mourn the loss of her mother was a huge indication to me. But I have already asked for help from the police to look for her so that when I go down there this summer she might just show up. I will find some big strong man to walk around Central Park with me lol. I won't ever give up. I just wish I could find a long-term treatment somewhere that I could afford. I want her to at least have a chance.

If some of the people on here spent more time trying to think of constructive solutions to this problem and less time bickering, I bet some really good ideas would be given. I try to do my part where I live. I've offered to talk to teenagers at the high school and community groups about what my cousin and my family are going through. If only one person hears the story and uses it as an example of "what not to do" at least it won't all be a waste.

DavidN, I wasn't ignoring you, my first comment was too long and rejected so I lost it...this is my second try later in the day...

.

... "against those that fill it for them?" We fill it for ourselves, through our skills, education and hard work. Though the opposite assumption is an often used ploy to conveniently discredit the Left...while denying the piracy of corporate welfare.

It seems those most addicted to the public purse are really those like big Pharma and its capitalist friends... those just pretending to manage the public purse for us, all the while they are craftily stealing its precious contents for themselves instead....where would they and their P3's be without the help of the public purse?

It may be true that some unions have sold part of their soul for monetary gain but this must be seen in light of these end days of capitalism as well... and the ugly face of its latest mutation. Principles are sometimes lost when one is just trying to survive... and live another day. Nonetheless I wish union leadership would have stood stronger in defence of workers' rights over their often collusionary dance with business....

Arrrgh...refuse those signing bonuses, dismount from the ubiquitious Merry-Go-Round-Tables, they are all a means of delay and distraction, anyway... and refuse to participate in the neo-con subterfuge. Stop the civil tone.

Just as we see the new rules in the Legislature demand a more civil and nice...more parliamentary means of address. Well.. who does that benefit, I wonder? What clever schemes can be hidden behind all that nicely polite facade?

Expose them as the sham they are.... But then that would take real leadership.

Same goes for Mr. Capitalism here, who hides when the going get tough behind a pretend veneer of gentility, the modus operandi of all bullies when they are losing the fight...or the argument... of which Capitalism/Vegas Man has one...argument that is..."that business should feel no pain"... and must be soothed..at all costs. If you read his comments he calls for more and more cuts with a cavalier coldness that has absolutely no compassion for those who will feel the depth of those cuts against an all too human skin.

And Vegas Man knows who benefits from the cuts... and whose skin will be ultimately saved.

He wears a pretend velvet glove that hides a pair of cruelly sharp scissors.

And I agree, DavidN that a pseudo-left exists...that is nervously torn between its two lovers. But the broken promises and the disappointments of this precarious affair are already taking its toll. And these sleeping beauties will awake...

Meanwhile the true left has remained so, and to mix fairy tales, has always known that the golden coach was just a mere pumpkin...and a rotten to the core one as well....guess that's why we've never really cared if the crass slipper fit ot not.

G. West. About a week ago in the Rafe Mair confession thread I said, "G. West, I'm so familiar with your fawning gullibility that I could have written your piece for you, and was waiting for you to show up. In fact,'I've concocted a word for your particular brand of childish obsequiousness: 'G. Westism'"

To which a "dgb" came on and said, "...P.S. to Truman. Excellent point in using one's real name. It should be considered as a rule for posting. I would settle for initials... Your view of Mr. Gilbert is blurred vision at best. A more candid, to the point individual does not emerge from the crowd very often...You might even benefit from meeting him."

Now I thought that "dgb" was editor, David Beers. Maybe it wasn't, in which case I owe him an apology. Maybe my error, if such it should prove to be, highlights the need for real names to be used. Perhaps Mr. Beers will clarify.

I called you "stupid" for not seeing the point about my long list of conditions that could set off a false positive reaction to so-called Hiv-specific antigens, and I think my reaction compares favourably to your invitation to a nose punching and referring to another poster as an idiot.

Yeah, but spedteacher, noone wants to give you advice, not even me,in spite of the fact that I've "been there." It's a terrifying place to be, waiting for one of several different scenarios to take place. It's your call. There's no easy answers.

David N

Actually not true. At least in the sense you seem to mean. In a worldwide survey results showed that the happiest people in the world are actually the inhabitants of a small group of islands in, I think, the South Pacific. They live a hand to mouth existence and have an annual personal income of less than $500(US).

This information, and the results for a wide variety of other nations - along with their relative income levels, was all presented in Atlantic Monthly sometime in the last couple of years. I'm sure there are resources on the web available to confirm this.

Truman
Thx for that, I'll check it out! I was busy typing the above whilst you were posting your response to my query or I'd have acknowledged you first and done this 'happiness' bit later.
I'm off for the evening. I suppose it could have been beers - on the other hand, other times I've seen him post using 'David Beers'. Hmmm. Thanks again.

Truman, You may be clever and funny., which I can discern from your comments. I just don't see any need to say it has anything to do with your "personality".
Likewise, I would not suggest that my persistence on this point has anything to do with my "entrenched personality". Actually, this is the first time that I haver ever added more than a single entry on any topic on Tyee. Not very persistent, usually.
It is so difficult to get a point across, for any of us, but with each of our comments I get closer to what I want to say. So I thank you for that. I have no need to convince you.
Personality is a hypothetical construct. Amen.

Haraldkann,
So, values and attitudes are learned responses. Personality, which we deduce from one's values, attitudes and behaviors, is geneticallly determined, kind of like skin color.
Okie dokie.

greengreen if trying to be clever and funny isn't part of my personality, then what is? I'm totally at a loss to comprehend your reasoning.

say's it all,egoistic,simplistic,condescending and really lacking in any understanding of genetics and the human psyche.

You are the kind of hard willed person that people like to keep out of their lives,but some how slither in to cause irritation .
Your language is a thin facade hiding a bad education .

[/B]Irritate some one else[B]

Truman,

I'm not asking for advice about my cousin's situation. But thank you. I was looking more at the bigger picture though. I thought that there would be some good dialogue about solutions to the problem (or ways to deal with it) as opposed to the hurling of insults at one another. Silly me.

I would say they are outward, observable behaviors, based on some decision making you did somewhere along the way. I'll bet these "traits" have served you well, and thus they have come to be fairly prominent in your everyday life. (to fit in, to be popular, to be fun to be around- all good stuff). Thus, your friends would say you are a clever, funny guy.
I guess it boils down to how one defines personality. If it simply means how you are, well, okay (he has a sunny disposition/he has a sunny personality -same thing? I can live with that.
That is 180 degrees away from defining personality as an innate part of us which causes us to behave in certain ways.
Another idea...I think there is a difference between saying, " person with addictions" rather than saying, "addictive personality".
Finally,(haha), it may come down to the idea of "personality" being a hypothetical construct. Here is another one, thanks to Michael Parenti
"The economy itself is not a neutral entity. Strictly speakling, there is no such thing as "the economy". Nobody has ever seen or touched the economy. What we see are people engaged in the exchange of values, in productive and not such productive labor, and we give an overarching name to all these activities, calling them "the economy", a hypothetical construct imposed on observable actualities. We then often treat our abstractions as reified entities, as self-generating forces of their own....the economy becomes an embodied entity unto itself, as in statements like, "The economy is in a slump" and "the economy is reviving"

"

greengreen, I assume you understand, then, that by your definition anything can be called a "hypothetical construct", including a "hypothetical construct."

