Answer Addiction

Author: The Fix

  • April is Alcohol Awareness Month

    April is Alcohol Awareness Month

    This year’s theme “Help for Today, Hope for Tomorrow” focuses on educating young people about the dangers of alcohol abuse.

    April is Alcohol Awareness Month. In 2019, the focus is on underage drinking.

    Alcohol abuse/addiction have taken a backseat to the epidemic of opioid abuse that has swept the country. However, alcohol abuse continues to increase in America.

    Alcohol Awareness Month, established in 1987, was created in part to reduce the stigma of alcoholism and to support local communities in addressing alcohol-related issues.

    A 2015 NSDUH study of young people between the ages of 12 to 17 estimated that 623,000 adolescents ages had alcohol use disorder, or AUD. (This study looked at 298,000 male and 325,000 female subjects.)

    According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), alcohol use disorder is defined as “a chronic relapsing brain disease characterized by compulsive alcohol use, loss of control over alcohol intake, and a negative emotional state when not using.”

    Signs of teen problematic drinking are similar to the signs of drug addiction, according to Project Know—including shirking of regular responsibilities (such as ditching school or suddenly getting bad grades), lack of interest in relationships, irresponsible behavior or a change in appearance such as exhaustion, weight loss or gain, or sudden lack of concern for appearance.

    Teens who have a family or personal history of addiction or mental health issues are more at risk of alcohol abuse, as are teens who are under greater stress due to socioeconomic or personal circumstance.

    The theme of Alcohol Awareness Month with its focus on youth drinking is “Changing Attitudes—It’s not a rite of passage.” This slogan seeks to change the cultural idea that heavy drinking is an important or expected part of teenage social life.

    The first weekend of April, the National Council on Alcohol and Drug Dependence (NCADD) is encouraging the public participate in Alcohol-Free Weekend. NCADD offers this weekend as a gesture of solidarity in our communities in support of alcohol-free youths, in remaining completely alcohol-free for three days.

    The Office of Disease Prevention offered these ideas as April’s action tool kit for communities:

    1. Share about April’s Alcohol Awareness month and focus on underage drinking on social media.

    2. Host a community event where families can learn about the issues around underage alcohol use and abuse.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Improvised Nasal Naloxone Devices Less Effective Than Narcan, Study Finds

    Improvised Nasal Naloxone Devices Less Effective Than Narcan, Study Finds

    The FDA-approved Narcan nasal spray delivers more of the antidote into the blood than the improvised naloxone device

    A recent study conducted by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) found that improvised nasal naloxone devices (INNDs) are significantly less effective at administering high enough doses of the overdose-reversing medication than the FDA-approved Narcan.

    Naloxone is the drug that can reverse opioid overdoses that kill tens of thousands of people in the U.S. every year. Efforts to make it available, particularly in the form of Narcan, are a part of the national fight against the deadly opioid epidemic.

    INNDs, according to Psych Congress, “consisting of a prefilled naloxone syringe attached to a mucosal atomization device” and have been used by first responders and others to successfully reverse overdoses for 25 years.

    However, the study, first reported on by NIDA on March 15, found that Narcan does a better job of delivering high enough doses of naloxone to be maximally effective. 

    “Scientists found that the approved naloxone devices deliver higher blood levels of naloxone than the improvised nasal devices,” the report reads. “In fact, levels in the plasma concentration of naloxone are considerably lower when improvised devices are used. The FDA-approved 4-mg dose nasal spray produced the highest blood level of naloxone of all the products tested.”

    Speed and plasma concentration of naloxone are especially important as overdoses of the highly potent synthetic opioid fentanyl have skyrocketed in the past few years. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that fentanyl-related overdose deaths doubled each year from 2013 to 2016.

    The fastest way to administer naloxone to counter an opioid overdose is with an IV, but first responders might not have access to the equipment they need to give a naloxone IV when time is of the essence.

