Britain can avoid sleepwalking into a US synthetic opioid crisis. Here’s how | Niko Vorobyov

LLast week, Home Secretary James Cleverly said announced that nitasenes are now treated as Class A drugs, his statement ended with the usual stern rhetoric about the need to “keep these despicable drugs off our streets.” The maximum penalty for selling or supplying Class A is life imprisonment.

Cleverly’s decision follows the discovery that several fatal drug poisoning victims had nitasenes in their systems. Nitazenes are synthetic opioids, meaning they are similar to the heroin and morphine refined from opium poppies, but made entirely in a laboratory. First developed as painkillers in the 1950s, but never approved for medical use, they were found mixed heroin to give the low-grade version of the drug an extra kick, as well as in illegal Xanax and Valium pills sold on the dark web. Up to 500 times stronger than morphine, even a small amount can be fatal.

In these relatively few cases, there are echoes of the overdose epidemic in the US that is now claimingmore than 100,000 lives per year – more than half of which comes from fentanyl, another synthetic opioid. This outbreak has led to a revival of a strict drug policy. But as Britain risks sliding into an opioid crisis, these are the pitfalls we must avoid.

A month ago, Oregon State withdrawn the Drug Addiction Treatment and Recovery Act (known as Measure 110), which passed by referendum in 2020, decriminalizing personal quantities of narcotics as part of a “health-based” approach to drug addiction. below that lawUsers were not arrested for possessing a gram of cocaine, but instead were fined $100 unless they entered drug treatment. Trading, meanwhile, was still classified as a crime. But amid a rising death toll The fentanyl crisis and homeless tents filling the sidewalks caused lawmakers to panic and reverse their decision. Drug users caught with small amounts of drugs can now go back to prison.

This return to the drug war norm makes little sense; it has been proven time and time again that increased criminalization does nothing to reduce addiction rates. Politicians lost their nerve in Oregon over a rise in drug deaths after Measure 110 passed — but as one study foundthis has more to do with the increasing prevalence of fentanyl rather than users taking greater risks because of the lower penalties. The fact is that wherever fentanyl hits the market in the US, the death rate skyrockets. Police action that disrupts the supply chain only makes matters worse as new dealers emerge with unknown strength and quality. A recent study in Indiana found it that the number of fatal overdoses increased every time there was a major drug bust.

A growing problem of street homelessness — and the very public drug use that many people on the streets are involved in — also forced lawmakers’ hands. But people don’t set up a tent under a bypass because of addiction problems. West Virginia is one of the hardest hit by drug deaths, but has the lowest rate of homelessness. Why? Housing is relatively cheap therewhile average rents in Oregon doubled between 2020 and 2021. Could it be that unaffordable rents are driving people out of their homes? No, it must be the meds!

Putting on the handcuffs doesn’t help. I’ve tried tramadol, lean drinking (a cocktail of codeine plus soda), and smoked opium, and I understand why people become addicted to opioids. If your life feels empty and hopeless, why not? They don’t fill the void, but they don’t make you care. They are like an anesthetic for inner pain. A recent study showed that 96% of patients abandon mandatory detox recurrent within months, proving that locking people up does not heal them from their trauma. You simply cannot force someone to sober up.

What could Britain do differently? In the 1980s a Liverpool Clinic led by Welsh doctor John Marks provided free heroin and cocaine thanks to the NHS. There was no toxic fentanyl or nitasenes, no one dropped dead from an overdose, and the stability of a stable solution gave their patients the chance to live normal lives, keep jobs, and rebuild ties with their families without being on edge for police officers or pushers. . Their business dried up and heroin dealers began to disappear from the area.

So why should law-abiding taxpayers foot the bill for allowing these junkies to have their fun? For starters, it’s more cost-efficient. The cohort of patients in a comparable clinic Middlesborough committed 541 crimes before taking part in the scheme, which cost £2.1m of taxpayers’ money. And if they were locked up in prison, it cost even more £47,000 per year to keep them housed and fed, again at taxpayer expense. By contrast, giving them free heroin costs just £12,000 a year, while giving them the chance to get their lives back on track. Over a six-month period, the Middlesborough cohort committed a total of three crimes, all found a roof over their heads (many were previously unhoused) and stopped buying items from their dealers (which may have contained toxic additives). contain). almost fully. That is, until funding was cut in 2022.

Feeding their dependency wasn’t an ideal solution, but it was in the long term diamorphine use – that is, clinically pure heroin – causes minimal damage to the body, certainly less than alcohol, it avoids the very worst consequences. You can’t help someone when they’re dead.

With the Taliban poppy ban By cutting off the heroin supply from Afghanistan, it is likely that synthetic opioids will become increasingly common in the UK illicit drug scene, regardless of whether they are class A, B or Z. To stay ahead, a safe supply is the only logical solution.