And if enough people agree to refer to a piece of furniture around which we sit and upon which we place dishes, utensils and food on platters as a "chair" then that piece of furniture will become a chair--a "hypothetical construct".

"I guess it boils down to how one defines a personality" you say. Are you absolutely sure that this is not the basis of my entire argument?--especially when I said to heraldkann: "Heraldkann, I still think it's mostly a matter of how we define "personality".

Is it entirely narcissistic of me to claim victory in this debate, "seeing as how" you've agreed to recommend my definition as the best resolution of the issue?

To wit: how we define "personality".

Gee, I think everyone else has tuned us out!!!!
I don't think your thoughts re hypothetical construct are accurate, ie, they don't reflect the meaning of this concept. There is such a thing as a chair, or a table, and regardless what we call it, it is there to be seen, felt etc. The same cannot be said for personality. Perhaps I can say, personality is a descriptor, not a noun. It does not exist as an entity.
Some would say, personality is what personality tests measure. Helpful, eh!
Having taken such a test, I remember it as a useful tool to become aware of labels that could be attached to me becasue of how I answered the questions. I came out concrete-sequential rather than random-abstract. This is not determined by my personality - these are just descripters. (by the way, it is totally accurate!). Being aware of this, I can choose to continue being this way, or modify my behaviors (I know how painful it is to be around people who go to the extremes in this continuum).
Actually, through all this, I don't know what your definition of personality is.
If you believe that it is an inborn quality that causes our behavior, we have a real difference of opinion. (Generalizing here)-I don't think the East Vancouver crowd is made up of people with addictive personalities. If it is, I sure don't have any idea how to help or how to prevent others from ending up there. How do you fix a broken personality? Any of us could end up there given the right mix of tragedies, bad decisions, bad luck etc. I am not there because of my fully-functioning personality. I refuse to believe that how we end up is due to a force within us called "personality"
Does all this matter? Yes, because what we believe will determine how we approach the problem. Again, how do you fix a person with a broken personality? Fines? Jail? Blame? Drugs? Counselling?
Nothing at all? I think seeing it as " a person with addictions" leads to different actions than the term, "addictive personality"
One last idea popped into the noggin...over the last couple of years, I have attained a bit of an addiction to coffee. For 50 years+ I never touched the stuff. I know there are at least two factors involved here: the comadrie of the coffee shop(I'm new here) and CAFFEINE.
It has absolutely nothing to do with my"personality" and I would not claim to have an "addictive personality" (cop out). Caffeine is the culprit, and if it becomes a problem, I will decide to quit coffee, period.
By the way, what is your personality...whatever your answer, you are just giving me descripters of your behaviors: smoker, clever, funny.
Good night!

Yes, "tightening up" is rather vague, and can be interpreted according to virtually every preconception that exists on this issue.

Let me give an example. A social worker friend of mine has been assigned to a particularly problematic high school in Ontario. This high school is known for being resistant to "outsiders" coming in and trying to help. My friend counsels the students on a variety of issues, but drugs are a biggie, and there are few countervailing forces to stop that spiral. The school is occupied territory. Case in point: after a session with a drug-using teenage girl, my friend observed as she returned to her guidance counsellor for her absence permission slip. The cousellor had a buddy-buddy attitude and added 10 extra minutes to her allowance, winking and saying with fake/teasing exasperation "I know what YOU'RE going to do with the extra time!" The teenage girl got the signal and went out to the smoking area to get high again. Some buddy. My friend says there are many similar examples in that high school, which he has begun to diarize, and he intends to take action on this.

This is an excellent example of an attitude that is pervasive. That guidance counsellor shouldn't be trying to be her "buddy", but that's how we now conceive of effective adult leadership & parenting. No hierarchy. No Big Bad Dad with his father's "NO" that is so anathema today. The cousellor was acting as a sibling rather than "the father". Our systems of self-restraint and self-control have been eroded by what Robert Bly has called "The Sibling Society" - an unhealthy product of stunted and underdeveloped identities and roles.

This is just one facet of the problem, of course, and doesn't really address the DTES - I'm thinking more of the school system and youth/middle class drug use.

Well nightbloom,i don't see any difference between some junkie looking for escape than some butthole surfer.

Just a little while ago,homosexuals were considered perverse creatures,sick people ,like junkies.

never takes long for the outsiders let inside to start flinging mud at other outsiders

G. West. I bet you're just as curious as I am to know if your defender, "dgb" is indeed David Beers. Maybe he'll let us know.

heraldkann, your first sentence seems a bit unnecessary, but I think your second two make a good point, though.

the censors have stepped in

Truman you are so wrong. Ask any addict in recovery such as myself if it is cruel to withhold heroin from a junkie, that is the poison that is killing them.
Norman Stamper who sounds like a hero to you is the biggets nu job to ever speak up on the subject. He's the guy that wants to give crystal meth to addicts. I've detoxed crystal meth addicts in my house and anyone who would even suggest giving them the drug is very misguided at best.
Truman you sound like a doctor because most have become mouthpieces for the big publicly traded drug companies. Imagine legalized drugs and the revenue stream created by legal drugs for all addicts. Major stock market players like George Soros are funding all kinds of initiatives to leaglize drugs and doctors are like puppets.
As for Sam S. he admits he did something stupid and broke his neck but he didn't become a victim like many do after such a tragedy, he he fought and soldiered on and become a survivor.
Sam is right when he says addicts are in a similar situation, they did something stupid and became victims. But he is dead wrong if he thinks they can't overcome there disablity. I know thousands that have.
Sam was fortunate that the medical system was in place to help him. The same can't be said for those who want to confront there addictions in a timely fashion.
Most are put on long wait lists and denied the same opportunity Sam had because the city wants to spend the bulk of their allotted monies on "harm reduction", which everybody knows prolongs addiction and diverts funds from services to those who really want to change.
I am so Grateful none of this harm extension...whoops I mean reduction stuff wasn't in place when I cleaned up after 27 years of heroin addiction or I wouldn't have gottn sick of the daily grind to get drugs which instilled a desire in me to seek change.

Barryjo, I didn't say anything about giving meth to crystal meth addicts. I don't know much about meth. I'm saying that there are people who can be identified who are never going to stop using the painkiller, heroin, and are going to suffer mostly from the horrow show of criminalization. For them, at least, I think it is cruel to withhold the stuff. And I offered my experience as a nicotine addict to support my opinion that I merely picked the legal drug with which to become addicted.

I'm certainly not suggesting that anyone give any drugs to anyone, except under a regulated prescription-centred program--after decriminalization.

I'm glad you were able to change your life. Many are not so fortunate. If I have learned anything in life, though, it's not to extrapolate from the individual to the general. You should google, "prosecutor's fallacy" sometime--and the Sally Clark case to see how easy it is to use a single experience as evidence for anything without being sure of all the factors that may account for the, in your case for example, success of a single theory of causation. In fact, I've invented a new phrase, "acausal concurrence" to describe such a situation. I think it might be used to describe your enthusiasm in using your own life experience as a cautionary tale.

heraldkann - Your crude post above only illustrates one of the points I was making - (about how some "progressives" seem to see drug-usage as simply another permutation of modern identity & lifestyle - as if users are really just another minority for inclusion in the Chart of Rights). That is relativist and highly destructive Nonsense, imho.