    Narcan is a simple nasal spray that does not require assembly and can be administered in one nostril while the patient is lying on their back. Members of the public, including people with opioid use disorders, can be easily trained to administer Narcan, and it is available to anyone without a prescription. Health insurance may even cover some or all of the cost.

    “Using the FDA-approved nasal Narcan spray is a great choice for average consumers, who will likely keep only one or two devices on hand,” said NIDA’s Dr. Philip A. Krieter. “It is smaller, easier to use, and doesn’t require much if any training to use properly. The Narcan spray is a ready-to-use device; the improvised device needs assembly, and lay persons may not able to use it correctly in a panic situation.”

    However, according to TIME, a Narcan kit with two doses costs around $135 without insurance, which may be prohibitively expensive for some.

    Another option is the auto-injection device Ezvio, which has also been approved by the FDA. According to Dr. Krieter, a generic version of Ezvio will become available “later this year for some purchasers.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Taraji P. Henson Reveals Depression, Anxiety Battle

    Taraji P. Henson Reveals Depression, Anxiety Battle

    “When they yell ‘Cut’ and ‘That’s a wrap,’ I go home to very serious problems. I’m still a real human,” Henson said.

    Academy Award-winning actress Taraji P. Henson has opened up to Variety about her battle with depression and anxiety.

    ”I suffer from depression,” the Empire actress revealed. “My anxiety is kicking up even more every day, and I’ve never really dealt with anxiety like that. It’s something new.”

    Henson has had a prolific and successful career in Hollywood, but she admits that while the lives of the rich and famous may appear to be filled with non-stop glamour, they also deal with real-world problems. 

    “I think there’s a misconception with people in the limelight that we have it all together, and because we have money now and are living out our dreams, everything is fine. That’s not the case,” Henson explains. “When they yell ‘Cut’ and ‘That’s a wrap,’ I go home to very serious problems. I’m still a real human.”

    Last year, she launched a new foundation to help raise awareness for mental health in the African American community.

    ”We’re walking around broken, wounded and hurt, and we don’t think it’s OK to talk about it,” she says. “We don’t talk about it at home. It’s shunned. It’s something that makes you look weak. We’re told to pray it away. Everyone was always asking me, ‘Do you have a charity?’ Well, dammit, this is going to be my calling, because I’m sick of this. People are killing themselves. People are numbing out on drugs. Not everything is fixed with a pill.”

    As Inside Philanthropy reports, the organization is called the Boris Lawrence Henson Foundation, and Taraji named it after her late father. In a statement, the organization explained, “Silence for Black people must end. We want to provide a safe environment for African-Americans to discuss their concerns in a space where they will not be persecuted or misunderstood.”

    Henson was inspired to launch this foundation because of her father’s struggles with mental illness. Boris Henson was a veteran of the Vietnam War, and he suffered from alcoholism and PTSD.

    As Henson explains, “My dad fought in the Vietnam War for our country, returned broken, and received little to know physical or emotional support. I stand in his absence, committed to offering support to African Americans who face trauma daily, simply because they’re black.”

    One of the goals of the Boris Lawrence Henson Foundation is to provide more mental health support for African-American youths, as well as provide backing for re-entry programs for people coming out of prison. The Foundation also wants to increase the presence of African-Americans in the mental healthcare field in the hope that it will encourage more African-Americans to get the mental health help they need.

    The Foundation’s website reports, “One in five Americans suffer from mental illness. African-Americans are the least likely population to seek treatment. We were taught to hold our problems close to the vest out of fear of being labeled and further demonized as inept, weak, and / or inadequate. African-Americans also have a history of being misdiagnosed, so there is mistrust associated with therapy.”

    As the Foundation statement continues, “People trust who they know and what they know. Having an African-American or culturally competent therapist gives way to the idea of opening up.”

    Henson explains, “My white friends have standing appointments with their therapists. I was like, ‘Why aren’t we doing that?’ In our culture, it’s taboo.”

    Henson also had personal traumas of her own that inspired the launch of her foundation, including the murder of her son’s father. Henson and her son both went into therapy, and she hopes her presence will encourage more people to get help themselves.

