Donate

Category: All

  • Keeping music festival-goers safe through harm reduction

    Keeping music festival-goers safe through harm reduction

    [vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_column_text]With the onset of winter, I’ve been reminiscing about the summer. Like many young Canadians, I spent the summer adventuring around my province, hiking, camping and enjoying the extra freedom the warm weather offers. This summer I was also lucky enough to attend a number of music festivals. I love festivals. Spending a weekend away, great music, camping with your friends, dancing until the wee hours under starry skies… there’s something magical and ethereal about the festival community that draws in so many attendees every year.

    And yet, these festivals have a darker underbelly. “Party drugs” like ecstasy, ketamine and cocaine are common at music festivals, and their uncontrolled use can lead to serious consequences. This summer alone in Canada, almost 80 people were admitted to hospital after incidents with drugs at festivals. Two of these people died. They were only 20 and 22, respectively. Sadly, this is not an uncommon theme. Every year, kids go to festivals and every year kids die at festivals. The Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse reports that the largest number of ecstasy users are between the ages of 15-24. These are not dangerous criminals. Annie Trong-Le, 20, who died this summer of a recreational drug overdose, was a political science student at York and a regular volunteer in her community. These are normal kids from normal families. So what’s going on?

    The popularity of music festivals is on the rise. Shambhala, an electronic music festival near Salmo, British Columbia capped its attendance at 10,000, which represents a tenfold increase since its 1998 inception. The Squamish Valley music festival drew in nearly 100,000 guests this year. The Basscoast music festival, formerly held in Squamish, scaled up two years ago, capping attendance and moving to Merritt, BC.

    (Image placeholder)

    This rise is, at least in part, due to the dramatic increase in popularity of Electronic Dance Music (or EDM) in the past several years. According to the International Music Summer Consumer report in 2012, $6.4 billion EDM industry is the fastest growing music genre in the US, with similar growth in Canada. Festivals that used to attract large rock acts are now drawing huge DJs like Skrillex and Deadmau5.

    Synonymous with the EDM scene is MDMA, aka “molly” or ecstasy. MDMA is everywhere in popular culture. In Miley Cyrus’ hit song “We Can’t Stop”, she sings “la-di-da-da-d/We like to party/Dancing with molly/Doin’ whatever we want”. Madonna made waves this year, titling her new album the cheeky “MDNA”, and asking concert-goers at the Ultra music festival “Has anyone seen molly?” Having attended 3 festivals myself this summer, increased MDMA use was impossible to ignore. Festival dance floors that used to be littered with beer cups are now full of young people in neon taking pills. With the surge in EDM popularity, rave culture has come back in a big way, and despite a lack of data collection, my sense is that MDMA and recreational party drug use is on the rise.

    The problem with this, ironically, is not that kids are taking MDMA, but rather that they are NOT taking MDMA. In it’s pure, non-contaminated form, MDMA increases release of the neurotransmitter serotonin in your brain leading to a feeling of ecstasy, trust and connectedness and, though hotly contested, evidence suggest that the effects of pure MDMA are unlikely to lead to death (and actually, some labs are even looking at the potential to use MDMA for therapeutic use). The problem is that MDMA, usually purchased as capsules or pressed tabs, is often laced with dangerous substances like speed, cocaine, or other MDMA derivatives, like the dangerous PMMA. These substances, especially when ingested unknowingly, can lead to heart attacks, hyperthermia, seizures and many other symptoms. Most lethal cases of party drug use are actually a result of users unknowingly ingesting dangerous unknown substances.

    Most users of party drugs have no way of knowing what they’re taking. Even after many successful uses, a single dose of contaminated drugs can lead to unexpected and sudden death. Maintaining a staunch “anti-drug” approach is not preventing kids from taking drugs. And simply accepting that deaths are a consequence of festival culture is not suitable. We need better options to keep users safe – otherwise things are only going to get worse.

    Some groups have already started taking control. At the Shambhala festival, AIDS Network Kootenay Outreach and Support Society (ANKORS) sets up a booth to provide free drug testing for unidentified substances (And it’s working — see below for their stats). The Trip Project, out of Toronto, and Dance Safe, out of San Francisco, do advocacy education and drug testing for EDM festival-goers to try and increase drug knowledge and safety. Many festivals have “sanctuary” spaces, where drug users feeling overwhelmed or uneasy can relax in a non-judgmental space, staffed by emergency medical professionals. Many festivals, though clearly stating that they don’t promote drug use, are clear about where to find help if something goes wrong. Harm reduction is bubbling up all around the edges of the party scene.