You seem to be implying that blacks, gays, women, etc. should be bound by some sort of bizarre inter-minority loyalty to drug-users and drug-culture. I've encountered this variety of insinuation on these thread before: you're saying that being a "real" gay necessitates that I tow your party line on the issue. The Left is particularly patronizing to gay men who dissent, and this is a clear example. Lemme ask you: how much thought did you really put into that post...?

Truman,
I was just noting Norman Stamper who you quoted as thinking like you in regrad to heroin distribution is in favour of giving all drugs including crystal meth to addicts.
I don't in any way extrapolate from the individual to the general. In my life I am surrounded by hundreds of recovering addicts.
Heres the deal, you say "some people might be identified who are never going to stop using".
I say most of then could stop if they choose to. Should we as a society pay for the drugs for those who "choose" not quit. After all for most addicts it becomes a choice. To give them free drugs limits there chances of hitting a bottom that is nessecary for change. We need high quality, full spectrum treatment and it isn't available. It takes years for the addict to get as messed up as they are and one to three months does little or nothing to reverse the effects of an addiction lifestyle.
This isn't just my take on things, I know people from all walks of life that are in recovery, including some physicians and they agree that harm reduction is a waste of time and money.
Actually, I believe in very limited harm reduction for those who aren't capable of staying clean but for most addiction shouldn't be tolerated or enabled as they can quit, they are choosing to be a drain on society.

nightbloom asks

Like all my posts,a lot of thought,i construct my statements so that as much information can be conveyed in as small a post as possible.

MY TYPING IS HUNT AND PECK...

So ,i like being as succint as possible.Is it vulgar to suggest that sticking a needle in
your arm or any where else is any different than anal sex or sex period,when it comes to getting your daily ration of endorphins to titilate the pleasure receptors ?

What,i pointed out was that HOMOSEXUALS,a minority in our society,were not all that long ago,looked at with the same jaundiced eye as the junkies/addicts,both considered PERVERSE,UNNATURAL,ETC.

You/the homosexual community,were on the outside of SOCIETY,looking in,with the other OUTCASTS.

Now,on the inside,i see you/the homosexual community,flinging more mud at the OUTCASTS,than offering real solutions.And i do know a lot of the homosexual community do offer alternatives,but i never hear about the out come of those programs.

So ,you see,it was not as off the cuff as you think my comments might be.

I have too much respect for your position/ideals ,to just piss in your general direction,as Monty Python quipped .

Barryjo, I didn't say anything about FREE drugs. I just meant decriminalize the addict and the drugs; build models of prescription and availability and let the addicts pay for their own drugs or belong to a health plan--and get the hell to work like all the rest of us. (Well I used to work, anyway, eh) I think the best treatment, not only for the addict, but for all of us is normalization not criminalization. I think a lot of activists went for harm reduction because with all the "anti-permissives" (read nightbloom, et al, and you, Barryjo) around, they knew that decriminalization, and especially legalization wasn't going to happen anytime soon--and especially now with this new conservative government in power.

Who are we trying to kid? We're all a bunch of drug addicts. I was addicted to nicotine for thirty years. I never quit nicotine; it quit me. My addiction got so bad I was hurting my lungs every time I did a big inhalation. I know a guy who's had a stroke and is now back chain-smoking. THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HEROIN ADDICTION AND NICOTINE ADDICTION. Some people, like yourself, will quit and some never will. I hate smoking now, but if I could have continued past the pains in my chest I'd probably still be smoking today.

And I think this is analogous to heroin addiction, only without the cops and dealers and "tough" love, which usually means stop using and you can come home and be a member of the family again.

Enforcement...yeah right. The Vancouver Cops created the horrow show in the downtown eastside by thinking the place was their personal Belgium Congo--a la Liepold the 2nd.
Take a look at their abuse record--and mostly of addicts and down and outs during the eighties and nineties. That's why I said, only half joking, that the best harm reduction would be to get in the RCMP (or the army) and ban the Vancouver Police Force from the downtown eastside.

Some years ago I attended a demonstration on the steps of the Police station, protesting the cops' bullying of street people and addicts. Although, it appeared briefly on tv news, I firmly believe that it wasn't even mentioned in the CanWest papers.

Did you know about that demonstration, Barryjo?

Truman,
I know you didn't say free dope but the reality is most addicts won't work. Self centeredness is the core of the disease and they will expect welfare to pay for it. Legal or not they would rather steal than pay for it.
The problem with normalization is the effect it has on childrens perceptions. It's no coincidence that alcohol and tobacco are the most widely used drugs, there perception has been normalized by being legal.
My research shows that EVERY case in recorded history where a certain drug was legalized addiction rates rose dramatically. Whern the British forced China to legalize Opium in the 1850's addiction rates skyrocketed and in ten years an estimated half the population was addicted to Opium. There are many, many more instances.
I don't recall the demonstration, it should be noted that Norman Stamper who you quote is an ex cop and by all accounts was brutal in his interactions with those less fortunate.

I'm not dgb

- David Beers

In the article Sam S. states" addicts have a disablity like me".
While true, the difference is Sam can't walk no matter how hard he tries, most addicts can make positive personal changes if they choose to.

G, West, I sure blew it on dgb. My apologies to David Beers. I think when dgb said, "I'd accept" something or other it was the tipping point to thinking it was Mr. Beers. But, actually I feel pretty stupid about now.

Barryjo. I was an addict (nicotine). I worked! Many people with many disabilities work. Do you have some research regarding opiate-addicted people that none of them are secretly and quietly holding down jobs? I'd love to see it!

When you say, "Most addicts can make positive personal changes if they want to" doesn't that kind of diminish your argument that most addicts would prefer for the welfare to pay for it and that they'd rather steal for the money to get drugs?

Large-scale decriminalization would alter the entire situation and also ruin the illegal drug culture. I think we're all sick of it and I think society owes it to itself to change directions away from the war on drugs. Everyone knows it's not working. The devestating effect it's had on the black community in the US is probably the worst. 12 percent of black men between approximately 20 and 30 are now in prison, most for drug offences.

Admittedly, all of the arguments I am making have been made before and to little effect, as the whole society seems determined to remain addicted to the criminality of certain drugs deemed as illicit and all the stake holders in the enforcement, treatment and illegal marketing industries are safely entrenched.

Even if the medical model of causality is accepted, there will never be less than a slight possibility of "treating" an "illegal" behaviour. You can't treat people with medical problems as though they're criminals. Well, you can but it will never work. Even if the City of Vancouver decides to do everything possible to get new treatment centres going, society will never support the kinds of funding necessary to make more than a small difference as long as addicts are considered to be criminals.

Barryjo, you say, "In my life I'm surrounded by hundreds of recovering addicts."

Damn, you have a low opinion of the people you work with--paraphrasing you: most addicts would rather get the welfare to pay for their drugs or steal.

You can't just say "it is an excuse for bad behaviour." - IAMC. People who use drugs need our compassion, not our disdain.