    As she explained to the Chicago Sun Times, “I think people feel safe when they see someone they look up to, and can go, ‘Oh wow. She’s just like me!’ We’re all humans. And we’re all in this thing called life, together. I’m trying to use my platform to do some good. If you know someone or if you are someone suffering from mental illness, just know you are not alone.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Dear Daddy, Why Didn't You Protect Me?

    Dear Daddy, Why Didn't You Protect Me?

    Instead of worrying about being attacked by some random person on the street, I lived with my attacker 365 days a year.

    My stepmom couldn’t remember if he whipped out a knife or a pipe of a similar size, but she recalled the moment the perp appeared over her left shoulder. She was leaning against my dad’s car, parked in front of the apartment building he owned on George Street in Norristown, Pennsylvania. They were there that night cleaning up after the first-floor tenant who’d recently moved out after dodging his rent for months. My dad was still inside when my stepmom stepped out for a cigarette. That’s when she says she was attacked. But just as the man who appeared over her left shoulder was winding up to bash or stab her, my dad popped out from the darkness and swatted him away. The details at that point get fuzzy because as my stepmom recalled, she was in shock, her body trembling as she collapsed into my dad’s chest like a wet noodle.

    “Your father saved me,” she’d lament whenever she told the story. “He’s such a good man…such a good man.”

    My dad began dating my stepmom before my parents divorced when I was four years old. As part of my parents’ agreement, my two older brothers, practically residents at the local juvenile hall, stayed with my dad while I moved with my mom to East Falls, Philadelphia. With the three of us kids figuratively gone, my dad was free to court my stepmom, and he did so with fervor. Newly divorced herself, and emotionally impaired by her allegedly abusive ex-husband, my stepmom basked in my dad’s undivided attention and unsolicited protection. It was through her stories about my dad’s acts of chivalry — rescuing her when her car broke down in a blinding blizzard or refusing to let her enter her apartment before he inspected every room and closet — that greatly influenced my perception of my dad. As a little girl, my father was more than a good man; he was my superhero. Until I realized he wasn’t.

    The disparity between my dad’s willingness to protect my stepmom and his inability to express even the slightest concern over my wellbeing became painfully clear while I was living with my mom and the man who eventually became my stepdad. They were both alcoholics with ravenous appetites for violence and our home was a war zone. Instead of worrying about being attacked by some random person on the street, I lived with my attacker 365 days a year. I spent many school nights and weekends watching my stepdad choke my mom on the living room floor. I scrubbed her blood off the sofa when my stepdad split my mom’s lips open, and when she turned her rage in my direction, I dodged the knives she thrust at my back and hid the patches of hair she ripped off my head.

    Literally and figuratively, I wore the scars of an abused kid. But unlike the thick coat of protection my dad offered my stepmom, he couldn’t be bothered to do anything about the hell I was experiencing. And it wasn’t because he didn’t know. My mom and stepdad didn’t keep their lifestyle a secret; on many occasions, amid a drunken fit, my mom called my dad.

    “I’m gonna kill your fuckin’ daughter,” she threatened. There would be a short pause while my dad responded.

    “Come and get your little bitch,” my mom screamed into the receiver while looking right at me.

    “You hear that?” she said. “Your dad’s not comin’, he doesn’t fuckin’ want you.”

    Despite the many things my mom got wrong when she was drunk, she wasn’t lying about my dad. He only lived a quick 30-minute drive away, but she was right. He wasn’t coming.

    When I was eight years old, my mom effectively kicked me out of her house. Oddly, it was the idea of me being homeless and not my mom’s drunken threats to kill me that motivated my dad to act. And although I was relieved to be moving away from the chaos, living with my dad and stepmom became a nightmare of a different kind.

