Drugs

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Widow of Beau Biden testifies about finding gun in Hunter Biden’s truck

      by

      The widow of Hunter Biden’s brother told jurors in his federal gun trial about the moment she found the gun in his truck, describing how she put it into a leather pouch, stuffed it into a shopping bag and tossed it into a trash can outside a market near her home.“I panicked, and I wanted to get rid of them,” she testified about finding the gun and ammunition in the vehicle’s console in October 2018. “I didn’t want him to hurt himself, and I didn’t want my kids to find it and hurt themselves.”The purchase of the Colt revolver by Hunter Biden – and Hallie Biden’s disposal of it – are the fulcrum of the case against him. Federal prosecutors say the president’s son was in the throes of a drug addiction when he bought the gun. He has been charged with three felonies: lying to a federally licensed gun dealer, making a false claim on the application by saying he was not a drug user, and illegally having the gun for 11 days.Hunter Biden, who has pleaded not guilty, has said the justice department is bending to political pressure from Republicans.Hallie Biden, who had a brief romantic relationship with Hunter after Beau Biden died in 2015, testified that from the time Hunter returned to Delaware from a 2018 trip to California until she threw his gun away, she did not see him using drugs. That time period included the day he bought the weapon.Much of her testimony focused on 23 October 2018 – 11 days after he bought the gun and when she threw it away. Hunter was staying with her and seemed exhausted, she said. Asked by the prosecutor if it appeared that Hunter was using drugs around then, she said: “He could have been.”As Hunter slept in her home, Hallie Biden went to check his car. She said she was hoping to help him get or stay sober, free of both alcohol and cocaine. She said she found the remnants of crack cocaine and drug paraphernalia. She also found the gun Hunter purchased in a box with a broken lock that kept it from fully closing. There was ammunition too, she said.Hallie said she considered hiding the gun but thought her kids might find it, so she decided to throw it away.“I realize it was a stupid idea now, but I was panicking,” she said.Hunter Biden watched expressionless from the courtroom during her testimony. She told jurors that she found crack cocaine at her home and saw him using it. She was with him occasionally when he saw drug dealers. Prosecutor Leo Wise asked Hallie about her own 2018 trip to California, where she visited Hunter at the Roosevelt Hotel in Los Angeles, and asked her whether she was also using drugs.“Yes, I was,” she said.“And who introduced you to it?’”“Hunter did,” Hallie said as Hunter rested his face on his hand and looked down.“It was a terrible experience that I went through, and I’m embarrassed and ashamed, and I regret that period of my life,” she said.Hallie testified she stopped using drugs in August 2018, but that Hunter continued smoking crack cocaine.Much of the prosecution’s case has been dedicated to highlighting the seriousness of his drug addiction and showcasing to jurors moments with ex-girlfriends, infidelity and crack pipes – judgment lapses they believe prove he was actively using when he checked “no” on the form. Prosecutors say the evidence is necessary to show his state of mind when he bought the gun.Surveillance footage played for jurors showed Hallie digging around in the trash can for the gun. It was not there. She asked store officials if someone had taken out the trash.Hallie said Hunter told her to file a police report because the gun was registered in his name. She called the police while she was still at the store.Jurors have also heard from the gun store clerk, who testified about how he walked Hunter Biden through a few options before he settled on the $900 gun. The clerk then watched as the customer filled out the firearms transaction record, a required document for the purchase of a gun, and saw him check off “no” to the question of whether he was “an unlawful user of or addicted to” marijuana, stimulants, narcotics or any other controlled substance.“Everything he bought, he ultimately decided on,” Gordon Cleveland, the clerk, told jurors.Cleveland said he saw Biden sign the form, which includes a warning about the consequences of submitting false information.In his cross-examination Thursday, defense attorney Abbe Lowell pointed out that some of the questions on the form are in the present tense, such as “are you an unlawful user of or addicted to” drugs. He has suggested Hunter Biden did not believe he had an active drug problem.The proceedings are unfolding after the collapse of a plea deal that would have resolved the gun charge and a separate tax case, and spared the Biden family the spectacle of a trial so close to the 2024 election.If convicted, Hunter Biden faces up to 25 years in prison, though first-time offenders do not get anywhere near the maximum, and it is unclear whether the judge would give him time behind bars. More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Florida’s other big November vote: will the state legalize weed?