    Small steps towards better harm reduction could make a big change. Improved access to testing kits at festivals and parties needs to become a norm. The University of Alberta is already developing quick drug testing kits, aimed for use by law enforcement to keep an eye on street drug makeup. Better drug testing could help weed out crooked dealers that lace their product, keeping users safer. Similarly, improved education about drug use in the home and school between youth and trusted adults can help kids make safer choices.

    The truth is that the party scene is changing. Kids are dying. It’s time to start thinking about how we can keep them safer.[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/1″][divider line_type=”Small Line” custom_height=”.25em”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_column_text]ANKORS compiles statistics every year outlining the results of their drug testing efforts at Shambhala Music Festival. The following are the stats from the 2013 festival:

     

    Total tests done 2,254
    Number of drugs disposed of after the test 155 (6.8%)
    MDMA capsules that tested positive for MDMA 1,302
    MDMA capsules that tested negative for MDMA 339
    Failure rate of MDMA capsules 21%
    Ketamine samples that tested positive for ketamine 158
    Ketamine samples that tested negative for ketamine 63
    Failure rate of ketamine samples 29%
    Mystery substances 91
    PMMA 77

    [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

  • Drug Policy Abuse: a condition affecting politicians across Canada

    Drug Policy Abuse: a condition affecting politicians across Canada

    A new, debilitating psychiatric condition has been identified today by the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition. Sadly this condition – dubbed “Drug Policy Abuse” – affects a great many politicians across the country.

    You’ve undoubtedly seen the symptoms. Politicians who resist change and disregard data. Who insist on being “tough” and sending a punitive message. Who refuse to discuss alternative approaches to conventional, decades-old drug policy, despite all the evidence of adverse physical, psychological and social consequences stemming from the current approach to drugs.

    These are the signs of Drug Policy Abuse. And CDPC has developed a campaign to draw attention to this crippling condition.

    Check it out the campaign here.

    The good news is, treatment is available for those who are diagnosed and acknowledge that they have a problem. All it takes is an open mind and the recognition that good policymaking – no matter what the subject matter – requires frank and open dialogue informed by evidence. Like the fact that harm reduction and regulatory interventions improve life expectancy and increase the likelihood that problematic users will seek treatment. And that drug use doesn’t go up in jurisdictions that have decriminalized or legalized drugs.

    Fortunately, we do have some bright lights of various political stripes willing to have the conversation. Federal parliamentarians who favour cannabis legalization include not only Liberal leader Justin Trudeau, but also Conservative MP Scott Reid and NDP Deputy Leader Libby Davies. The NDP’s official cannabis policy for 40 years – reaffirmed by current party leader Thomas Mulcair– is decriminalization. Elizabeth May’s Green Party would legalize marijuana and launch a public consultation on the decriminalization of all illicit drugs. Similarly, Liberal Prince Edward Island MP Wayne Easter defends the need for safe injection sites and favours bringing illicit drugs under a regulatory framework given that  “The current drug laws are not working.”

    At the provincial level, Wildrose Pary leader Danielle Smith in Alberta is in favour of decriminalization of cannabis. In British Columbia, Health Minister Terry Lake points to the success of Vancouver’s Insite supervised injection site in preventing transmission of HIV and other blood borne infections, reducing overdose risks, and connecting drug users to services. And former Attorney Generals Kash Heed and Geoff Plant speak out about the need to regulate cannabis in BC and Canada.

    Municipally, former Vancouver mayor Larry Campbell ran on a platform of implementing supervised injection sites, and city councilors in Toronto have lobbied for such a site in their city. Eight BC mayors including Vancouver’s Gregor Robertson, have called for the legal regulation of cannabis in Canada, as has Thunder Bay mayor – and former police officer – Keith Hobbs. Councillors and mayors at the 2012 Union of BC municipalities convention passed a resolution calling for the appropriate levels of government to “decriminalize marijuana, and research the regulation and taxation of marijuana.”