    Slowly I realized it wasn’t only boogeymen lurking in the dark or tales of abusive ex-husbands that my dad protected my stepmom from. He was also willing to shield her from me if she felt she needed it, no questions asked. Once at a family gathering, my stepmom grew increasingly annoyed when I wouldn’t get off the couch and play with the other children. At ten years old, I was painfully shy and didn’t know how to approach a group of kids I’d never met before. When I wouldn’t budge, my stepmom stormed out of the house and my dad and I followed. On the front lawn, she turned to me and said, “Great, now everyone is going to think you’re retarded.” As I started to cry, my dad wrapped his arms around my stepmom and looked away.

    To this day, my dad has yet to acknowledge the life I lived with my mom and stepdad. He never asked me what it was like to watch my stepdad bash my mom’s face into a mirror or how sick it made me feel to have to tell my stepdad I loved him when there wasn’t a cell in my body that did. No, he never once inquired, but on several occasions he brought up my stepmom’s childhood. He shared how her father died when she was young and how her mother was never around. And while my stepmom’s upbringing may have been less than ideal and could have affected her behavior in certain ways, I’ve never understood how my dad could compare my experience to hers. I don’t know how he could look me in the eyes and say, “You know, your stepmom had it bad too.”

    A few months before my 18th birthday, my dad was hit by a car. One of his hips was nearly shattered, and after being released from the hospital, he spent weeks laid up in bed. One night we got in an argument over something trivial. As our exchange escalated, my stepmom burst into the room, grabbed me from behind and shoved me towards the bedroom door. Although she had occasionally spanked me for misbehaving when I was younger, this was the first time she put her hands on me as an adult. As I regained my balance, I turned towards my stepmom and paused. Although my body was still, in my mind I’d already lurched forward and pinned her against the wall.

    What happened next snapped me out of my fantasy. Off to my left, I watched my dad, who’d been bedridden for weeks, thrust himself out of bed. Although he barely had the strength or the balance to stand, I knew if I caused any harm my dad would call the police and I’d be the one leaving in handcuffs. Given my lack of options, I did the only thing I had the power to do. I walked away. I knew who my dad would choose to protect and defend.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • New York Tries To Tax Prescription Opioids Again

    New York Tries To Tax Prescription Opioids Again

    Some people argue that the tax could push people to use illegal alternatives if prescription opioids become more expensive.

    New York state has passed a measure to tax opioid prescriptions in an attempt to fund addiction-recovery efforts, despite the fact that a court ruled a similar measure unconstitutional last year. 

    According to WXXI, the state said that the measure, part of the state budget, is intended to raise additional funds to pay for the response to the opioid crisis by taxing manufacturers.

    However, some people argue that the tax could have unintended effects, pushing people to use illegal substances if prescription opioids become more expensive. 

    “While the language of the proposed law attempts to place the burden of the tax on drug manufacturers, in practice market forces determine how the burden of the tax is shared between producers and consumers,” Lewis Davis, professor of economics at Union College, wrote in a report.

    The report was prepared last year and paid for by a pharmaceutical lobbying group, but echoed concerns shared by other organizations including the American Cancer Society Action Network.

    Davis pointed out that the tax policy could have a number of negative side effects. 

    “Most of the tax will be paid by non-consuming NY residents in the form of higher insurance premiums and higher taxes to cover public health programs. Second, to the extent that the cost of the tax is passed on to consumers, it will have a high cost to society in terms of reduced access to medically appropriate use of opioids,” he wrote. “Third, by increasing the cost of prescription opioids, the proposed tax will encourage NY residents suffering from opioid dependence to switch to cheaper illegal opioids, including heroin and fentanyl, with increased rates of accidental overdose.”

    He continued, “Because it fails to target opioid abuse, the proposed tax is poorly designed policy for addressing the opioid crisis.”

    Last year, a federal court struck down the tax because it would violate interstate commerce laws by treating New York residents differently from consumers in other states. The 2019 version of the bill works around that and should stand up in court, according to the state. 

    Freeman Klopott, a spokesperson for the state budget office, said that New Yorkers who use prescription opioids won’t be affected by the measure, since most of the cost for the tax will be shouldered by insurance companies and drug manufacturers. 

