....well isn't that special....
This turns the war on drugs inside out... Now the states are funding the drug use that they are trying to combat. < Inject more money here... >
"This is an historic day for public health,"
More like 'A new low for public safety'
oh, and how will this stop the spread of AIDS by sexual contact? Don't they know that men and women sell themselves for drugs and for money to buy drugs. But don't worry, they will have clean needles after whoring all night long.
Condoms for rapists!
....well isn't that special....
Do these programs reduce the spread of AIDS? The article doesn't present the opposition's response to Corzine's claim.
Before the obligatory "Liberdopian" or "Losertarian" remark come out, let me remind those that Libertarians oppose taxpayer funding & government intervention of this and prefer to have Darwin work its magic.
Lets see.
A junkie is Jonesing in the middle of the night, when a running buddy stops by with a dime bag. He says, I'll split if I can use your outfit. The junkie naturally says, "Gee, I'm sorry, but I don't have any clean needles. Wait until tomorrow and I'll run down to the needle exchange bank."
It's not going to happen.
More "blue state" political goofiness.
Just as long as people are not allowed to eat cheesecake the public health mission is accomplished.
I'm of two minds on clean needles for addicts. I understand that the use unsterile needles is a major risk factor in hepatitis and AIDs. But I think it is a bit naive to think that addicts ( hardly known for being responsible) will suddenly make sure they get a clean needle before they inject their next fix.
Also it does send the message that the only possible danger with drug addiction is blood borne illness. The addiction itself is glossed over as some kind of benign habit with no personal or social consequences.
I don't think drug addiction should be treated as a crime. However I see nothing wrong with mandatory treatment programs involving public and private agencies.
But I do think any public program that gives even the appearance of endorsing destructive behavior is on the wrong track.
Throwing condoms at AIDS will not stop it. Throwing clean needles at AIDS will not stop it. Only when certain groups of people change their actions will AIDs become a thing of the past.
So now the taxpayers of New Jersey are paying for druggies' clean needles?
"Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts (D-Camden) who co-sponsored the bill, asked for sympathy for the IV drug user, who 'clearly is leading a tragic, dysfunctional life' as well as 'the partners they infected who did nothing wrong, and the babies being born HIV-positive who deserve our help.'"
"'When we hear the debate on the other side, people talk about enabling criminal activity. What they really don't talk about are the innocent victims,' Roberts said."
This war on some drugs keeps having more unintended consequences. It helps to fund the comeback of the Taliban in Afghanistan. It screws up relations with Latin America. I don't see much difference with the failure of alcohol prohibition. Take the profit out of it by decriminalization or legalization, and organized crime won't be able to make money from it, besides dropping its retail price. They wouldn't need to inject heroin if they could smoke opium. They had Rockefeller drug laws before the war on drugs. You can't legislate or enforce morality.
This first international review of the evidence that needle syringe programs reduce HIV infection among injecting drug users found that conservative interpretation of the published data fulfills six of the nine Bradford Hill criteria (strength of association, replication of findings, temporal sequence, biological plausibility, coherence of evidence, and reasoning by analogy) and all six additional criteria (cost-effectiveness, absence of negative consequences, feasibility of implementation, expansion and coverage, unanticipated benefits, and application to special populations). The Bradford Hill criteria are often used to evaluate public health interventions. The principal finding of this review was that there is compelling evidence of effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness, consistent with seven previous reviews conducted by or on behalf of U.S. government agencies. Authorities in countries affected or threatened by HIV infection among injecting drug users should carefully consider this convincing evidence now available for needle syringe programs with a view to establishing or expanding needle syringe programs to scale.
Here's a search strategy for PubMed:
needle exchange programs and HIV incidence NOT (HCV OR HBV)
Before the advent of Highly Active Anti-Retroviral Therapy, HAART, the average survival time after infection was about 10 years, with some folks lasting up to 20 years. The last time I checked HAART regimens cost over $20,000 a year per patient which is usually picked up by Medicaid.