    Outside of Canada, European politicians are actively supporting harm reduction efforts and Latin American leaders are demanding alternatives to criminalization and the punitive approaches to drugs over the past 40 years. Uruguay plans to legalize cannabis use for adults. Closer to home, two US states – Colorado and Washington – have done the same, thanks to ballot initiatives that passed thanks in part to key endorsements from public officials. More states will surely follow.

    The point is, politicians don’t need to suffer from Drug Policy Abuse. There are jurisdictions exploring alternative approaches to the war on drugs. The conversation is happening.  Unfortunately, though, many politicians in Canada are scared of the conversation and have difficulty considering alternative approaches.

    So for those who cling to outmoded models, it’s time to “Have the Talk”. Go to our campaign site to sign the pledge that you’ll reach out to your elected representatives if they have Drug Policy Abuse problem. The campaign site includes tools to tweet national party leaders as part of a larger conversation to address this nationwide affliction.

    Check out the campaign, watch the videos and spread the word.

  • Canada is ignoring easy, ways to prevent overdose deaths…

    Canada is ignoring easy, ways to prevent overdose deaths…

    This article first appeared as an op-ed in the National Post, October 22, 2014

    A particularly potent batch of heroin recently resulted in 31 overdoses at Vancouver’s Insite safe injection clinic. The facility proved its value yet again, as staff applied immediate treatment and ensured none of the victims died. But what about those who can’t access Insite? In 2013, 308 people died in British Columbia due to illicit drug overdoses, the majority of which were opioid-related.

    Canada-wide, we can only speculate about the total numbers because there is no national database tracking overdose deaths. But the numbers we do have, from a patchwork of provincial data and news reports, tell us that far too many Canadians are dying from an entirely preventable phenomenon. And not preventable in the sense of “well, if people didn’t use drugs, there wouldn’t be overdoses.” While that’s essentially true, we know people will use drugs. One hundred years of prohibition hasn’t stopped that.

    No, these deaths are preventable thanks to easy-to-implement, non-controversial policy changes at our disposal.

    The most pragmatic and immediately effective remedy would be to improve access to naloxone, a 40-year old medication that, when administered during an opioid overdose, reverses the effects of the drug. It has no narcotic effect and people cannot become dependent on it.

    Currently, naloxone is used predominantly by ambulance and medical staff — like those at Insite — but we could save countless more lives if it were available to those most likely to be with someone experiencing an overdose. Eighty-five percent overdoses occur in the presence of others, often in the home. For this reason, naloxone should be included in provincial drug plans and made available over the counter.

    In addition, we should scale up existing “take-away naloxone programs” to increase the distribution of overdose response kits among people trained to prevent, recognize and respond to overdoses. Streetworks in Edmonton pioneered this programming in Canada, and similar initiatives have spread throughout the country. The most robust program — Take-Home Naloxone (THN) — was established at the B.C. Centre for Disease Control in 2012. THN operates in 51 sites, from large urban hubs like Vancouver and Surrey, to smaller rural centres such as Cranbrook, Campbell River and Fort St. John. More than 2,200 people have been trained, including staff and volunteers at health and social service agencies, as well as friends and family members of people who use drugs. THN has dispensed more than 1,200 kits, and 125 overdoses have been reversed.

    Clearly naloxone is a life-saver, but reducing barriers to its access and providing training are just part of a comprehensive overdose response. We also need to immediately implement appropriate guidelines for opioid prescriptions, improve national data collection on overdose events, and reduce barriers to calling 911 during a drug overdose. Again, most overdoses occur in the presence of other people. Though witnesses to heart attacks rarely hesitate to call 911, witnesses to an overdose often lose precious minutes wavering over whether to call for help — if they make the call at all. They may fear arrest, the loss of custody of children, or judgment from friends and family.

    This would be resolved by the passage of Canadian 911 Good Samaritan legislation — so called because it provides protection from arrest and prosecution for drug possession if the evidence is obtained as a result of the person calling 911. In the last four years, 11 U.S. states have passed some form of this legislation, often with bipartisan and near-unanimous support.

    Such legislation recognizes that accidental drug overdose is a health issue that doesn’t merit attention from the criminal justice system. Indeed, public health imperatives should drive all policy relating to overdose response.