      by

      The push to legalize recreational marijuana in Florida ramped up this week. Campaigners bankrolled by dominant players in the cannabis and CBD marketplace launched a $5m advertising blitz in support of a ballot measure in November’s election that has so far been overshadowed by publicity for the one on abortion rights.Four commercials featuring retired military personnel, business owners, law enforcement officers and regular citizens began appearing on television, radio and the internet, leaning in heavily to themes campaigners believe will appeal to the 60% of voters amendment 3 needs to pass.And while the financial backers of the Smart & Safe Florida political advocacy committee, most prominently Trulieve, a major operator of marijuana dispensaries, stand to harvest far greater profits if the Vote Yes campaign is successful, there is little to no organized resistance.Florida’s Republican party passed a resolution opposing it, and the state’s Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, says he is concerned about the smell. But outside of that, nobody has yet set up any group or campaign to counter the tens of millions of dollars and corporate might invested by Trulieve and its allies, a coalition of other invested industry partners.“Nobody is selling ‘no’. They don’t make any money selling no,” said John Michael Pierobon, vice-chair of the Tobacco Free Partnership of Broward county.“The big wealth transfer is from the poor people that are going to be smoking pot, because the temptation is there, to the rich people that own the pot companies. It’s all about corporate greed.”Pierobon said it was difficult to effectively counter the arguments promoted by Smart & Safe Florida with such a “lopsided” platform.View image in fullscreen“I’m just a private citizen. I volunteer with these organizations, who are really just community groups,” he said.“I don’t have the Republican party behind me, I don’t have the Democratic party, I don’t have anybody, so I just have to speak and hopefully influence people to make informed decisions.”Pierobon takes issue with many of the assertions put forward by the yes campaigners. In one of their advertisements, called Freedom, a retired army colonel and Vietnam war veteran heralds the “billions of dollars” that would be raised in revenue and sales taxes, and money and time suddenly available to law enforcement “to focus on serious crime”.A Florida financial impact analysis predicts an almost $200m annual windfall.“In Colorado, they’re regretting they passed it because it actually cost them more money than they thought,” Pierobon said. “They talk about money for law enforcement, well we know there are more car fatalities in states that have legalized marijuana, they’re the hidden costs. It costs money to come out to more fatal car crashes, investigate them and write the reports.”Before producing the advertisements, Smart & Safe Florida had already spent substantial funds on its arguments to get the amendment on the ballot in the first place. Its adoption was opposed at the Florida supreme court by the Republican state attorney general, Ashley Moody, in the same way as amendment 4, the abortion measure. Moody lost both challenges.“I don’t think this is a partisan issue, and I don’t think the decision will be made by politicians at party meetings,” Morgan Hill, spokesperson for Smart & Safe Florida, said, referring to the Florida Republican party’s declaration of opposition.“It’ll be made by the voters at the ballot box in November, and I think a really good example of how bipartisan marijuana is, as an issue in the state of Florida, is 2016, when medical marijuana was on the ballot that passed with 71.3% support.”Hill also said that the “way medical marijuana was both implemented and regulated” in Florida “is a really good roadmap”.“Other states that haven’t had medical [marijuana] had a little bit of a harder time when it comes to the implementation process [of recreational marijuana]. We kind of already have a state program set up for that,” Hill added.The proposed Florida amendment would make it the 26th state to approve marijuana for recreational use, and seeks to place production and distribution solely in the hands of professional, regulated operators such as Trulieve, and their networks. Growing marijuana independently would still be illegal, and individuals could possess no more than three ounces for personal use.As in almost all other states where voters said yes, campaigners are resting heavily on “safety” arguments, including how legalization will lead to a reduction or elimination of street drugs, often produced by cartels and laced potentially with fentanyl or other toxins.View image in fullscreen“The state’s own economic analysis shows 1.8 million people in Florida are accessing marijuana on the illicit market, more than double those who are getting it from medical marijuana cards,” Hill said.“When that many people are accessing a product in a market that’s not regulated, that’s really dangerous, especially when we know that market is often tainted.”Polling so far, all conducted before this week’s advert drop, indicates that voters’ minds are far from made up. Florida Atlantic University found last month that only 47% of voters said they would vote yes, with another 18% undecided.Also unknown is what effect this week’s proposal by the justice department to reclassify marijuana from a schedule I drug, the same level as heroin, to a schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act will have on the process in Florida. Joe Biden said he was committed to “reversing longstanding inequities”, but the move would not legalize marijuana nationally or wrest control from states’ jurisdiction.The political analyst Jeff Brandes, a Republican former state senator and founder of the Florida Policy Project, said he expected the amendment would pass.“You’re going to see the Republicans coming out, saying, ‘don’t turn Florida into Colorado or other states’, but it’s largely tempered because so many states have now implemented adult use of marijuana, and I can’t see that argument winning today,” he said.“Most Republicans, quietly and once they’re able to vote their own mind in the privacy of the voting booth, will vote to support it.”Brandes also said the measure had, understandably, taken a back seat to the other big policy amendment in November’s ballot.“The Republican party cares much more about the abortion issue than it does about the marijuana issue,” he said.“Ultimately, it’s not a question of if Florida’s going to have adult use, it’s a question of when. In the meantime, we can either perpetuate the illegal drug cartels and the black market, or we can bring people into the light of day and create a legal pathway for people to make adult decisions.” More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden poised to loosen restrictions on marijuana, but some say it’s not enough

