Who knew humans fall for ‘safe’ temptation?

Plenty of ink has been spilled recently about Canada’s “safe” drug supply, with thousands of inches of newsprint debating the merits of the program — both pro and con.

Much of it is in the wake of a special report in the National Post where Adam Zivo uncovered that a lot of the safer supply is being resold on the streets so that those who receive the “safe” opioid hydromorphone — safe as in it is as powerful as heroin — are reselling their pills on the streets, at ridiculously low cost to pay for even more powerful opioids. A terrible offshoot of this is low cost makes it affordable for teens to access hard drugs.

And this is how we treat addiction these days. Make it cheaper — free in fact — and easier to access.

The consequence of all of this is in the numbers. Actually, in the morgue. Canada’s Health Infobase stats show that between January 2016 and September 2022, there were “34,455 opiod toxicity deaths.” And just last year, between January and September, 5,360 Canadians died an opioid toxicity death. That is about 20 a day, the majority occurring in British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario. Young men are the overwhelming victims — 75 per cent in 2022 alone. In B.C. last year 2,272 people fell victim to opioids, where only a decade earlier it saw 270. That’s an 850-per-cent increase in 10 short years. Staggering numbers.

First off, let’s forget about a “safe” supply of dangerous drugs (though there’s an oxymoron to top them all, like “military intelligence” or “fighting for peace” as those old jokes go). The one thing missing in all this is one simple question: Who couldn’t have seen this coming? Isn’t that what studies are supposed to explore? (I guess the question could easily be answered, who, but for government, couldn’t have seen this coming?)

I mean, in the government bureaucracies where these policies are developed, is there not one person who is acquainted with human nature? Give me an inch and that’s only a short path to the mile I want. Yes, but we’ve had studies, studies and more studies on any of these topics. (Let’s forget that a study can tell you whatever you want it to, with the right criteria and methodology set up, my favourite being many years ago, well before Internet gambling, one study concluding Manitobans spent more on their bets than they did on food). But is there no one who could foresee a desperate segment of the population, many already on the wrong side of the law, would find a way to profit from this? Zivo’s research has found gang involvement in helping this spread. And in the no questions asked manner in which these drugs are given out, well, you don’t even have to come up with any foolproof story to get your way.

All Catholics are familiar with this having learned the Adam and Eve story in our earliest days. God told them to stay away from the forbidden fruit, but as we all know, the forbidden fruit just has to be sweeter.

Sadly, this lack of foresight can be seen in so many areas, and why is it that government is always the one that has been hoodwinked?

Abortion? Only for rape victims and we will keep it under control. Euthanasia? Only for those at the end of the line with no hope for recovery. How’d those work out?

Now we have drag queen story time for our youngest. What’s next for kids? Porn stars and strippers acting out love stories in school? (Dare I say, a slippery slope? Cue the ridicule).

Probably the second hardest thing to stomach in all this is watching politicians climbing aboard their soapboxes to tell us they are merely following the science and are actually saving lives. (I refer you back to paragraph four to see how that’s working out). The two sides go back and forth, each claiming the higher ground and the more sensible way of dealing with the problem.

But the hardest thing is that caught in the middle are the people who are paying the price, the addicts themselves. As each side claims to know best, the only conclusion you can come to is that they is no thought of them in coming up with a real solution. It begs the question: Why are we giving up on them?

Instead of the constant mud-slinging back and forth, perhaps there is a simpler solution: Get these people real help.