    While much of the responsibility for this issue rests at the local and provincial level, ultimately the federal government plays an important leadership role in setting the overall tone and guiding any national strategy. At the 2012 annual meetings of the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs, delegates passed a resolution recommending that member states include effective elements for the prevention and treatment of overdose in national drug policies, including the use of naloxone. Although the Canadian delegation supported this resolution, and despite the simplicity of implementing such programs and policies, to date the government has not acted on this matter. It’s time for that to change.

  • Taking Control: Pathways to Drug Policies that Work

    Taking Control: Pathways to Drug Policies that Work

    Today, the Global Commission on Drug Policy releases Taking Control: Pathways to Drug Policies that Work. The report calls on governments to rethink global drug policy, to take some immediate measures to address drug problems, and not to shy away from the transformative potential of responsible regulation as a longer term solution.

    The recommendations come at a time when more and more governments are recognizing the conventional “war on drugs” approach is a failure, and that new approaches are necessary. As part of this recognition, the UN General Assembly has called for a Special Session (UNGASS) in 2016 to discuss solutions to the global drug problem. At UNGASS and other diplomatic gatherings, this report encourages UN delegates to recall the mandate of the United Nations, not least to ensure security, human rights and development.

    Members of the Commission include, former Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo, former Colombian President César Gaviria, former Swiss President Ruth Dreifuss, Richard Branson and others. As part of the release, the Commissioners are meeting with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and UN Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson to present the recommendations in the report.

    Their recommendations are as follows:

    • Putting health and community safety first requires a fundamental reorientation of policy priorities and resources, from failed punitive enforcement to proven health and social interventions.
    • Ensure equitable access to essential medicines, in particular opiate- based medications for pain.
    • Stop criminalizing people for drug use and possession – and stop imposing “compulsory treatment” on people whose only offense is drug use or possession.
    • Rely on alternatives to incarceration for non-violent, low-level participants in illicit drug markets such as farmers, couriers and others involved in the production, transport and sale of illicit drugs.
    • Focus on reducing the power of criminal organizations as well as the violence and insecurity that result from their competition with both one another and the state.
    • Allow and encourage diverse experiments in legally regulating markets in currently illicit drugs, beginning with but not limited to cannabis, coca leaf and certain novel psychoactive substances.
    • Take advantage of the opportunity presented by the upcoming UNGASS in 2016 to reform the global drug policy regime.

    You can view the entire report here.

  • Preventing music-festival drug deaths must go beyond saying ‘just say no’

    Preventing music-festival drug deaths must go beyond saying ‘just say no’

    This article first appeared as an op-ed in the National Post, August 20, 2014

    It’s summertime, so we can count on this unfortunate fact: Young Canadians will die or become seriously ill because of drug use at music festivals. Earlier this month, three deaths and dozens of cases of illness were attributed to drugs at the VELD festival in Ontario and Boonstock in BC. And the resurgence of large-scale, camp-out music events — especially EDM (electronic dance music) festivals — means these incidents will only become more common.

    The conventional response to these tragedies is predictable and ineffective. We tend to blame the individuals for making bad choices and trumpet the “just say no to drugs” mantra.

    But there’s a better way. For starters, we need to acknowledge that drug use is not going away. Which isn’t to say we should condone it or encourage it. However, it’s naïve to think that we can eliminate drug use at music festivals, or anywhere, for that matter.

    So let’s make it safer. The world is full of instructive solutions to the problems we face: Canadian youth are not unique in supplementing their partying with psychoactive substances. In the Netherlands, Switzerland, Portugal, Colombia, Spain and Austria, authorities have developed “safer parties” strategies to help concert-goers determine if the pills they are about to ingest are as advertised.

    In Austria, for example, ChEckiT project workers attend large music events and offer professional drug testing for purity and accurate labelling, which provides results within 30 minutes. It’s part of an integrated drug-checking service that includes information, individual counselling, crisis intervention, group discussions, telephone hotlines, and educational videos on drug-related themes. Colombian NGO Accion Tecnica Social has initiated a similar program in that country.

    Other countries provide continuously available street-level testing facilities. One example is the Dutch Ministry of Health’s Drug Information Monitoring System (DIMS), which began in 1988 with testing ecstasy at raves. Today, people can drop off their substances for analysis at a DIMS office, and then check on the internet a couple of days later for results. This system also gives authorities a real-time assessment of drug market trends, enabling general warnings to the community at large when warranted. Here in Canada, only police seizures and hospital visits give us that data, at which point it’s usually too late.