People who work with the homeless estimate anywhere from a third to half of those living on the street are mentally ill. Studies estimate that half of people with mental illness abuse illegal drugs or alcohol, compared to 15 per cent of the general population. (Vancouver Coastal Health Newsletter)

“The mentally ill are just coming out in droves, getting involved in drugs and contracting HIV and dying.” (Standing Senate Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs, 1996)

The aboriginal population makes up 25 to 30 percent of the Downtown Eastside community. Many have been forced to move from their homes because of abuse or neglect and they end up in the Downtown Eastside. They are exposed to drugs and many become addicted.

Truman,
My how you like to twist words, recovering is the word that you should note. Once in recovery addicts slowly lose the self centerdness that ruled their lives prior to recovery.
I wouldn't trust myself or any other addict while using but once in recovery its a different story. I often bring addicts into my home as long as they are clean and want help and I trust them. Haven't been ripped off in fourteen years.

Truman,
You state many people with disablities work, well very, very few on Methadone work. Actually they are a job site hazrd. You can't compare the head space while smoking cigarettes to heroin or methadone, the argument is ridiculous.
My guys, all in recovery would walk off the job if they had to work with someone loaded on heroin or methadone and I wouldn't blame them.
You keep saying the war on drugs isn't working and to a certain extent I agree but legalization according to all cases in recorded history is a much worse alternative. There will still be a black market as addicts will seek drugs more potent thn the legal ones provided and crime will still flourish, addicts will steal for food and cigarettes and whatever else they need.
Legalizing drugs isn't the answer, addicts taking responsibilty for their lives is the answer and most could do it if they had to. If folks like you get your way the world will be a lot worse off in a few years.
For you its not only drugs, its the civil liberty thing, legalize everything let peopl decide for themselves if they want it. The reason society has laws and things are either legal or illegal is most people can't function in a healthy manner without guidlines i.e. laws.

Barryjo, what's the address of your facility? I'd like to show up for a visit.

Our yard is on Marine Drive in Burnaby, our jobs are all over the GVRD. Our commercial jobs are primarily downtown Vancouver and our residential work is all West Van/Pt. Grey.
You can call the office at (604) 529-1011 or fax (604) 529-1012.
Give me a call I'll take you out to a site to meet the guys.
I'll be in L.A. from April 26- May 2 though, I'm going down to visit Homeboy Industries, I am very interested in the good work Greg Boyle is doing with gang members. We are going to meet and discuss working with at-risk youth and I am really looking forward to it.
Give me a call anytime before or after those dates.

Thanks Barryjo. I'll give you a call and come down.

yeah sure ! Laws are made by those who want the great unwashed to do their bidding...

being a slave to the system is not every persons dream

thats why ESCAPISM is BIG BUSINESS .

that's why people take Timothy Leary's advice and TURN ON and TUNE OUT ...

that's why,there are so many addicts...people are sick of society and self medicate .

Heraldkamm...

Is this really how you see human sexuality (and love?) - the nihilistic equivalent of mainlining heroin? Do you really believe what you're saying? I don't think you do. But perhaps I'm being overly generous in my estimation. You need some serious de-programming, much as I did years ago.

So the doctrinaire Left would have us believe, and its a line I swallowed when I was younger...and it's even partially true. Overt man-on-man sexuality has always been rejected by the mainstream, yes, and still is by-&-large. But like everything else, it's not quite that simple. "Gay" men have also sat at the pinnacle of society and power (politics, religion, philosophy, art). Their contribution has become encoded in the fabric of our culture and thought, virtually invisible to the naked eye and taken for granted (much like, for example, the historic and profound Jewish influence on our culture, literature and sensibilities). Sure, gay men have been persecuted - but who was doing to persecuting? Who are the most outspoken critics of modern gay culture and political goals today, right now...? It's a subtle thing. Marginalized people adapt to their circumstances in very different ways, and not always in ways that compliment the goals of the institution-busting ideologues of the Left. I'm not saying it's right, I'm only saying that human nature is perverse, with many grey areas.

The gay community isn't flinging mud (and neither am I). I don't understand what you're trying to say. My whole point an that score has been that the gay community (and some other minority communities) have become enabling structures when it comes to drug use. I'm already spoken at length elsewhere about the "non-enforcement bubble" that surrounds urbanized gay communities in major North American cities. I've also tried to illustrate my point with concrete examples relating to the reaction of the institutionalized AIDS Lobby in North America to the current meth problem in the community.

I'm trying to respond rationally to some of your broader points, but I don't want to take this thread too far off topic....So getting back to the issue:

Your post above seems to suggest that people turn to drugs because of laws. They're tuning out to escape the restrictions of an oppressive system. This explanation dovetails nicely into the ideologically-mobilized anti-establishment agenda. Too nicely. You're not allowing for the grey areas that are replete in human nature. Are you sure you're not reading too much bare politics into the problem?

nightbloom, I'm studying HIV/AIDS. I've got a hard copy of a article from the Reappraising Aids website which claims that about 98% of Gay AIDS Patients are Drug Users. It claims that there are studies in the Lancet, May 15, l982, An. Int. Med, Aug, l993,STD, Oct l985,JAMA, Epidemiology and Genetica, Feb, l995 which support this conclusion.

I'm going to be going through all of these studies if I can find them, but I wonder what you think of the 98% assessment.

That number looks way too high, which leads me to question what they're defining as a drug user. Are they including tobacco, alcohol and over-the-counter pharmaceuticals? Including the innocuous legal "drug use" - that tends to throw the numbers off.

Most of the numbers I've seen place hard drug use among HIV+ patients in the 40-percentile range, which is still shockingly high. Roughly half of those are occasional users (approx. once a month) and the other half are regular or chronic users (at least once a week). That's still a huge number, and the statistics (and methodology) are being hotly contested. There a lot of money tied up in the different conclusions that can be derived from the numbers, the numbers themselves are being fought over.

[/B]

We in Society have a contract that is very obvious,we maintain good behaviour and pay dues to keep things running smoothly and the POWERS THAT BE ,will let us function within the parameters set by all.

BUT AS WE KNOW,NOT ALL AGREE,THE KIDDEE DIDDLERS ,WILL BE THE EXAMPLE I WILL USE .

KD's,like the power over and the sex from our sweet little INNOCENTS and this is not condoned in our Society,and rightly so .

So how many children does and average KD molest and RUIN FOR LIFE ?

WHEN THAT CHILD TURNS TO DRUGS AND PROSTITUTION,WHO IS AT FAULT ?

One child/addict/prostitute/disabled x ? doctors + nurses +police + judges + jail +rehab + social workers + johns + ad infinitum = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

SIMPLISTIC TO BE SURE,i was taught this the first day of my studies,so that,we would UNDERSTAND[B] the reasons behind the lack of resources we would run up against in the system.

FOR MOST SOCIAL SERVICES,THE MISERY OF SOME IS NOTHING MORE THAN A MAKE WORK PROGRAM AND NOTHING ELSE.

No ,real Compassion,no real Rehab,nothing of any consequence.Just go through the motions,mouth the mantra,and collect your pay cheque .

and the misery of others is now a reputable business,just look at barryjo's postings ,they are evangelical in their vigor.

so a SICK SOCIETY WITH UNWILLING PARTICIPANTS,WHO IS CULPABLE,WHO PAYS ?[B]

i say we are all culpable and we all pay !

every person out there is different and not all will recover from trauma the same way...if at all .

nightbloom, thanks so much for getting back. Your figure of 40% is a bit shocking alright, but I think it is roughly accurate concerning HIV positive patients, who, in my estimation, shouldn't necessarily be patients at all.

