Source: Weekend Edition (Victoria, B.C., Canada)
Contact:  August 14, 1998

GO BEYOND THE SURFACE OF DRUG DEBATE

It's so frustrating to read a story that allows the bureaucrat or
politician a platform to spread his or her ignorance and to avoid the
important issues.

To show you what gives rise to my frustration, let's take Bev Wakes' July
31 Weekend Edition article, "Government wary of changing heroin treatment"
and insert the questions I think should have been asked in response to the
various uninformed, if not fatuous, statements about drugs that she
elucidated from various bureaucrats and politicians she interviewed.

Uninformed statement # 1.

Ministry of Health spokesperson Jeff Gaulin, "We do not support it
(prescribing heroin). Harm reduction is the way to do, not heroin
prescription."

Suggested response.

But isn't prescribing heroin usually regarded as part of a harm reduction
approach? In his 1994 narcotic overdose death report, didn't BC Chief's
Coroner suggest that heroin be supplied to users?

Uninformed statement # 2.

Again, Jeff Gaulin. "(The number of methadone users) would have to double
before the Ministry of Health would even consider allowing doctors to
prescribe heroin."

Suggested response.

Why would a large increase in the number of people enrolled in the
methadone program mean that a heroin program should be initiated. Surely
the more successful the methadone program is, the LESS we need a heroin
program.

Uninformed statement # 3.

One more from Jeff Gaulin, "Methadone is a substitute and heroin is an
illegal street drug."

Suggested response.

What is your point? Heroin and methadone are both illegal street drugs.
Doesn't the fact that these drugs are illegal cause user deaths and the
spread of disease? Didn't bathtub gin and other adulterated potions spawned
by prohibition kill thousands of users.

Uninformed statement # 4.

Even though heroin prescription has been shown to be effective elsewhere,
Dr. Stanwick said, " (I don't) feel that the prescription of heroin will
solve B.C.'s drug problems.

Suggested response.

Not even a little bit? Why not? It wouldn't hurt, would it?

Uninformed statement # 6. (Note: They removed a paragraph and forgot to
re-number!)

Attorney General Ujjal Dosanjh, "(I'm not) convinced that the legalization
of heroin and cocaine will work unless it's tightly controlled."

Suggested response.

The two drugs you mentioned were legal before the early years of the 20th
century. What problems did that cause? Is it not true that Canada's
narcotics laws, like parallel United States' efforts, were enacted not for
public safety but to impede Chinese immigration, repress oriental culture,
protect white manufacturers and grant special privileges to medical
professionals?

Finally, a question that should be asked of all government representatives
defending this demented "war on drugs":

How on earth did you come to the conclusion that a government has the right
to tell its citizens what they may, or may not, ingest? Perhaps doctors
should prescribe food too?

Alan Randell

- ---
Checked-by: Mike Gogulski