    None of these programs serve to endorse drug use. But they do send clear messages to young people that society actually cares about their wellbeing. Their fate doesn’t need to be conceded to the vagaries of an unregulated, potentially unsafe black market.

    Unfortunately, we don’t send these messages in Canada. Beyond broad platitudes about education and awareness, the concrete measures taken are primarily reactive rather than preventative. Public officials and police will wring their hands, warn people not to take drugs and perhaps step up attempts to go after the dealers. Event promoters will increase screening at the gate, bring in more emergency responders, and establish “chill-out tents” for those who need a break.

    All of which is perfectly worthwhile and laudable, but in the meantime, young people will die because no one in authority is willing to consider product safety as a potential solution to music festival deaths.

    Product testing isn’t complicated. It wouldn’t require any major legislation overhaul, and public-health workers could partner with existing grassroots organizations active in the space to carry it out. For example, the Toronto Raver Information Project (TRIP) already provides info and supplies around safer drug use for the perpetual cohort of partyers for whom simply “saying no” is not a realistic goal. ANKORS does similar work — including some rudimentary product testing — at B.C.’s Shambhala festival. Outside of the events themselves, police could more regularly disclose Health Canada results of the contents of substances seized at raves. Currently, they only do so in exceptional circumstances when it suits their purposes.

    Whatever the test results, however, we know from constant warnings of police and others that no drug is made safer when left in the hands of organized criminals and unregulated dealers. So as part of a product-safety regimen, we should also open a discussion about alternatives to across-the-board prohibition, like experimenting with a legal regulated market for party drugs — as New Zealand has done.

    Product testing and drug policy experimentation isn’t the same as creating a free-for-all where all drugs are available in any corner store for whoever wants them. Nor would it minimize the importance of health information and drug education and awareness programs — similar to how we approach tobacco and our favourite party drug, alcohol.

    It is simply the recognition that we have the power and knowledge to prevent unnecessary deaths at music festivals and anywhere else drugs are taken. What is holding us back?

  • Cannabis, Cannabis Everywhere

    Cannabis, Cannabis Everywhere

    It’s a busy time for all things cannabis. Easily the most high profile developments are the legalization of recreational use in Colorado and Washington in the US. That paved the way for a widely heralded New York Times editorial that proclaimed unequivocally: “The federal government should repeal the ban on marijuana.” This coming November, legalization will be on the ballot in Alaska, Oregon, and Washington D.C.

    All of which has Mexican president Enrique Pena Nieto musing about liberalizing cannabis laws so that his country keeps pace with developments in the US. This comes after he and the presidents of Colombia, Costa Rica, and Guatemala persuaded the UN General Assembly to convene a special session (UNGASS) to explore alternatives to the failed war on drugs — in Mexico alone, an estimated 100,000 have died or disappeared in drug-related violence. Further south, delays in Uruguay’s roll-out of a legal, regulated cannabis market are putting that plan into question.

    Here in Canada, April 1 brought new medical cannabis laws that are confusing and now stalled by a court injunction. Nevertheless, the federal government projects that this industry will be worth $1.3 billion in 10 years. So it’s no surprise that entrepreneurs across the country are jockeying to get in on the action; applying for licences, building greenhouses, and repurposing vacant industrial space — like an old chocolate factory outside Ottawa.

    The government is also looking at changes to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act that would make it possible for police to issues tickets for possession of small amounts of cannabis, instead of laying charges. It could be a positive step, but the risk is that if it’s easier for police to process minor cannabis offences, individual officers might stop using case-by-case discretion and instead formally record all minor offenses.

    Regardless, it’s a pretty timid move compared to what’s happening elsewhere in the Americas — particularly given how many Canadians don’t think possession should warrant any police attention whatsoever. Even the government’s own polling shows that over 70 percent of Canadians think cannabis should be legalized or decriminalized. No matter… Conservatives seem to have set their sights on the remaining 30 percent, denouncing Liberal leader Justin Trudeau’s pro-legalization stance and going so far as to claim he wants schoolchildren buying pot in convenience stores.