    “We expect no significant change in the availability of these pharmaceuticals or any diversion to illicit alternatives,” said Klopott.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • How Teen Drinking May Affect Brain Growth

    How Teen Drinking May Affect Brain Growth

    Researchers investigated whether drinking alcohol during the teen years stunted brain growth.

    Drinking alcohol could stunt brain growth in teenagers and increase their risk for problematic drinking in the long term, according to a recent study. 

    The findings were published in the journal eNeuro. To examine the effects of alcohol on brain development, scientists allowed rhesus macaque monkeys to drink as much as they wanted. They tracked how much the monkeys ate and drank, and used MRIs to measure their brain growth. 

    “Heavy alcohol reduced the rate of brain growth” by 0.25 milliliters per year for every gram of alcohol consumed per kilogram of body weight, the researchers found. Smaller brain volume can be associated with less cognitive abilities, because there are fewer connections in the brain. 

    During the teen years, the brain is rapidly growing and developing, which may explain why teens are particularly vulnerable to the brain-stunting effects of alcohol. 

    “The transition from adolescence to adulthood is associated with brain remodeling in the final stages of developmental growth. It is also a period when a large proportion of this age group engages to binge and heavy alcohol drinking,” study authors wrote.

    The stunted growth could lead to long-term cognitive effects, although further studies would be needed to examine that theory. 

    “This is the age range when the brain is being fine-tuned to fit adult responsibilities. The question is, does alcohol exposure during this age range alter the lifetime learning ability of individuals?” lead author Dr. Tatiana Shnitko said to The Journal. 

    In addition to affecting brain volume, drinking during the teen years also seemed to be associated with heavier drinking later in life in the monkeys that were studied. 

    “Thus, developmental brain volume changes in the span of late adolescence to young adulthood in macaques is altered by excessive alcohol, an insult (the cause of some kind of physical or mental injury) that may be linked to the continuation of heavy drinking throughout later adult life,” they wrote. 

    This indicates that early drinking could lead to lifelong problems in humans’ drinking patterns as well. 

    While not all the effects from monkeys can be extrapolated to humans, studying the effects of alcohol on primates’ brains is a powerful tool for researchers. Study author Christopher Kroenke said that using monkeys allowed researchers to control for factors and focus on the specific effects of alcohol use. 

    “Human studies are based on self-reporting of underage drinkers,” he said. “Our measures pinpoint alcohol drinking with the impaired brain growth.”

    The amount of alcohol that affected brain health would be equivalent to about four beers a day. 

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • States Need Long-Term Opioid Response Funding, Report Finds

    States Need Long-Term Opioid Response Funding, Report Finds

    Areas with the highest overdose rates are receiving funding while rural areas struggle to received adequate funding. 

    The United States is spending more money than ever on addiction treatment, particularly focused on the ongoing opioid crisis. However, the federal response is hindered by one-time grants and limitations on the programs that they can fund, according to a new report by the Bipartisan Policy Center. 

    The report found that federal spending on addiction interventions more than doubled between 2017 and 2018, rising from $3.3 billion to $7.4 billion. However, more federal coordination is needed to streamline how these funds are delivered to states and help determine how they can best be used. 

    “The sheer volume of grants going to the states has made it challenging for state officials to track and coordinate these funding streams and monitor the quality of treatment that is being provided,” Dr. Anand Parekh, the Bipartisan Policy Center’s chief medical advisor, said in a news release. “Congress and the administration must provide greater oversight to ensure these federal resources are better coordinated and well spent, so states can respond effectively to this crisis.”

    Looking at how funds were utilized in Arizona, Louisiana, New Hampshire, Ohio and Tennessee, researchers found that the money was making it to areas with the highest overdose rates, but that rural areas received less funding. 

    One way to avoid this is by having a state system, often directed by the governor, to coordinate opioids response. 

    “A statewide coordinating body, typically convened by the governor, is an essential part of developing a strategic opioid epidemic response,” the report authors wrote. 

    “Governors are on the front lines of the opioid epidemic and keenly aware that the crisis is multifaceted and demands the same response,” said Hemi Tewarson, health division director for the National Governors Association.

