syringes and needles

Diggo11

1. I'm all for making clean needles harder to access if anything it would at least reduce drug use which was the idea of the proposal in the first place....
Would it?

A lack of free, clean needles is unlikely to stop drug use in first time users. If you can manage to obtain the drugs, obtaining a clean needle shouldn't be overly difficult. Not to mention that if you're taking drugs, it's doubtful you're one to care for consequences much, otherwise you wouldn't need the needle in the first place. Truly, I'll be damned if someone can show me a case saying "I was going to take drugs, but I had no needle, and could never find one, so I never took drugs in my life."

An addicted brain craves the drug, rational thought about a lack of clean needles can easily get pushed aside. I wouldn't count on the lack of clean needles stopping people, otherwise we would have zero drug use in areas without a needle exchange program. Perhaps stories of "my mate died from an infection" help somewhat towards the cause, yes, but that's slightly unethical, letting people put themselves in harms way so they get made an example of in the community.
 

Dark Lotus

Ok here we go. You gave me a list of what? A list of why vets told a reporter that they did drugs? Which side do you want to attack this from. What is the ratio of vets who did not turn to drugs or kill themselves to those that did? If your argument held water, then it would be 80 percent or higher that do (use needles mind you). I see a lot of prescription drugs, pot, coke and things in your list. None of which are well know for needles as their main delivery device to the human body. Maybe just maybe, these were people who are not really wired to handle any type of trauma or stress. Maybe, just maybe they were users before and now they have an excuse. I countered with EVERY single person you see on a talk show or in the news. It is not Linsay's fault, it is not Charlie Sheens fault. It is never anyone's fault. That is what is so great about this country. People have ZERO accountability for their actions.

You gave me this list, because a list of police reports, with documented cases of just the average person being held by gun point and forced to inject themselves would be rather hard to come by.

He posted that the government stopped funding it, but that many states are now. I commented that the other great thing about this country is people have no problem at all spending other peoples money. So talk about things all you want. Talk till you are blue in the face. Keep going on and on about all the pros and cons about things. And why YOU feel that it is worthy of spending other peoples money on (but not yours). Orrrrrr in your own words, people need to put their wallets were their mouths are. If it is such a great idea. Then post the links to the drives you have to raise money. Show all the items that you have sold for this great cause. Lead by example and not by words. Only then will others follow. Right now you are like a parent with a beer in one hand and a cigarette in the other, telling your kids you will kill them if you ever catch them smoking or drinking!

If you want druggies to have clean needles, awesome more power to you. Then have a coke and a smile, pay for it and shut up about it. Stop telling the rest of the population they should pay for it because YOU think it is a good idea. That is called hypocrisy. I do not care if they have clean needles. One way or another it does not matter to me. I just DO NOT want to pay for them. I have NO problem with those who think it is a good idea to pay for them. I will do nothing to try and stop you. If they OD well so be it. If they get AIDS and die, then so be it. That is not hypocrisy. That is laying/sleeping in the bed that they made for themselves. It just amazes me that people plant an apple seed. Watch it grow and then get upset when it does not yield oranges. It amazes me even more when they get you on their side and you get an attitude that it is producing apples. The most amazing thing of all is YOU people bring up the comparison of what it would save in money compared to health care cost.... That YOU also say we should pay for!!!! NO FREE NEEDLES.... NO FREE HOSPITALS for junkies..... Total cost? NOTHING!

His post was not about vets who become addicted to drugs. His post was about plain ole drug users and I say SCREW EM!!!

lol if you do not like my view.... Well just as nobody is putting a gun to their heads to use drugs. Nobody is putting a gun to your head to read this. It is something call free will. It was their free will that got them in the boat they are in, in the first place. Wait no it is not. I forgot about Oprah..... It is that mommy did not love them or their dog ran away and caused childhood trauma so they hit the needle.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Daniel

and you know you can get AIDS by having an open wound and an AIDS patient bleeding on you right?
Just a small note, people don't "get AIDS", they get/transmit HIV. They develop AIDS as a result of HIV. Too many times in this thread have people made this mistake, so just thought I'd step in and point out the correction :p
 

DeletedUser34

Just a small note, people don't "get AIDS", they get/transmit HIV. They develop AIDS as a result of HIV. Too many times in this thread have people made this mistake, so just thought I'd step in and point out the correction :p
Semantics
Sister N Law...died of Aids

