Opioid crisis got worse thanks to Obamacare

[SunsetBengal]

(06-28-2017, 04:58 PM)Griever Wrote: what we need is for all those lazy bums on medicaid to get real jobs, right?

Better yet, just legalize opioid use for everyone, let them write their own prescriptions.  If they die?  Oh, well.  We tried to tell you they were bad. 

[JustWinBaby]

Hey....let's not ignore opium dealers as part of the solution to reduce the price of painkillers....

[*wildcats forever*]

(07-01-2017, 07:19 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Better yet, just legalize opioid use for everyone, let them write their own prescriptions.  If they die?  Oh, well.  We tried to tell you they were bad. 

You might want to rethink this, old friend. Think of the stranglehold this would put on the economy! Lawyers would lose revenue from fewer clients. And the prisons! The already struggling prison system would suffer greatly with reduced occupancy. And for the unfortunate ones who fall through the cracks and get tangled up with the health care system,  (doctors, nurses, hospitals, pharmaceutical providers), and even the insurance industry would lose so many jobs the fallout would be devastating. 

[Millhouse]

(07-01-2017, 07:19 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Better yet, just legalize opioid use for everyone, let them write their own prescriptions.  If they die?  Oh, well.  We tried to tell you they were bad. 

A Middletown, OH councilman proposes for his area that a heroin user can only be revived two times (I am guessing yearly?) by ems squads with the drug Narcan. Any time after that though, they would be on their own. 

As harsh and cruel as that may sound to some people, I am all for it because at some point allowing natural selection to run its course might be a good thing for society in the long run. But also because of the money and strain it causes on local cities like Middletown where I read they pay about $100k a year on the Narcan revival drug, which is 10 times the amount they are budgeted for. And spend 1.5 million a year just on heroin addicts overdosing in total cost. (article below)

So my question to folks here is what do you think the limit should be on reviving a heroin addict, or should there be a limit? And should an heroin overdose take second priority for EMS squads if other emergencies are happening at the same time? I say yes for sure on the this.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/06/28/ohio-councilman-suggests-three-strikes-law-halt-overdose-rescues/434920001/

[NATI BENGALS]

(07-02-2017, 11:37 AM)Millhouse Wrote: A Middletown, OH councilman proposes for his area that a heroin user can only be revived two times (I am guessing yearly?) by ems squads with the drug Narcan. Any time after that though, they would be on their own. 

As harsh and cruel as that may sound to some people, I am all for it because at some point allowing natural selection to run its course might be a good thing for society in the long run. But also because of the money and strain it causes on local cities like Middletown where I read they pay about $100k a year on the Narcan revival drug, which is 10 times the amount they are budgeted for. And spend 1.5 million a year just on heroin addicts overdosing in total cost. (article below)

So my question to folks here is what do you think the limit should be on reviving a heroin addict, or should there be a limit? And should an heroin overdose take second priority for EMS squads if other emergencies are happening at the same time? I say yes for sure on the this.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/06/28/ohio-councilman-suggests-three-strikes-law-halt-overdose-rescues/434920001/

Nothing like the comfort of knowing the paramedics will revive you if that fentynal laced heroin you wanted so bad kills you.

I saw a heqdline the other day. Think the same guy was revived like 9 different times. 

Most of the time there are no charges filed. There needs to be lengthy community service sentences handed out or something. Our cities should be spotless because of all these people picking up garbage.

[Benton]

(07-02-2017, 11:37 AM)Millhouse Wrote: A Middletown, OH councilman proposes for his area that a heroin user can only be revived two times (I am guessing yearly?) by ems squads with the drug Narcan. Any time after that though, they would be on their own. 

As harsh and cruel as that may sound to some people, I am all for it because at some point allowing natural selection to run its course might be a good thing for society in the long run. But also because of the money and strain it causes on local cities like Middletown where I read they pay about $100k a year on the Narcan revival drug, which is 10 times the amount they are budgeted for. And spend 1.5 million a year just on heroin addicts overdosing in total cost. (article below)

So my question to folks here is what do you think the limit should be on reviving a heroin addict, or should there be a limit? And should an heroin overdose take second priority for EMS squads if other emergencies are happening at the same time? I say yes for sure on the this.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/06/28/ohio-councilman-suggests-three-strikes-law-halt-overdose-rescues/434920001/

Sounds like a nightmare of paperwork.

"Bill, revive this guy."

"I can't he was give. His second dose in august."

"But he got his first in October, so calendar year, he.... wAit, google the statute."

Plus, I can't imagine telling a healthcare professional not to save someone. Most likely they will anyway.

Good intentions, bad idea.

I would prefer they just outlaw methadone and instead of trying to chemically treat addiction, start funding treatment centers. trying to help out drug companies and the prison industry has created a horrible approach to ending drug abuse in this country.

[SunsetBengal]

(07-02-2017, 11:37 AM)Millhouse Wrote: A Middletown, OH councilman proposes for his area that a heroin user can only be revived two times (I am guessing yearly?) by ems squads with the drug Narcan. Any time after that though, they would be on their own. 

As harsh and cruel as that may sound to some people, I am all for it because at some point allowing natural selection to run its course might be a good thing for society in the long run. But also because of the money and strain it causes on local cities like Middletown where I read they pay about $100k a year on the Narcan revival drug, which is 10 times the amount they are budgeted for. And spend 1.5 million a year just on heroin addicts overdosing in total cost. (article below)

So my question to folks here is what do you think the limit should be on reviving a heroin addict, or should there be a limit? And should an heroin overdose take second priority for EMS squads if other emergencies are happening at the same time? I say yes for sure on the this.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/06/28/ohio-councilman-suggests-three-strikes-law-halt-overdose-rescues/434920001/

I'm sure that situation in Middletown will prompt a good bit of discussion on just burden should Government be held accountable for, to save people from their own poor life choices.  Some will claim that these people are sick, with a disease, and deserve our fullest compassion.  Others, like myself, will claim that these people made a conscious choice to endanger their lives, and should be allowed to run their course to their own undoing. 

[HarleyDog]

Unfortunately, these addicts are causing more harm than to just themselves. Overdosing while driving, depleting local budgets, etc. so I started thinking, when life hands us lemons, make lemonade right? Seriously thinking about dropping a few thousand bucks on the stocks of companies that make Narcan. This crap is only going to get worse.