    These state agencies can also help coordinate more in-depth tracking of outcomes for intervention programs. 

    In addition, the report pointed out problems with the current funding model. With states only getting grants, it’s difficult to plan for a long-term response to the drug crisis. 

    “With one-time funding, we are treating the problem of addiction in our country as an acute condition rather than a chronic condition,” said Regina LaBelle, a consultant for the policy center and former chief of staff of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. “Substance use disorders are not going away. Federal funding must be provided over the long-term instead of in annual budget cycles.”

    In addition, the terms of funding need to allow for flexibility in how states handle substance use disorder, she said. 

    “Flexibility in funding ensures that while states are responding to today’s opioid epidemic, they are also prepared for other emerging drug threats, such as methamphetamine and cocaine,” the report reads. 

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Michigan Grapples With Marijuana Licensing

    Michigan Grapples With Marijuana Licensing

    Michigan has been slow to give out business licenses to sell marijuana.

    A judge in Michigan ruled this week that the state could not shut down marijuana retailers while they await a review of their application for a license to sell marijuana.

    The ruling highlights the latest in a series of hurdles facing states in the process of setting up a retail marijuana market. In Michigan, which became the first midwestern state to legalize recreational cannabis last November, marijuana business owners have complained about the state’s slow approval process. 

    Because the state has been slow to give out licenses, dispensaries have been allowed to remain open while their applications were reviewed, according to the Detroit Metro Times.

    There had been a deadline of March 31, but on Thursday (March 28) a judge from the Michigan Court of Claims barred the state from shutting down the shops. 

    “Until further order of the court, [The Bureau of Marijuana Regulation] will maintain the status quo and not enforce the March 31 deadline with respect to both temporary operating facilities and caregiver products,” said David Harns, a spokesman for the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs.

    Even though Michigan legalized marijuana, the slow pace of setting up its legal market has allowed illegal sales to continue to thrive. Not to mention the steep cost of obtaining a license to sell marijuana—which includes a $6,000 application fee and $66,000 a year for the license.

    The state has struggled to license enough dispensaries to keep up with demand, Harns said in February. 

    “We are focused on moving ahead by setting [a] regulatory framework to help create an industry in which licensed businesses can be successful,” he said. “We are constantly in contact with stakeholders, licensed operators and applicants to get a better understanding of how the regulatory environment affects them.”

    Michigan isn’t the only state that has legalized marijuana only to grapple with licensing issues.

    In March, the Sacramento Bee reported that California officials had approved only a fraction of its total applications received. The state gave out temporary licenses as a way to keep the legal market going despite the slow approval process.

    However, those temporary licenses are set to expire in the coming months and California has yet to approve enough permanent licensing to support the legal cannabis industry. 

    “This is the worst way to transition a multibillion-dollar agricultural crop, which employs thousands of Californians. Without legal licenses, there isn’t a legal, regulated market in California,” said State Sen. Mike McGuire, a Democrat who sponsored a bill to extend the validity of temporary licenses. 

    McGuire added, “In a time where the Golden State is working overtime to bring the cannabis industry out of the black market and into the light of a legal regulatory environment, we can’t afford to let good actors who want to comply with state law fall out of our regulated market just because timelines are too short and departments have been unable to process applications in time due to the sheer number of applications.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Why Aren't More Doctors Embracing Medication-Assisted Treatment?

    Why Aren't More Doctors Embracing Medication-Assisted Treatment?

    A new op-ed suggests that concerns about “branding” may deter many doctors from offering medication-assisted treatment (MAT) for opioid use disorder.

    A new op-ed on STAT News highlights a troubling concern in regard to medication-assisted treatment (MAT).

    Author David A. Patterson Silver Wolf, PhD, opined that the reason why methadone, buprenorphine and naltrexone aren’t more widely used to treat opioid use disorders (OUDs) may be due to “branding”—specifically, concern on the part of primary care physicians about the stigma associated with OUDs and its effect on their practice.