    To top it all off, anti-legalization Americans who don’t like what they’re seeing in their own country have inserted themselves into the Canadian conversation, helping launch a Canadian branch of Smart Approaches to Marijuana. It remains to be seen whether Canadians will buy their version of prohibition-lite — i.e. allowing for some degree of decriminalization, but maintaining that cannabis is a public health menace.

    So what’s next? Will Trudeau stand by his support for legalization come election time? How will the national debate be impacted by the return to Canada of Marc Emery — arguably Canada’s most famous pot crusader? What initiatives can we expect to see from Sensible BC, NORML Canada and other cannabis interest groups?

    Clearly there’s an emerging conversation in Canada, and a big year coming up.

    For our part, we intend to be at the forefront of that conversation. So here’s what we have planned:

    Medical Cannabis forum in Mexico City – Sept. 22-23. 2014

    As part of our International Program, CDPC is supporting efforts in Mexico to introduce medical cannabis in that country. In September we’re partnering with several Mexican organizations to co-sponsor a Medical Cannabis forum in Mexico City. Experts from the US and Canada will convene in two meetings, one sponsored by the Senate of Mexico — which is deliberating a bill to legalize medical cannabis — and a second meeting at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) to discuss the state of medical cannabis research in the three countries.

    Cannabis Policy Brief – Fall 2014

    We’re currently working on a policy brief that will outline what it could look like to regulate cannabis through a public health framework. It will cover the history of cannabis prohibition, the potential health harms, and the key social and health harms relating to cannabis policy, followed by an examination of the regulatory mechanisms that could balance the health impacts of cannabis with the rights of consumers and the pursuit of profit by commercial interests.

    UNGASS – Ongoing

    All off this is leading up to the UNGASS session in 2016. UNGASS is a special meeting of UN member states to discuss major global issues like health, gender, the status of children, etc. The focus of 2016 will be the world’s drug control priorities, and we expect it to precipitate a new approach to drug policy – either through the development of a more progressive global consensus, or, more likely, because it will shatter the distorted idea that a global consensus is possible.

    In the build-up to UNGASS, we’ll be asking “what’s Canada’s role in the world?” Will we line up with the old guard? People like the former president of the UN’s International Narcotics Control Board, who accused Uruguay of demonstrating “pirate attitudes” for proposing cannabis legalization? Or will we side with forward looking reformers who feel countries should be free to craft drug policy — regarding cannabis and otherwise — that reflects national attitudes and interests? Our job will be to make sure it’s the latter.

  • It’s easy and it saves lives: Opioid overdose prevention & response in Canada

    It’s easy and it saves lives: Opioid overdose prevention & response in Canada

    In 2013, 308 people lost their lives due to illicit drug overdoses in BC alone. The worst part? Drug-related deaths from opiate overdose are entirely preventable.

    And not in the sense that “well if people didn’t use drugs… there wouldn’t be overdoses.” Because while that’s essentially true, we know that people will use drugs. One hundred years of prohibiting drugs and arresting and incarcerating people who sell and use drugs hasn’t stopped that.

    We need to be realistic and practical. Drug use does happen and it will happen. So let’s get on with preventing deaths and injuries from drug overdose. Here at the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition, we’ve worked with experts across the country to come up with set of policy changes that can save lives and make Canada safer for all.

    Click here to download: Opioid overdose prevention & response in Canada

    While putting together this brief, we met many dedicated, compassionate people who work in frontline overdose prevention programs across Canada. One of the most pragmatic and effective interventions to prevent overdose injury and death is the “take-away naloxone program.” Based on 180 similar initiatives in the US, the program involves distributing overdose response kits – dubbed take-home-naloxone kits – to people who have been trained to prevent, recognize and respond to an overdose. Naloxone is a 40-year old medication that when administered during an opiate overdose reverses the effects of the drug. It has no narcotic effect and people cannot become dependent on this drug.

    Streetworks in Edmonton pioneered this initiative in Canada and similar programs have spread throughout Canada. The country’s most robust overdose program – “take-home naloxone” (THN) – can be found at British Columbia’s Centre for Disease Control’s (BCCDC) harm reduction resource Toward the Heart.