The most amazing thing of all is YOU people bring up the comparison of what it would save in money compared to health care cost.... That YOU also say we should pay for!!!! NO FREE NEEDLES.... NO FREE HOSPITALS for junkies..... Total cost? NOTHING!
You realize this is not even remotely logical right? If you don't give them needles, and you don't give them care, what do you think they do? Disappear from society? What about the high person who mugs or rapes a person, or cuts themself and bleeds on an innocent passerbyer? Or what about the person whose spouse used a dirty needle and they didn't know their spouse tried drugs, and got a disease, didn't tell them, came home and gave it to them? What if the (for the sake of argument the husband used the needle, and gave it to the wife) the wife found out the husband partook in drugs and left him, and got remarried? she now has given her new spouse a disease, and say she decided to get pregnant, she also gave her baby a disease....wouldn't all this have been solved by giving out a clean needle? Instead 3 innocent people were destroyed. What about the high guy who attacks a woman on the road for her purse for drug money. She resisted, he beat her up badly, but he used a dirty needle a few months back....oh my goodness, now she is paying the price, AND she took it home to her husband and 3 kids. Now per your logic, we are not just paying for 2 addicts in the hospital, but 7 other innocent people who would still be infection free if we had just handed out clean needles.

oh yeah and Dark Lotus, just to make it clear, this HE doesn't have the proper plumbing to make that accurate...
also, Dark Lotus, tread lightly with the assumptions. I have been on doing AIDS awareness since 1992. I have volunteered in rehabs, I have participated in our churches outreach for addictions since 1993, I have volunteered with Salvation Army since about 1993.

And finally Statistics on addicted soldiers of Vietnam....
Drug-and-alcohol abuse problems range between 50 percent and 75 percent.
now, my family has served in the armed forces, during wars, including but not limited to my ex husband. Riddle me this, before you throw stones towards our guys who have gone back over to tour in some cases 3-5 times without the mandatory time off in between, have you ever served in a war zone where it is life and death? Do you know how it feels to be at the end of your tether? Really? Now, I am sure the statistics of the last two wars we have been in will be just as staggering. Are you telling me they didn't get a gun held to their heads?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dark Lotus

The first thing you need to understand is that I go from one extreme to the other. I have played the liberal loving/caring role in the debates, to the heartless scrooge side of them. Somebody has to keep them going lol. With that said, fine I will be serious for a moment. First lets do the statistics....

1. "Women do not make the same amount as men in this country". From the President on down, I have seen statement. Now that in itself is true. Then they want to talk about how or what needs to be done to get "equal pay". Well wait a moment. What does one have to do with the other? You can get "statistics" from the department of labor. Now the reason women do not make as much as men is attributed to other facts. They do not work as many years as men. They take off long periods of time to have children and raise families. They occupy a large number of jobs that are unskilled. Never, ever, is "doing the exact same job, but making less pay" cited anywhere. Sure this does happen, but the number is a lot lower then people think. If they mention this, they will lose support, so take a study and imply that is the reason.

2. Now for "numbers". I start a program and call it "Operation Pull". It bothers me that the green man does not make as much money for doing the same job as the white man. I show cases at a facility where the white man makes 4 times as much. The green man gives large sums of money to Operation Pull. In just 5 years I now say that number has gone from 4 times as much, to only 3 times as much. With more of your dollars and support we can do a lot more. 15 years later, Operation Pull has gotten it so now the white man only makes 2 times as much. We NEED more money!!! Now in reality here is what happened:

Year 1: The white man made $40 and hour. The green man made $10 (4 times as much) But it is $30 more an hour

Year 5: The same amount of raises were given to each ($1 per year). The white man makes $45 an hour. The green man makes $15 an hour. Now the white man only makes 3 times as much. Still $30 an hour more tho.

Year 15: Keep giving them both $1 an hour raise. Now the white man makes $60 an hour and the green man makes $30 an hour. The white man only makes 2 times as much. STILL $30 more an hour tho.

My Operation Pull has done NOTHING but scammed people out of millions of dollars and only made me rich. I did not lie tho, the numbers and statistics are right there so take me to court.

So you see I do not put a whole lot of stock into them. If I want something, I can make numbers and statistics to make a point for anything.

Have I served? Well yes I have and been way out on the tether. So let me tell you some more truth. You do not have to go beyond basic training to see what is what. The first thing you will notice is that you are not with the elite as shown on TV. They are pretty much the complete opposite. You will find people who went to another state to try yet again to pass this very simple test just to get in. All they want is to be an 11 Bravo "Bullet Stopper" (infantry) but are not smart enough. When they finally get it and are doing their basic, they are making pipes out of pop cans to smoke hash with in the laundry rooms. They are snorting coke as they play 5 card stud for $25 a card. 80 percent are already on drugs or messed up in the head before they are ever deployed.