However, I was asking about the prevalence of so-called "illicit" drug use such as heroin, cocaine, methamphetamines and "poppers", various kinds of nitrite inhalents which have been proven to be immunodessant. And I was considering drug use among "Aids patients"--a more precise delineation.

I did it again. Misspelled another word. Not "immunodessant" but immunodepressant".

haraldkann,
"the misery of others is now a reputable business, look at barryjo's postings".
You don't know me, in fact, the only reason I do what I do and not go mainstream with my business is that I believe I owe a debt to society. It is a lot of hard work and is frustrating at times but when someone gets clean and stays clean it is worth it.
One doesn't get rich working with addicts with no government funding but I am enjoy the work and the challenge.
Don't judge me and I have to tell you most of writings appear to be from what you learned in a school or something, being in the trenches is the only way to get a real sense of what is going on.

as i have posted,been there done that,you should pay attention ,while you are PONTIFICATING

then again,the brain damage done in drug abuse/addiction/dependency,really highlights the abberant behaviour,that some,
find normal...and pawn off as,NORMAL...

I do not see any FACTS...IN ANY OF YOUR POSTS .

ANYWHERE !

time 2 go to the cottage...

later

contact:haraldkann@hotmail.com

Truman - I contacted a friend of mine currently doing grad. work in Health Policy at the University of Montreal, with a specialization in HIV-AIDS policy. Apparently, only a few agencies have been looking at this issue for any length of time, and the results are a mixed bag (for example, RAND released a study two years ago, which was subsequently followed up with a second study published six months ago which seemingly contradicted the previous results). Many agencies will be unrolling the results of new studies over the next year or so.

Unfortunately, there's no one source that provides a comprehensive picture or definitive conclusions. Often there's a certain amount of spin involved. For example, there's been an east coast - west coast tension in this whole debate, with San Francisco being ground-zero of the current resurgent drug-&-hiv crisis (as they were originally in the 1980's, and therefore more prone to take a hard-line) with the NYC agencies providing much of the opposition (not as hard hit by meth crisis & rising hiv transmission rates, and with an established & lucratic circuit-party industry to protect).

Here are San Francisco's Department of Public Health reseach on the topic:
http://www.dph.sf.ca.us/Reports/HlthAssess.htm
Their 2004 Annual Report shows a clear prevalence for drug-use, from poppers to meth & everything in between (although their numbers are from 2002....I *know* it's gotten a lot worse in the last 4 years, especially on the West Coast).

Here are the Vancouver studies.
http://cfenet.ubc.ca/vanguard/publications.htm
The Vanguard Project has been a problematic one. Much of the more recent research has been authored by Dr. Tom Lampinen, a young doctor in his early 30's, a popular member of the local gay community who is himself a participant in the gay party scene. It's a common pattern among gay male healthcare professionals, I've noticed. That isn't reason to discount the numbers, but I question the arguments he has put forward as a result, because his research has been used over the past year to deflect criticism away from the gay drug circuit while advocating increased government funding of the AIDS-HIV agencies he works with.

Anyway, I hope this helps -

nightbloom
this is totally off topic but the thread we'd been using is closed....did you happen to see this:
http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/04/alone_together.html
Although it's not directly about disconnected youth it has a certain resonance nonetheless.

nightbloom, that was exceptionally gracious and helpful of you to get back on that issue.
Thanks, again.

My pleasure - Also of possible interest:

http://www.cahr-acrv.ca/english/resources/archive.html

Their on-line archive of papers from their 2005 Vancouver Conference is fairly wide-ranging, so it requires some sifting.

commentor: Simon_Carlsenposted: 6 Days AgoTom Cruise can reportedly get someone off heroin in 3 days, I say we blanket the DTES with scientologists and e-meters: problem solved.

We must remember that drug addicts and criminals own the city and we must coddle and gladhand them in perpetuity.

No wonder,people get hot under the collar with sarcastic mental midgets like this.

greengreen,should really spend more time reading than writing by the looks of the studies available

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060423/sc_nm/science_choice_dc_2

more fuel for the fire

Science has been searching for the answer to addiction forever, it seems every time they do a little research project they come up with a new medication.
Science will never figure out a cure for addiction, they may hatch round after round of medications to treat it but they are the proverbial bandaid ona gunshot wound.

You've touched on something that is almost never spoken of - the interrelationship of local Organized Crime and municipal bureaucracy and regulatory agencies. It has been frankly acknowledged in public policy circles that Vancouver has a particularly systemic case of this "disease". One very senior federal civil servant I worked with in the mid-nineties involved in developing public policy in the regions bluntly referred to Vancouver as a town in which "the mafia pulls the strings".

Any drug solution for Vancouver (either relating to club-drugs, youth addiction, or the DTES) which fails to acknowledge this fundamental local reality is fundamentally incomplete.

One of the early posts claimed that we should "stop being cruel to chronic heroin addicts by withholding drugs." Following that logic, City Council could save itself a lot of money. Allow addicts to keep on with their behaviour and let nature take its course. Dumb.

The telling thing for me is that David Berner worked for years among the addicts. When he hosted his radio program - on a local station that was stupid enough to can the show - he pointed out that not only did he do his best to help the addicts, he began that part of his career believing that a compassionate, caring approach would do the trick.

Bottom line is that, once a person is addicted to any drug - alcohol included - you cannot expect them to make rational choices. No-one seems to find it "cruel" for an alcoholic to weather the DTs once he or she decides to make a change, so why should it be different for a drug addict?

Governments at one level or another spend a fortune dealing the with addicted - policing, emergency room services, social services, and welfare. Because the addict rarely works at a steady job, society loses out on income tax and purchase taxes. Society also loses - big-time - when addicts steal, injure and kill in order to support their habits.

So what is more cruel - for everyone - to keep the addicted addicted? Or mandatory treatment that would or could save the lives of many?

The Campbell government has downloaded its responsibility for health and social services. It did so without providing municipalities with sufficient funding to support remedial programs. For Mayor Sullivan to continue Larry Campbell's farce of a 2-legged four pillars approach, just plays into provincial hands.

It is said that as many as 80% of the homeless on the downtown eastside are mentally ill and that a huge proportion of the prostitutes and addicted are aboriginals. Yet the Campbell government is handing over $100-million - yes $100-million Gordo claimed he didn't have - to a "panel" to spend as it sees fit on some yet to be defined "programs" to better the lot of aboriginals. All but two of the panel are, themselves, senior Band members. The money is to be dispensed in the unaccountable "trust" that it will be spent wisely on programs that will improve the lot of aboriginal citizens. Taxpayers are left hoping that the money will not be spent on the previous formula - Band Council first, and crumbs for the rest.

That $100-million, spent to set up treatment centres for the addicted - and the mentally ill - would have accomplished one hell of a lot more that Their Worship's wobbly and ill-conceived pillars.

As a taxpayer, I'd take a single cured addict over 10 kept addicted by Sam's Plan.

Go for it Berner - and for crying out loud find another radio station.......