    But as Silver Wolf noted, the toll taken by the opioid epidemic on individuals and families all but required physicians to undertake the necessary steps to prescribe MAT, despite any qualms they may have.

    In the article, Silver Wolf, an associate professor at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri and faculty member for training programs funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), wrote that he came to his opinion after participating in a national panel of addiction experts that produced “Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Save Lives,” a report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.

    In the report, he and his fellow experts noted that while the need for medication-assisted treatment is sizable, and drugs like methadone and Suboxone have been approved as safe and effective treatments for OUD by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), only a small number of physicians have signed up for the necessary training by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be able to prescribe it.

    Silver Wolf also cited another STAT opinion piece, which speculated on some of the reasons why more physicians haven’t been lining up to prescribe MAT. One deterrent may be the process for receiving a federal waiver and the specialized training required to administer this treatment.

    But he also suggested that concern over the perception of those with substance use disorders by other patients may also color certain medical professionals’ opinions, who fear that the inclusion of such individuals to a patient base may negatively impact business.

    “Physicians whose practices focus on patients with opioid use disorder don’t have to worry about their ‘brand’ being harmed because it is tied to this treatment and this patient population,” Silver Wolf wrote. “But a typical primary care physician in Manhattan or suburban Atlanta or rural Nevada might worry about the potential trouble that patients with addictions might cause in their waiting rooms.” 

    The answer, according to Silver Wolf, is for more physicians to look past financial concerns and stigma, and take the steps to make medication-assisted treatment a part of their practice—even though, he adds, that many will not.

    But if individuals and families impacted by the addiction crisis—what the National Academies committee has come to view as an “all-hands-on-deck” situation—then Silver Wolf believes that physicians need to do the same.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Could The Nation's First Supervised Injection Sites Be Coming To Maine?

    Could The Nation's First Supervised Injection Sites Be Coming To Maine?

    Maine’s bill would allow two facilities in the state and create a half-mile “tolerance zone” around each location, where individuals cannot be arrested for using drugs.

    Maine officials held a public hearing Monday to consider a bill that could establish the first safe injection sites in the country. The bill, called “An Act to Prevent Overdose Deaths,” would certify two facilities to “provide safe and secure locations for people to self-administer drugs,” according to FOX 23.

    A number of local governments across the U.S. have considered opening “safe injection sites” or “supervised injection facilities” (SIFs) where individuals can safely use illicit substances with clean equipment and under the supervision of trained medical professionals, without the threat of arrest.

    The philosophy behind these facilities is that people will use drugs one way or another, and giving them a safe space to do so prevents overdose deaths and the spread of HIV and hepatitis C. At the same time, medical professionals on site can offer recommendations for addiction treatment and other health issues related to drug use.

    Places like Maryland, Seattle, San Diego, and Philadelphia have also considered opening safe injection sites. But the process has been slow going, not to mention the threat of legal action from the government. 

    Most recently, the Philadelphia non-profit Safehouse was sued by state prosecutors and the U.S. Department of Justice to stop the opening of the city’s first SIF.

    The legal challenge is based on a section of the federal Controlled Substances Act which intended to close “crack houses” in the ’80s. The ruling on the Philadelphia case is expected to determine the future of SIFs in the country.

    Meanwhile, the first of these sites in North America launched over 15 years ago in Vancouver, Canada. According to the BC Coroner’s Service spokesman, Andy Watson, there has not been a single death reported at any SIF in the province since they opened. At the same time, new HIV cases among people who use injection drugs have fallen by 86% since 2005.

    Maine’s bill would allow two facilities in the state to act as safe injection sites and create a half-mile “tolerance zone” around each location, where individuals cannot be arrested for using drugs. Said facilities would also gather and report demographic data and other information, which would be used to determine if additional sites should be opened.

    According to Maine Public, no one at the Monday hearing spoke against the bill, but “supporters acknowledged that safe injection sites would violate federal law.” So far, it does not appear that there are any legal challenges to this specific bill.

    View the original article at thefix.com