You realize real quick if you go into battle with these clowns you are gonna die. So you look into rangers, air assault, LRRP's, or some group that is not as messed up. You understand they your odds of survival are not better in a large group. You want to be in a small team with people who are not already junkies. So you go for that and get some real training. Now it is time to go overseas and play in the sandbox. You really do not know why you are there. You really do not know why you are killing people.

Then you get an AK burst to the chest. One round has lodged in your heart. You are doped up and see all kinds of funny things. You get so much dope you have to detox before you can leave. You get a purple heart and a pat on the back for all your troubles. You do not want to kill yourself. You do not want to put needles into your veins. You just want to get on with your life.

The ONLY thing you got out of it was how as we as a people, have let it get to a point where a few humans can make others kill and die on a whim. I did not see any pilots that flew into world trade centers the whole time I was there. I saw a bunch of scared soldiers who had no clue while they were killing or dying either. No place did I see the people who sent others to fight either. They were in a nice bed, sleeping like a baby. DEBATE THAT!

Then you go to work and hear the war stories from another vet from the gulf. He is going on about the trauma he has endured, the bad things he has seen, and all kinds of new found political views. If only the people listening knew they were talking to some rear echelon MF who worked in the motor pool, packing wheels with grease! Trauma from what, an engine that backfired?

Well it would be to graphic to say how I really feel. I can tell you that he does drugs to cope too. I am sure if you are interested, he will share his war stories with you as well. Funny thing tho, those of us that did it, do not really talk about it. Those that have not, talk up a storm. lol maybe that is where Desert Storm was coined from.

Anyway.... been there done that. Seen both sides of it. Dont put a lot into it or the numbers or statistics, sorry. All I am saying is they had guns to their heads well before any shots were fired.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser34

you make no sense in your posts, it is like reading a monotoned phonebook. I give up
 

DeletedUser3

(( Hi guys & gals, last chance -- topic is Syringes & Needles. Stay on topic or I will stick you. ))
 

DeletedUser34

Dark Lotus, you wanna try a come back that is on topic and understandable now?
 

Dark Lotus

"Many illicit drug abusers inject drugs such as heroine directly into the blood stream with syringes or needles. For many users, sterile syringes are not readily available and drug paraphernalia laws in some countries make it an offense to distribute or possess syringes for non-medical purposes.

As a result, many drug users share needles, which contributes to the spread of diseases such HIV and Hepatitis C, which have become near pandemics in countries and communities around the world. The spread of these diseases among drug users has become so concerning that, starting in the 80s, some activists and cities began opening needle exchanges. These government funded programs supply clean needles to drug addicts, so that they are at a lower risk of sharing needles and spreading diseases.

Opponents argue that needle exchange programs condone illicit and immoral behavior and that governments should focus on punishing drug users, discouraging drug-use, and providing treatment for quitting.

In 1998 a ban was placed in the U.S, preventing the funding of needle exchanges using federal resources, however in 2009 this ban was overturned with 46 states participating in needle exchange programmes as of 2006. Due to the controversial evidence regarding the efficacy of the policy whether the government should fund needle exchanges is a contentious issue in the U.S. as well as worldwide."
~ http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Needle_exchanges
Me stay on topic? I am not the one who drifted to make it about vets and abuse or fund raising for AIDS lol

1. I agree that they should focus on punishing drug users

2. I do not agree that the government or states should fund free needles.

As far as the spread of HIV and things. They twisted the numbers to make a point. I tried to show how easy it is to bend statistics and numbers to make an argument seem more valid. True there could be a reduction with clean needles. The fact that users have unprotected gay sex or strait sex, to get money to buy drugs (as shown on the HBO documentary that followed addicts around for a month)... Do/can they not get the same things this way? How does a clean needle help here? It also showed that clean needles were available, but they only opted to get them until theirs were no longer usable. Heroin addicts are not known for their high activity levels. So walking to obtain clean needles was not real high on their to do list. Calling numbers written on pay phones to sleep with gay men for $40 was tho.