Yeah, Isabelle2, that was me who said it was cruel to withhold heroin from a long term chronic heroin addict, and I have no doubt that it's true. The result of your comment being in vogue among thinkers on this issue (and I think you're in the majority) is that we'll be getting more of the same: organized crime's influence in Vancouver municipal decisions, as nightbloom commented.

So, whether you realize it or not, you're working as a marketing employee for all the creeps who are getting rich on the backs of-- relatively speaking--a very small percentage of BC citizens--chronically addicted heroin addicts.

Forget the treatment crap for the chronically addicted; give them a prescription--same as you'll get when you need to start shooting insulin. (An analogue which I know there's absolutley no chance of you accepting).

Afterall, methadone is given to addicts as part of a treatment program. (methadone maintence progam) and it's every bit as addictive and deadly as heroin. Why not just give the chronically addicted heroin.(Or let them pay for it) Makes sense to me, eh.

As far as "let addicts keep on with their behaviour and let nature take its course."

What do you think is happening now?

Exactly that! I think we're trying to figure out how to change the situation, not maintain it.

Sorry. Been there, done that. I happened to work on a hospital ward that, as part of its routine, gave daily methadone doses to pregnant women. That methadone was, and likely still is, "prescribed" in a futile attempt to persuade those women to protect the life of their unborn baby by staying off the hard stuff. What a joke! The nurses, doctors and everyone else on the ward knew that 99 out of a hundred of the women barely made it around to the back of the building before they met up with a "marketer" for their booster shot.

What do I think is happening now? It's not what I think, it's what I know. The drug addicts are taking the drugs wherever they can find them. In the "safe" shooting galleries and then out on the street.

Far from me being used "as a marketing employee" it is your own, perhaps, good will that is being manipulated by addicts who will spin whatever story you want to hear and fall for, just so long as you keep feeding their habit.

Know what's cruel? What's cruel beyond belief is that politicians like Larry Campbell will keep building the latest, very expensive, feel-good program "on the backs of" the addicted, just so long as they get paid, handsomely, for doing so.

Isabella2, I didn't recommend methadone. My point is that allowing presciptions for heroin would be not that much different than what is already going on. As far as addicts tricking me, I don't think any addict in the world could trick me because I don't generally believe ANYTHING that ANYONE says unless I have a good reason for believing it.

You may not recognize it, but you have a model in your mind of drug addiction being a lot different if it is a legal drug than if it is illegal drug. I was a nicotine addict for 30 years and society merely left me alone as long as I didn't bash in some windows of a store to get my fix. Eventually I quit when I couldn't stand the pains in my chest any more. Heroin rarely works far beyond the addicts 50th birthday. This is well-known in the medical profession, but it's not common to hear about it.

On the front page of one of the big newspapers today there's a picture of an ex-addict. He's bragging about how he had enough will-power to pack it in and go bike riding or something. It's all a load of crap because heroin's pain-killing (emotional and physical) efficacy is seriously eroded in people beyond 50 or so years. (He looks about 50).

As a matter of fact, that's the joke about heroin addiction: They're all going to quit in late middle age anyway.

So, instead, Isabella2 of claiming that your opinions are not actually opinions, but self-evident facts (a bit narcissistic, no?)--I've done that a few times a bit myself--consider my point of view for a few minutes--not necessarily self-evident, but borne, at least, of experience and sorrow at watching people die who would rather die than envision a life without their medication.

Let's decriminatlize heroin. It's just a painkiller, eh--medically-speaking, an analgesic.

And how are are present laws fixing the problems you've seen as a nurse?

Isabella2,
What Truman is saying sounds very rational if one doesn't understand addiction.
Truman says "They're all going to quit in late middle age anyways". Just about everyone I ever used with is dead from overdoses and I know some that still use in their 60's. The rational that addicts quit in their late middle age is if, and thats a big if, they make it to middle age and still there is no gaurantee.
Whether it is legal or not addicts will still want to get enough to get wasted which leads to od's, bottom line decriminalization or legalization won't change anything.
Truman argues that it is just an analegesic and he is right but addicts don't use it to get rid of physical pain, they are trying to erase the emotional pain. A side effect of any narcotic or sedative etc. is a false sense of well being, thats why addicts use, to feel better.
Comparing nicotine addiction to heroin is so laughable, I was heavily addicted to both at one time and there is no comparison. I will concede that heroin would by far be the lesser of two evils in maintaining an addiction but why should we support anyones addiction. Most addicts can't work or won't work so who is going to pay for it. The answer most often is that if we the taxpayer do it will cut down on crime etc. Thats a load of crap, crime will flourish as addicts running around high will need cigarettes food etc.
The poverty pimps on the DTES would love to see drugs given to addicts, the big drug companies would make billions...I wonder what God would say... probably, I have given you free will, you have made a choice to use drugs and I can't support or enable that decision but if you ever want help I'll be there for you.
To encourage total self centered, destructive behaviour as addiction by legalizing drugs is an admission that we as a society have given up. I will never give up, I see the miracle of recovery too often to give in to the bs logic of, they can't stop just give it to them.

Barryjo, addicts use painkillers to kill pain. Sometimes physical pain. In fact, the guy that just came to rent my suite was a former heroin addict. It all started after a car accident. Another friend used heroin to kill the pain of emotional trauma as well as a chronic back condition she got in a car accident. In fact the only time I saw her totally at ease from this (she wore a back brace most of the time and could never get comfortable) was when she got her heroin, after which she was totally without pain and the fear of withdrawal--and she was a thoroughly pleasant person to be around, until she started planning her next adventure in the environs of the Columbia Hotel.

Barryjoy, I'm beginning to wonder what kind of heroin addiction you were. Heroin addicts are not crazed lunatics while they have their heroin in their system. This is just not right. Chronic users are just using to maintain, and after they get their fix the ones I've known are just fairly normal people.

And what are you talking about?--addicts can't go to work? There's lots of them quietly getting up and going to work every day!

And I think there is a parallel between heroin and nicotine addiction, except that nicotine kills thousands of times as many people.

I have a study done by some SFU reseachers that concludes that 70% of the people who supposedly die from heroin overdose, actually died because of the effects malnutrition and and other causes. I'll dig it out if you persist.

Heroin does no serious damame to any organ or body system. I've seen published reports that it damages the liver and kidneys. This is not true.

I'm not advocating using the stuff. I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole. Luckily I have no pain--physical or emotional. But for someone who's chronically addicted, who's going to quit around 50 anyway, I think a reasonable prescription and decriminalization program is the only way to go.

People are pretty clever, eh. I'm sure we can come up with some way to ensure that prescription recipients are the truly chronically addicted, so that recreational users will not be allowed into the program.

Now that I've got your ear, Barryjo, I've decided not to come down. I'll concede that I bet you've got a "win-win" situation there. I'm sure your people are well-treated and glad to be in your program. I doubt if you'd be inviting people down to see an abusive or exploitive program in action.

So thanks for the invitation, anyway. I'm sure you're doing good work down there, but I don't see how decriminalizing heroin, so that it would become regulated would diminish the success of your program.

Barryjo, as far as the drug companies making billions if heroin was decriminalized--you keep saying this--heroin and cocaine are marked up by 1000 times in today's crimiinal market. That forty dollar fix cost about 4 cents to produce. In fact heroin's only worth about $150/ounce in the "stans" in Central Asia and Afghanistan. By the time it reaches the streets of Vancouver, it's worth $150,000.