    Through a series of participating organizations throughout BC, the naloxone program operates in 35 sites, from large urban hubs such as Vancouver and Surrey, to smaller rural centres such as Cranbrook, Campbell River and Fort St. John. Nearly 1000 people have been trained including staff and volunteers at health and social service agencies, as well as friends and family members of people who use drugs. Over 600 kits have been dispensed to clients who use opioids and various resource materials are being developed to assist community partners to increase the reach of the program. Since its origins in 2012, 55 overdoses have been reversed.

    While these simple yet effective initiatives are demonstrably preventing overdoses, significant challenges prevent these programs from being scaled up. Naloxone remains a prescription-only medication, and it’s costly and not covered by provincial drug plans. An even more significant challenge is the lack of a national Good Samaritan law, one that prevents people from being arrested and charged with drug possession if they call for help during an emergency. Eleven US states have passed Good Samaritan laws, often with bipartisan support from legislators.

    Our hope is that this policy brief will help support efforts to clear away the barriers blocking overdose programs. That’s the most realistic way to prevent drug-related deaths from opiate overdose.

    For more information, read the full policy brief, here.

  • A gift to the drug kingpins: and the need for a North American Drug Policy Agreement

    A gift to the drug kingpins: and the need for a North American Drug Policy Agreement

    This article first appeared as an op-ed in the National Post, April 21, 2014

    We know the stories. Hockey bags that go south full of B.C. bud and return full of Latin American cocaine. Elaborate underground tunnels at both the U.S.-Mexico and U.S.-Canada borders. Canadian mobsters being gunned down in Mexican resort towns. Unlikely Mennonite drug mules crossing North America’s borders with illicit packages concealed in gas tanks and old farm equipment.

    It’s easy to think it’s always been this way, but the reality is we can thank the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) for much of this activity. So this year, while business leaders and politicians fete the 20th anniversary of NAFTA, drug runners and cartels will be doing the same.

    It shouldn’t come as a surprise. Free traders wax poetically about the interconnected, globalized economy, and the whole point of NAFTA was to strengthen the economic integration of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico by reducing trade barriers.

    How’s this for economic integration, then? Access to legal, regulated medical marijuana in Canada and the U.S. has reduced black market demand across the continent. This phenomenon will become more pronounced with the recent legalization of recreational marijuana in Colorado and Washington, and more states to come. It’s worth noting too that concerns over drug gangs generally, but Canadian gangs in particular, were a key reason Washington voters supported legalization in that state. Regardless, marijuana farmers in Mexico have responded to decreased black market demand by shifting to poppy cultivation. This has resulted in a surge of cheap heroin availability at a time when heroin use is increasing in both the U.S. and Canada.

    Yet despite the predictability of this kind of domino effect in a continental economy, then-U.S. president Bill Clinton forbade U.S. negotiators from discussing the illegal drug trade in NAFTA talks. Years later, U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration official Phil Jordan revealed: “We were prohibited from discussing the effects of NAFTA as it related to narcotics trafficking, yes.” As a result, “For the godfathers of the drug trade in Colombia and Mexico, this was a deal made in narco heaven.”

    Indeed. NAFTA brought a proliferation of maquiladoras — companies operating in duty-free free-trade zones— to the north of Mexico and a massive increase in cross-border commercial traffic. In other words, freer movement of goods in a continent that represents “the world’s largest illicit drug market” according to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime. NAFTA also brought an influx of cheap, subsidized U.S. crops — including corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton and rice — resulting in the collapse of northern Mexico’s agricultural sector. Some farmers shifted to marijuana, which is 1,000 times more lucrative than corn, pound for pound. The rest were in need of work.

    Basically, NAFTA helped create ideal conditions for the rise of a lucrative cross-border drug and gun trade.

    Governments responded by escalating the war on drugs, with devastating impacts on citizens and their communities throughout North America. An estimated 100,000 Mexicans have died or disappeared in drug-related violence, and the U.S. has the highest prison population in the world with over 2 million citizens behind bars. Of these, roughly 500,000 Americans are incarcerated on any given night for a drug law violation. At the same time, death from overdose and HIV/AIDS among injection drug users has taken thousands of lives in the U.S. and Canada. Add to all of that the pain of the families of those directly affected and the communities that have suffered these losses.