You ran off and said what about the girl who gets raped by one. The drug addict who gets a girl pregnant and such. If it was just the lack of clean needles, then their would be little to talk about. What I saw showed a much bigger problem tho.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser34

Since disease is a domino effect, would it not be worth the cost to have a reduction? I mean, isn't that the same idea behind condoms? Even music has lyrics that bring attention to the risk factors from exes... :D
Somebody Told Me
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dark Lotus

If you have pockets with no bottoms then yes. If you have limited funds, then how much do you want to allocate to free needles. If the facts are that they shoot up daily, multiple times, and the trip to get a new needle for every injection is not deemed worth it. Add the fact that they have unprotected sex with random losers who put their numbers in permanent marker on pay phones.... It just seems that the risk is not really lowered by that great a number. I just think if you have X amount of dollars, it would be better spent on prevention of HIV/AIDS else where.

I find it very funny that all the girls on Maury (and many in general) say they got pregnant with the use of condoms. Yet the condom states they are 99% effective. Somebody has to be lying lol but that is a whole nother debate.
 

Diggo11

If you have pockets with no bottoms then yes. If you have limited funds, then how much do you want to allocate to free needles. If the facts are that they shoot up daily, multiple times, and the trip to get a new needle for every injection is not deemed worth it. Add the fact that they have unprotected sex with random losers who put their numbers in permanent marker on pay phones.... It just seems that the risk is not really lowered by that great a number. I just think if you have X amount of dollars, it would be better spent on prevention of HIV/AIDS else where.

I find it very funny that all the girls on Maury (and many in general) say they got pregnant with the use of condoms. Yet the condom states they are 99% effective. Somebody has to be lying lol but that is a whole nother debate.
97% as I recall, meaning ineffective for 1 in 33 instances. Given you say these "random losers" are engaging in undesirable behaviour on a daily basis, it wouldn't take long until the odds are against you. But it doesn't matter, right Lotus? These people are the scum of the earth, they're not even worth our horrific, spoiled and elitist words!

You cannot engage in sensible debate if you start with the preconceived notion that the human beings you're discussing are worth less than the family dog you feed and shelter.
 

Dark Lotus

You are right, what was I thinking? A person who puts their number on cards, and pay phones in the red light districts, to have gay unprotected sex with addicts. Preying on the already weak people. Whose addiction runs so deep that they do not care what they need to do to get more money for drugs.

Predators like this are not random losers. They are model citizens, who deserve to be praised. Maybe an award or federal holiday in their honor. I can not wait to have kids so I can show them, that it is these people who are the true role models.

Since they put their phone numbers out there, not knowing the people, or caring who calls. You will at least give me the "random" part right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Diggo11

You are right, what was I thinking? A person who puts their number on cards, and pay phones in the red light districts, to have gay unprotected sex with addicts. Preying on the already weak people. Whose addiction runs so deep that they do not care what they need to do to get more money for drugs.

Predators like this are not random losers. They are model citizens, who deserve to be praised. Maybe an award or federal holiday in their honor. I can not wait to have kids so I can show them, that it is these people who are the true role models.

Since they put their phone numbers out there, not knowing the people, or caring who calls. You will at least give me the "random" part right?
Stop muddying the waters. We are discussing drug users, not sexual predators, prostitutes or homosexuals. Your stereotypes are grossly offensive and an oversimplification of the issue at hand. The original proposal, a needle exchange program, does not seek to put anyone on a pedestal but save lives and combat the spread of a fatal disease. The expenses are minimal compared to providing free medical stabilisation services, a requirement under U.S. law, irrespective of how efficient your medical system may be.

If you'd care to provide some logical reasoning, reputable sources or informed insight that'd be great. Repetition of logical fallacies, bigoted stereotypes and off-topic ramblings are getting tiresome ;)
 

Dark Lotus

I was citing a documentary based on the lives of addicts and needles. I then said that given the fact that they were doing things that were just as high risk for the spread of HIV/AIDS with random losers who preyed on their addictions by exchanging unprotected sex for money to fund their addictions. Would not the money be spent in other areas. You tell me which of these was "off topic"?

1. Spending money in other areas to fight HIV/AIDS? The spread of these was in the original post, along with some do not agree the government should fund it.

2. That addicts while having access to clean needles were not using them with each injection. Seems on topic to me

3. That if people list their number to have unprotected sex with MULTIPLE "addicts" (who are already in a high percent group of being infected) and they do it........ seemed to do with the topic to me.

4. You seem to take great offense that I called these predators "random losers" and then go on with your sermon about how they are NOT the scum of the earth. Then have the nerve to lack anything you demand from others. How is your defending their actions "on topic".