The drug companies aren't interested in legalizing heroin. There's no money in it if it's legal. It's the illegality of the stuff and the cost of doing business among thieves and murderers and slavers--and criminal prosecution that drives up the price.

Merck Frosst just ain't interested.

If you cite me a single example of any big pharmaceutical lobbying for the legalization of heroin or cocaine, I'll definitely rethink my whole program on the aspect of "billions for pharmies" mantra that you keep repeating.

Heroin and cocaine are stupidly cheap to produce. There's no big bucks in a legal market.

As Milton Friedman--nobel laureate in economics says, it's a totally phony market, totally manufactured by prohibition.

Again: There's no big bucks in legal dope.

And for the second time, Barryjo, will you please stop implying that I said to "give" heroin to heroin addicts. I said they should get it by prescription, prescription, prescription, and pay pay pay pay--just like the rest of us have to pay for whatever we buy buy buy.

I'm being repetitive because you just keep right on saying I'm advocating free heroin.

Barryjo, I found the story online. I'll try to do the link. I hope you read it because it's pretty rare that anything other your kind of hype ever gets published about this drug.

http://www/sfu.ca/mediapr/sfnews/1996/Sept5/heroin.html

http://pb.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/29/4/126

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-10,GGLD:en&q=scottish+heroin+addiction+trials+

just ,some of the material available

there are world wide trials for various addictions and all have merit of some sort

Great links, heraldkann. I think where Barryjo goes off the rails on this issue is that his vision is probably correct if a presription program is introduced in the middle of a global prohibition. Certainly, it is reasonable to predict that the prescription program can be negatively impacted by the criminal model in which it is introduced.

I am advocating a global decriminalization of heroin which I think is the only way we can get a true assessment of the difference between the systems of prohibition and decriminalization.

Even so, some of the studies in England and the Netherlands, cited in heraldkann's link showed that even in the midst of global prohibition selected prescription programs can be beneficial.

barryjo,you really have problems understanding some of us out here have dealt with addicts in clinical trials and have done research and do know the ropes for funding and critical information/data gathering

When i read some one has experience and they say they have done research ,well,i would like to see that information...that is what Clinical Research is all about.

FACTS...i don't see any

Have a good trip .

Haraldkann,
Some of you might have dealt with addicts in clinical trials but clinincal research has come up with nothing in the way of solutions.
Addiction is flourishing, and you need to understand that reserach isn't what is needed. Addicts can and do recover if they find the desire, plain and simple. I have seen cases that even doctors said were hopeless turned around with positive long term results.
Research and data will have a minimal effect at best and I think what is very telling in your writing is the statement "do know the ropes for funding". Thats the problem researchers want funding, funding, funding for more studies.
Most of us already know that an addicts life can only improve when the find the desire to stop using.
Much like people with mental illness, if you find a miracle pill to address addiction most will stop taking it as it will take away their unique charcteristics and turn them into someone they don't like, probably more like a zombie.
The only answer for addiction is abstinence or in a small percentage of cases where the addict isn't capable of staying clean, we call it drug simple it is like wet brain for alcoholics, for them presecription heroin should be available.
Sweden ahs a three pillar program with limited harm reduction for those who cannot recover and it works very well. They have about 600 people on methadone as opposed to a country like Switzerland that has over thirteen thousand. Sweden, it should be noted, prescribed heroin from 1964-67 and had to shut it down because of abuse of the process, they were one of the first countries to attempt harm reduction and soon notice it wasn't all it was touted to be.
Bottom line, if some of the real bad cases I have witnessed can get clean I know most could, I have seen so many get clean and relapse after awhile, they made a choice so why should we make drugs legal for them, most will not work and the taxpayer will have to pay fr their drugs.

barryjo sez ...

haraldkann sez ...I can see you are indeed an ex junkie/addict,because you can't/won't read the data provided ,because you are still in your own little world,you may not be addicted to any drug but you are addicted to a philosophy that feeds on ignorance and hyperbole...

the talk to me face to face is the first sign the bullsh!t is about to flow and hopefuly in the mind of the salesman,talk the other side over

no facts,no figures,just plain bullshit ..

typically what you get from a junkie/addict...even when they quit drugs,they mentality to MANIPULATE is still there .

http://pb.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/29/4/126

Haraldkann,
You say "typically what you get from a junkie/addict".
That tells it all, you think you are better than me. I feel very sorry for you.
The reason so many never get out of the trap of addiction is your ignorance and your tendency to think junkies are less than you.
YOU'RE ATTITUDES ARE A HUGE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
Addicts are human beings and equal to you in every respect although their actions while addicted leave a lot to be desired.
I asked you as a fellow human being to meet with me, I e mailed you and asked you personally but you are afraid of what? I would have liked to have sat down with you to discuss these issues that are very important to me but I know realize you aren't interested in more knowledge or networking, only in arguing and trying to be right.
If it is that important to your ego to always be right, okay then you are right, you have done a gazillion studies now get on out there and fix the problem... whats that?... you need more government money for a few more studies... I thought so.
I might suggest that if you really want to understand the problem meet some junkies that are living in the solution... oh ya... were a bunch of losers who spend our lives manipulating others. I looked on other views and news, you got opinions on everything man, I've met a million like you.. an expert on everything but its away more important to let people know how smart you are rather than actually giving a bit of your time to try and make a difference.

barryjo sez ...

haraldkann sez ...
I stated legalizing all drugs and programing prescriptions for the hard core and education for the young so they dont go down that road.

barryjo sez ...

haraldkann sez ...
I pointed out multiple links to the latest studies and the resources that could be saved by initiating those studies,such as the SWISS/DUTCH/SCOTTISH ,where the will and the means have shown them to be the best so far...IMPLEMENT THEM ,HERE,NOW...

barryjo sez ...

haraldkann sez ...
typical junkie/addict,always looking for that manipulative edge,to entertain self satisfaction,you cannot/will not read the posts,as posted,because it is not your philosophy...it is not in your self interest and reading would be, by the look of your writing/thinking pattern,counter productive to your pathetic offerings as a real debate.