    Twenty years after NAFTA’s signing, it’s time to finally acknowledge the drug market is a part of our integrated economy. In turn, we need to negotiate a modern, 21st century drug policy that addresses the health and safety issues across the region and undermines the illegal profiteers.

    The good news is, there’s cause for optimism. The Organization of American States in particular is providing refreshing leadership through member states like Mexico, Colombia and Guatemala calling for a discussion about alternative approaches to the enforcement-heavy war on drugs. And some jurisdictions are implementing bold new paradigms on their own. Similar to the moves in Colorado and Washington, Uruguay became the first country in the world to authorize a legal, regulated market for adult cannabis use.

    The current overemphasis on criminal justice approaches to drug control in North America has sidelined a variety of programs that can minimize the harms related to the drug trade and substance use, including public health promotion and prevention programs. It has also curbed economic and social advancement for drug-producing countries.

    A North American Drug Policy Agreement could serve as a powerful statement of shared responsibility in addressing the trans-national drug problem. Such an agreement should include provisions for the consuming countries (U.S. and Canada) to reduce demand through social development and improved access to health responses. But it should also map out a legal, regulatory control framework for drugs that are currently illicit. This would reduce the violence within the drug trade, and all of the other prohibition-related harms that are far more destructive to communities and countries than substance use itself.

    Yes, it would mark a departure from 40 years of restrictive, prohibitionist policies, but as Stephen Harper himself has noted, “the current approach is not working.” It’s time to try something else.

  • To ticket or not to ticket – Conservatives take a tiny step on cannabis

    To ticket or not to ticket – Conservatives take a tiny step on cannabis

    For a split second, the door to drug policy reform in Canada opened ever so slightly. But then Justice Minister Peter MacKay was quick to slam it shut: “We’re not talking about decriminalization or legalization.”

    On March 5th, MacKay announced that the federal government is looking at changes to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act that would make it possible for police to issues tickets for possession of small amounts of cannabis.

    The announcement follows last summer’s resolution from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police asking the federal government to consider ticketing options. But it also follows Justin Trudeau’s considerably bolder endorsement of cannabis legalization. So I can’t help but wonder if this is a move to stem the Liberals’ rise in the polls.

    MacKay’s proposal would allow police to issue tickets to people possessing less than 3 grams of cannabis. It’s a positive move in one way, because it means these cases will no longer be sent to criminal court. So otherwise law-abiding citizens will not be burdened with a record of criminal conviction, which can have serious implications for travel and employment.

    But it also comes with the potential of a significant downside. In Australia, for example, similar measures resulted in a “net-widening” effect. That is, because it was easier for police to process minor cannabis offences, individual officers shifted away from using case-by-case discretion in giving informal cautions, to a process of formally recording all minor offences. The result was a significant increase in formal infractions, but no change in the pattern of cannabis use.

    Still even if we assume MacKay’s changes hold promise, we need to be clear that these modest steps are not the endgame to a much needed overhaul to drug laws in this country – especially considering that jurisdictions bordering Canada are moving toward legalization. Is this is best Canada can do given the momentous changes taking place around the world?

    Critics of legalization take pains to point out that cannabis can harm the health of its users. Of course it can! So can alcohol, but the lesson of alcohol prohibition is that an underground market is an unsafe market. The purpose of a legally regulated cannabis market is to ensure that we use the painful mistakes of alcohol and tobacco regulation to create the best possible approach to cannabis. Regulation rather than prohibition will make this substance safer, control its production and distribution, and ensure that at least some of the profits go to the public coffers.

    The other problem with cannabis prohibition is that the effects of drug laws are inequitably applied to poor and Indigenous Canadians. And prohibition doesn’t keep cannabis out of the hands of kids. As Unicef’s 2013 report on the well-being of children in rich countries reveals, Canadian youth use the most marijuana compared to our economic counterparts around the world. Yet they use the third least amount of tobacco. What accounts for this second stat? A solid, legally regulated market that relies on stringent controls and education about the harms of tobacco.

    It’s great that MacKay has taken a first step, but we need to keep moving toward a saner, safer approach to cannabis use. The CDPC is committed to talking with Canadians about the possibilities of cannabis regulation. To that end, in the coming months we’ll unveil proposals to help to build a regulatory framework that takes into consideration what we’ve learned from public health approaches to alcohol and tobacco. Canada can do better.