What would happen if we stopped treating overdose cases?

[Woodznutz]

As a theoretical exercise this is one thing, but I doubt it could be implemented "in the wild" realistically, as you would need the responders to be able to instantly tell the difference between an accidental overdose of legal drugs vs. an accidental overdose of illegal drugs.

No government would accept the liability issues caused by this, regardless of any moral questions.

Any 'responders' wouldn't be connected the government.

 

[Woodznutz]

Yet they cause many times more deaths than overdoses do. But you want to let those folks die with out treatment. Fuck that. We should be compassionate to our bothers and sisters who we don't agree with who make mistakes, even the unvaxed and those who go maskless. imo.

How would you translate that compassion into action?

 

[Woodznutz]

Lots more white trash, trump supporters would die.

So be it.

 

[BlindBoo]

Please.....it's all over the board

Doesn't reflect reality.

 

[Woodznutz]

Hospitals shouldn't be turning people away regardless of their situation.

It's what happens to overdose victims once they are admitted.

 

[BlindBoo]

How would you translate that compassion into action?

By treating everyone who comes to the hospital with the best care as possible regardless if they are od'ing or can't catch their breath because of Covid.

 

[Woodznutz]

There you go, another condition the heartless can profit on by denying treatment for. If you live an unhealthy life style and have fatty built up in your arteries, no stints for you......or bypass surgery. Think how much that will save!

Funeral Directors Union 157 approves this message.

</sarcasm>

There's insurance for that. Heroin overdose, not so much.

 

[Woodznutz]

By treating everyone who comes to the hospital with the best care as possible regardless if they are od'ing or can't catch their breath because of Covid.

Then what? Addiction is a treatable disease so we're told. How do you suggest they be 'treated', and at whose expense? And what happens if they relapse again and again (this is common). I have had some illnesses that required medical treatment but none have ever relapsed. After my bypass surgery eleven years ago I changed my lifestyle. Do you think addicts will voluntarily change their lifestyle if released without lengthy treatment?

 

[Woodznutz]

Hospitals shouldn't be turning people away regardless of their situation.

As I have often stated in other related threads, hospitals are a great place to catch and sequester addicts and overdose cases. Same with gunshot victims.

 

[BlindBoo]

There's insurance for that. Heroin overdose, not so much.

The premise is no treatment for OD's, not insurance options.

 

[Woodznutz]

The premise is no treatment for OD's, not insurance options.

You are correct.

 

[BlindBoo]

Then what? Addiction is a treatable disease so we're told. How do you suggest they be 'treated', and at whose expense? And what happens if they relapse again and again (this is common). I have had some illnesses that required medical treatment but none have ever relapsed. After my bypass surgery eleven years ago I changed my lifestyle. Do you think addicts will voluntarily change their lifestyle if released without lengthy treatment?

Again not about overdosing. However if an addict had access to affordable and safe dosage information for his/her habit drug, there would be much less of a chance of an accidental overdose. As far as treatment goes, you can't treat someone who doesn't want treatment for their habit.

 

[Woodznutz]

Again not about overdosing. However if an addict had access to affordable and safe dosage information for his/her habit drug, there would be much less of a chance of an accidental overdose. As far as treatment goes, you can't treat someone who doesn't want treatment for their habit.

Their habit is illegal, so there's an open door for compulsory treatment.

 

[BlindBoo]

Their habit is illegal, so there's an open door for compulsory treatment.

Such is the fascist nanny state.

 

[Woodznutz]

Such is the fascist nanny state.

Either that or let 'em dah!

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Would it have a chilling effect on the drug using community, knowing that if they overdose there will be no one there to save them (read enable them to continue using drugs)?

Would such a policy actually save lives in the long run? In war casualties are anticipated. Body bags and coffins are part of 'logistics'. Why not the same in the drug war?

Their Only Rehab Center Will Be the Cemetery

Not only should we not keep these self-indulgent scumbags alive, we should be pro-active and poison the drug supply. Even to the extent of letting a dealer go if he passes out poisoned drugs to his dirtbag clientele.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Q. How much money have you paid for other people's overdose treatment?

A. I don't know. I had a salary working with the schools, social workers and probation officers as well as volunteers.

Q. How many volunteer hours have you put in with the homeless and with the addicts at the drug treatment center?

A. I spent hours working with Probation and Social Services who been arrested and deferred for trial, having been released on 1000 PC (Penal Code).

SEE: PC 1000 - The Drug Diversion Program in California

So other people paid you to do these things. Shocking.....

You actually proved my point better than I could. You referred to someone else as callous for questioning if we should continue treating people who overdose, yet it doesn't appear you've put forth any of your money to pay for the NARCAN, the hospital bills, law enforcement resources, to constantly respond to this problem. You've profited from it. How much additional tax dollars in your city or county is it costing the taxpayers to deal with this problem. I'm guessing quite a bit knowing that you live in the Bay Area and given the fact there is an enormous homeless and/or drug problem in that area.

There was a sheriff somewhere a year or two ago I read about who said he was no longer going to use county tax dollars to pay for NARCAN for people who OD and if they die as a result so be it. They made that choice. Of course, the media had a melt down over his comments, but I'm willing to bet most people agreed with him. I certainly did. I have no qualms taking the position of letting the trash take itself out.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The two leading cases of death in the US in 2021 were heart disease and cancer. Smoking does cause cancer and heart disease but in this day and age, very few people smoke.

Smoking's Masculine Image Is Behind These Sissies' Lies

Oncologists are the worst failures in the medical profession. If they're too stupid to cure cancer, why should we believe they know what causes it? The two are directly related.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Their habit is illegal, so there's an open door for compulsory treatment.

That surely doesn't work.

 

[HenryBHough]

Wrong. Numbers of beds put those antivaxxers to go elsewhere when the beds are filled with those vaccinated; those who are less likely to die and/or spend many weeks and months taking up space.

I would expect a drug user to react that way. Like any "progressive", me Me ME! Nope. You lefties want the unvaccinated to go untreated so suck it up. Overdose? Die. No treatment. No transport. Just lie down in the gutter where you can rest with the actual turds.