Any one with half assed education can see the thought pattern here ignore the posts,ignore the links,ignore the studies

then blame some one else...been there...done that...

haraldkann,
I'm not going down this road with you, I wish you well, I know your type.
I am on my way to L.A. in the morning to look at some programs that are making a big difference in East LA.. No government funding, just a desire to make a difference.
I am grateful for the life I have today and I believe that gratitude is an action word so I am constantly looking for real solutions from, not clinical studies, real programs saving lives.
I've seen a million studies and quite frankly I'm sick of studies and really sick of people like you who believe they have some kind of an edge because they are so smart and they can quote this study and that study but don't have a clue what addiction really is.
Addiction will exist as long as humans have free will, there is no cure and the best we can hope for is very good comprehensive programs for those that want a way out.
By the way, I have probably forgot more facts, statistics and studies than you will ever see in yourt lifetime... so soldier on and research a couple more studies... get some government funding cause you never know, someone such as yourself that loathes addicts might find the holy grail to save them...not.

haraldkann,
By the way, I know some folks who have been directly conneceted to some of these so called studies and they tell me statistics are really manipulated to use as a crutch for more funding.
Unless a study is done and it can be proved to be totally independant with no reason for bias it is essentially worthless and if you don't know that or won't acknowledge that then you are not living in reality.
I think you are someone who dabbled in a couple physcology or mental health courses and now thinks he could be the next Sigmund Freud...hate to burst your bubble Einstein.. you've got a long ways to go.
Normally I don't talk to people in this manner but I find you quite offensive.

barryjo sez ...

haraldkann sez ...more hyperbolic anectdotes ,to be EXPECTED ,when people have no facts .

barryjo sez ...

mixed metaphors,mixed mind,no substance to your empty rhetoric....ad hominem attacks of the simple minded .

barryjo sez in tears...

haraldkann sez ...when people lose so badly in a debate...your's is the ATTITUDE they take...like a junkie/addict,it's not my fault,it's haraldkann's fault/societies fault

next time load up on facts...not HYPERBOLE like your buddy David Berner .

halderkann,
Your last post confirms you are probably borderline insane, I would have no problem holding my own with you in a one on debate and I don't think I'm too smart.
Here is the only fact I have to load up on... addiction has been here since the beginning of time and no amount of your ridicoulous studies will find a cure.
As for tears, I will admit I have feelings and sometimes they come out in tears and thats very healthy...

halderkann,
Goodbye, good luck and God bless you, I have to pack for LA... You'll have to find another bit of subject matter to argue about with someone else... trying to appear very intelligent but anyone can see it's a case of a wanna be smart guy... you need more help than the addicts you look down upon.

halderkann,
Holy crap, I loooked at a bunch of other views and news as I was winding down.. you have quite a few opinions and consider yourself an authority on a lot of things.
How big are you ?... it seems you might be suffering from little man syndrome...or just low self esteem and a desire to look smart somehow so people will look at you in a different light... most likely a lonely and unappreciated mental health worker who wants to portray himself as a researcher or doctor... delusional.. and perhaps a bit schizophrenic as you also post as thomas49.. it does present a scary picture... perhaps some funding for a study could be arrnged to help you to deal with your dilema.

barryjo sez ...

haraldkann sez ...this is a site noted for those who like to OPINE and opinionated people are those not afraid to open their mouths and step into the fray...to debate the issues and offer solutions and nowhere do I,say i am an AUTHORITY...trouble reading barryjo ?

barryjo sez ...

haraldkann sez ...6'4" 245 ,so no little man syndrome like you .

barryjo sez ...

haraldkann sez ... no,i,left that to people who could put up with the lies and manipulations,the suicides,the murders,back in 1973 and i posted that,but as usual,you have trouble reading...i have a small business fabricating custom vehicles special order .

barryjo sez ...

haraldkann sez ...
As an identical twin,with an IQ over 200 I have enjoyed the hundreds of research tests we have endured over the years for science...thomas49 on the other hand likes his privacy and is the prankster that got me addicted to this venue
especialy ,when people like you take the bait.

ou are really operating on an empty tank,barryjo

And,right at this moment,we are in another research program,seeing what we can ascertain from the thought procceses formed in these threads.

It's all recorded for genetic data studies...

Something ,you have shown to have no knowledge of ,at all...you should try reading ,instead of pontificating like some evangelical posuer .

haraldkann,
I wasn't going to post again but I can't resist.
I knew and I told others, you would post that you were some great height and weight (6'4" 245 lbs.) and I said you would say you have a very close brother... sure enough an identical twin.
Not only are you not playing with a full deck, you are very predictable.
To say you are in another research program " seeing what we can ascertain from thew thought processes formed in these threads"...I would think okay, that sounds interesting... but then you add"it's all recorded for genetic dats studies".
You have just proved you're whacko buddy, it would be impossible to record info from online posts that could have any benefit for genetic studies of any kind.
The more you say the deeper the hole you dig.

barryjo sez ...

You really show your limited intelligence,must be that drug addled brain not being able to read.
My thought process during the week as i post will be investgated for time shifts as to when my brother posts to a certain percentage of the same posts on the week end in a different space and time.

You see,we can finish each others sentences even in another room,or country.Does not matter what the subject,the time,etcetra.

Since a death defying motorcycle accident and brain damage a lot of previous research programs are being done over to see the difference from my younger days ,to the present,the drop in IQ to 200 is 40 points lower than thomas' .So,we have been rather busy within the research community...

Something ,you should really check out,if you are not lying about your so called addiction,i have a feeling that you had nothing more than a dependency you were to weak willed to escape until it was ADVANTAGEOUS...

And are you flying to LA in your mind or on a real airline ?
see...I can be funny too and look no hole,no shovel,no sh!t...

THE MENTALITY OF HACKS LIKE BERNER AND MORONS LIKE barryjo...1970's THINKING !

THE ONLY THING FOUND CONCERNING ARTICLE ...

this is the kind of parasite that feeds of the weak minded ...

http://www.bhf.ca/history.htm

Seems Berner was one of those on a power trip and the only two interesting benchmarks during his EMPLOYMENT/HE WAS SALERIED...WAS PHILIP J DICK'S STAY AND MONEY MISMANAGEMENT...
LINKS HERE...

http://www.tvwiki.tv/wiki/A_Scanner_Darkly

http://www.legis.gov.bc.ca/HANSARD/30th4th/30p_04s_740315a.htm#01222

So ,we got POWER TRIPS , MONEY DISAPPEARING AND WHO KNOWS WHAT ELSE ... SOME GREAT EXAMPLE DAVID BERNER TROTS OUT...SMALL WONDER HE DID NOT OFFER UP ANY ...FACTS

Did Berner mention that his half-way house/treatment centre was indeed X-kalay?
I don't think so. It seems to me that he had an obligation to at least mention the name of the half-way house, (which as I remember had a pretty spotty record).

I mean, isn't it sort of like doing an article about your experience working for an American agency in Zaire or somewhere and never mentioning the fact that the agency was known as the Peace Corps or Canadian Union of Students Overseas--whatever.

I think Berner's failure to identify X-Kalay makes all of his articles on the subject of drug treatment suspect.

More perspective on Berner can be had by reading one of his other pieces on Tyee entitled, "The Rabbi is Plugged In," in which he brags about calling the Hell's Angels in to deal with some small-time street dealers on the sidewalk in front of his business effort.

Herald-Kann, I think you have these guys figured out all right: professional treatment entrepreneurs, at best.

Truman,you know from experience on these sites that the veracity of a person's position is often challenged by many doubting thomas'.The comments and evidence are pretty well de riguer ,now in these times.

WHEN AN AUTHOR LIKE DAVID BERNER CITES HIS GREAT EXPERIENCE IT SEEMS TO GET CREDIBILITY BY BEING POSTED ON A SITE LIKE THE TYEE.

WHY ?

a QUICK GOOGLE...tells it like it is ...

and HANSARD is a real wealth of information... and golly gee...it is not refutable

I think,David Beers should find a really good fact checker,instead of worrying about the odd swear word ,or some percieved insult...

and someone should be cheching on how much Beers pays KLOWNS like Berner,for drivel and self serving advertising.

[B]small wonder the SCUZZISET RADIO STATION in BC canned his ass .[B]