Put up a poll to see if most would consider them great people or a predator. Were are your facts and figures? If a documentary that actually follows drug users and needles for a month is not creditable, then show something that is. If it is off topic then why do you bring nothing up other then your defense of their actions.

In "my opinion" which plays a part in a debate. A person who stalks those who minds are not in a state to make rational judgement (drug users on heroin). And has them engage in dangerous acts (unprotected sex) for money to buy more drugs (heroin). Is a predator and a LOSER, no different then those who do things to runaways. The fact that they bait anyone by their methods, shows that it is random.

If that is a bigoted stereotype, then show me all the "logical reasoning", "reputable sources", or "informed insight", that gives them justification to exploit the addicts for unprotected sex! What is the reasoning for not doing it to people who are not under the influence of drugs?

This "you are right, cuz you said so" is beyond tiresome. I truly look forward to your logic and facts in their defense? Defending their actions is grossly offensive to me. Never mind, you do not need do anything. We both know why they target addicts. We both know if they just walked up to a random guy on the street with this proposition. THEY WOULD GET KNOCKED OUT! As most would find it "grossly offensive".
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser34

Dark,
I truly look forward to your logic and facts in their defense?
I already posted back up for our point...you have posted up NOTHING.
but just for you since you didn't read it..
the effect of clean needle exchange programs
We both know if they just walked up to a random guy on the street with this proposition. THEY WOULD GET KNOCKED OUT! As most would find it "grossly offensive".
This doesn't sound very Opinion like, matter of point you used the word "know", meaning you better put out some back up or back the heck up. I can tell you from actual work with addicts (as I have stated before) you are very incorrect. But I would pay more attention if you showed more than hot air.

Finally, your logic has no logic, at least with Diggo, his logic has reasons. You have no valid reason to be against needles. The cost of care for the spread of disease out weighs the cost of a clean needle program, so your logic is...rDQlous.
 

Dark Lotus

Ok I read your link now.... Then read this, so now what?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/03/11/us-needle-exchange-idUSTRE62A4EC20100311

What part of people who want something, will twist, bend, skew, and flat out lie, to get it, is not clear? You do not factor in things like how many will actually do it for EACH and EVERY injection. You do not factor in how many are having unprotected sex with other high risk people and that was the cause of the infection (you just sneak the stats into yours so it seems more valid). You do not care how things were actually done. You just want to spew out some bias numbers to make a point. Raise more money with the fudged numbers. Get a pat on the back by other people involved, and be all proud of yourself.

How do I "know"? Well it is very easy and you can do this at home. You ask guys that you know. If another guy walked up to you and said "I will give you $30 if you let me have unprotected sex with you". You see what their response is? I do not know where you live, so maybe they would say okay, or no thank you, and be on their way. My poll got different results. It was more things like "When my fist came out the back of his head, he would know my answer". So if it makes you feel better.... In Chicago, THEY WILL BE KNOCKED OUT and I KNOW THIS. Maybe in your area they will wink and smile. So I stand corrected. It is not hot air "here" it is pretty dead on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Daniel

Ok I read your link now.... Then read this, so now what?
Some quotes from your link:

"The findings of this review should not be used as a justification to close NSPs...or hinder their introduction."

"Insufficient or weak evidence of an effect is not evidence of no effect."

"Studies looking at needle-exchange programs have been observational," which are "subject to limitations like selection bias."

"Overall, Palmateer and her colleagues conclude, there appears to be tentative evidence that needle-exchange programs reduce HIV transmission among injection-drug users."

"There was strong evidence across the reviews that needle-exchange programs reduce the sharing or reuse of dirty needles."

"The main public implications of the findings are that a higher level of coverage of interventions, including needle and syringe programs, is likely required to reduce blood-borne virus transmission."

And your point was...?

Also, why do you keep going on about the whole gay sex thing? How does talk about syringes, needles, and programs lead you to talk about asking people to have gay sex with you and phone numbers on pay phones and whatever? Just because these diseases and viruses can be transmitted via sex doesn't mean it's relevant to the discussion of the effectiveness of needle programs.
 

DeletedUser34

Your Article
(Reuters Health) - Needle-exchange programs designed to cut injection drug users' risk of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, and other infections do seem to reduce needle sharing, but there is only limited evidence that they lower disease transmission, a new research review concludes.

Reporting in the journal Addiction, researchers say that based on their study -- an analysis of five previous reviews of needle-exchange programs -- the evidence for the programs' effectiveness is weaker than generally thought.

However, they also stress that their review did not find needle-exchange programs to be ineffective either.

"The findings of this review should not be used as a justification to close NSPs (needle and syringe programs) or hinder their introduction," write the researchers, led by Norah Palmateer, of Health Protection Scotland, part of the UK National Health Service.

"Insufficient or weak evidence of an effect is not evidence of no effect," Palmateer told Reuters Health in an email. "It is more a reflection of the studies and evidence available."

It is not that studies on needle-exchange programs have been "poor," Palmateer said, but they are limited by the nature of their design.

Studies looking at needle-exchange programs have been observational, rather than controlled clinical trials where researchers would, for example, randomly assign some communities to start a program, and then compare them over time with program-free communities.

Observational studies, Palmateer noted, are subject to limitations like "selection bias." For example, if those injection drug users at greatest risk of HIV are most likely to use the programs, then a study may find that program attendees have a higher rate of infection than drug users not involved in needle-exchange.

Needle-exchange programs have always been controversial, with opponents arguing that they sustain people's addictions and send the wrong message about drug use. The U.S. just recently repealed a ban on federal funding for needle-exchange programs, though some cities have long had their own programs.

Advocates of the programs, including many public-health and HIV experts, point to studies showing that needle and syringe exchange can cut HIV transmission --such as a 2004 review by the World Health Organization (WHO) that concluded there is "compelling evidence" that the programs reduce HIV infections.

However, individual studies have come to mixed conclusions, including those covered by the WHO review, according to the current study.

Palmateer and her colleagues found that of the 10 studies in the WHO review focusing on HIV transmission, five had positive findings; of those five, four had weaknesses in their design that limit the conclusions that can be drawn.

Palmateer's team also looked at two other reviews that covered many of the same studies as the WHO review. One research team came to similar conclusions as the WHO, while the other was more guarded -- saying that the evidence that needle-exchange programs reduce HIV transmission is "modest." (is it just me or does modest still mean a plus improvement?)

Overall, Palmateer and her colleagues conclude, there appears to be "tentative" evidence that needle-exchange programs reduce HIV transmission among injection-drug users.

When it came to hepatitis C, a liver infection usually spread through infected blood, there was insufficient evidence to say whether the programs are effective or not, according to Palmateer's team. Of the five reviews she and her colleagues analyzed, the three major ones did not examine hepatitis C "in any depth," the researchers write.

There was also insufficient evidence of the effectiveness of alternatives to standard needle-exchange programs -- including vending machines that sell syringes and needles, and outreach programs that go to drug users rather than having them come to a clinic.

On the other hand, there was "strong" evidence across the reviews that needle-exchange programs reduce the sharing or reuse of dirty needles, and no evidence of harmful effects, according to Palmateer's team. (Call me crazy, but I would think a logical leap would be, less dirty needles would equal less risk of transfer...but hey, that is just me...

Exactly why the evidence for disease prevention is not as strong is not entirely clear. Studies may have failed to detect an impact, but limitations of the programs themselves may also be at work.
imagine that!!!

For example, many of the needle-exchange programs studied in these reviews had strict limits on the number of syringes and needles they could give clients, Palmateer and her colleagues note. So while they might have reduced users' needle sharing and reuse, it might not have been adequate.

It is not known what "level of coverage" -- that is, the amount of injecting equipment given to clients -- is needed to lower HIV and hepatitis C rates, according to Palmateer's team. And at any rate, the optimal level will vary from one locale to another.

"The main public health implications of the findings are that a higher level of coverage of interventions, including (needle and syringe programs), is likely required to reduce blood-borne virus transmission," Palmateer said.

She noted that this may be especially true of hepatitis C, which is most commonly transmitted through drug-equipment sharing. In the U.S., injection drug use is believed to account for most new cases of hepatitis C and about one-fifth of new HIV cases.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for making mine and Diggo's point for us. It was great. I have highlighted with bold all the points that help us, and the underlined points go to you. It has been fun.

oh yes, FYI, I am not for giving out needles per say. I am for whatever is cheaper, as I am a tea party Republican, rank and file.......I am for whichever is cheaper, needle programs or medical cost.....it seems it is the needle program. It was nice talking to you. Sorry your own "proof" helped stuff that sock into your mouth. Don't gag....I am hoping it is clean. You do do laundry in your house yes?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dark Lotus

You are welcome. I aim to please ;) Right now the most urgent need is not needles, aids, or drug addiction. It is helping Scorpdog take the #1 spot from Daniel.