      by

      The US government appears poised to announce next year the most sweeping changes in decades to how it handles marijuana, the psychoactive drug dozens of states allow to be sold from storefronts, but which federal law considers among the most dangerous substances.Evidence suggests that Joe Biden’s administration, responding to a policy the president announced last year, is working on moving marijuana to schedule III of the Controlled Substance Act (CSA), a change from its current listing on the maximally restrictive schedule I. That would lessen the tax burden on businesses selling the drug in states where it is legal, and potentially change how police agencies view enforcement of marijuana laws.“If it’s going to be finalized at schedule III, it’s going to be the moment that the industry really is able to turn the corner and we begin to see the growth in the cannabis space amongst the legal operators that we’ve been waiting on for so long,” said David Culver, senior vice-president of public affairs for the US Cannabis Council, a trade group.But other marijuana legalization advocates regard changing its classification as a half-measure that would do nothing to resolve conflicts between state and federal laws that emerged after weed legalization picked up speed a decade ago.Marijuana faces the same federal restrictions as drugs like heroin and ecstasy under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), but 38 states have approved its use for medical conditions, and 24 states and the District of Columbia allow adults to also consume it recreationally. That conflict has complicated the marijuana industry in states where it is legal, particularly when it comes to access to banking services, and Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (Norml), said rescheduling the drug would not resolve that.“Classifying it as schedule III would make every existing state cannabis law that’s currently inconsistent with federal law as equally inconsistent going forward. So, it doesn’t solve any of the problems before it,” he told the Guardian.“It needs to be descheduled for logistical reasons, for practical reasons, because we have a system right now where the majority of states are choosing to regulate marijuana as a legal commodity through their own state-specific systems, and that act is not permitted for any substance that is in the CSA. That is only permitted for substances that are not scheduled.”Last month, Gallup released a survey that found 70% of Americans think marijuana use should be legal, a record number.Biden does not appear ready to go that far. In his statement announcing marijuana reform, which was released about a month before last year’s midterm elections, the president pardoned all people convicted of simple marijuana possession federally, and also kicked off the review of the drug’s classification under the CSA.That process is typically a bureaucratic affair, in which the Department of Health and Human Services reviews the substance and sends its findings to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which then decides whether to change its classification. Yet signs have already emerged that marijuana is being treated like no drug before it.On 30 August, the US health and human services secretary, Xavier Becerra, announced on X that his department had completed its review, an unusual public status update for a process that is typically opaque. And his account made the post at 4.20pm, a number of great significance in cannabis culture.Becerra did not specify what his department had recommended, but Bloomberg News obtained a letter from HHS to the DEA that recommended marijuana be put on schedule III, alongside drugs like ketamine and anabolic steroids.Tahir Johnson, a board member at Minority Cannabis Business Association who is planning to open a dispensary in New Jersey next month, said rescheduling would help his business by lessening its tax burden. Federal law currently prohibits marijuana businesses from deducting their expenses from their income, meaning they sometimes pay tax rates upwards of 80%.“It will help all cannabis businesses. But, I think especially for minority businesses, where capital and finances are tight, being able to alleviate that is certainly meaningful,” said Johnson.Armentano also expects a rescheduling could help Biden’s reputation with the voters who make up the Democratic coalition, as well as people outside his base. Gallup found 87% of Democrats think marijuana should be legal, along with 55% of Republicans and 64% of people older than 55.“It behooves the president to have this core base passionate about something that he’s doing to try to address the enthusiasm gap that he seems to have now,” he said.Kevin Sabet, president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, which opposes legalizing the drug, argued dropping pot to a lower CSA schedule would harm public health.“It’s going to ramp up commercialization, it’s going to ramp up the marketing and the glamorization of marijuana,” Sabet said. “It’s going to do that both in a practical way with this deducting expenses, and it’s going to do so in a global way, by just sending the message that this is harmless.”Until marijuana is legalized federally, it will still be up to Congress to resolve the conflicts between state and federal law, and progress there has been slow. A bill to allow cannabis businesses access to more financial services, known as the Safer Banking Act, has been passed by the House of Representatives six times, and is currently working its way through the Senate.Starting in 1972, groups including Norml have petitioned the DEA and HHS to reschedule marijuana, to no avail. Armentano said the stage appears to be set for political considerations to finally get federal agencies to back down, at least partially.“Frankly, if this petition is successful, and the DEA reverses 50 years of precedent, then it just speaks to the fact that all along this process has simply been a political one,” he said. More

    • 188 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Cannabis firms are cut off from the US financial system, but relief is in sight

      by

      Imagine that you run a perfectly legal business but are unable to open a simple checking account at a national bank. Believe it or not, that’s the case right now for anyone licensed to sell cannabis in the US. Given the size of the cannabis industry, it’s pretty shocking. But it may be about to change.In the US, 38 states have legalized marijuana for medical use and 23 of them have legalized it for recreational purposes, including three territories and the District of Columbia. An additional eight states have decriminalized its use. Both red and blue states with legalized marijuana laws have collected $15bn in tax revenue between 2014 and 2022, with $3.77bn in tax revenue attributed to 2022 alone.Meanwhile, if you run a cannabis business – one that sells, distributes, manufactures or in some cases serves the industry, you’re not allowed to be a normal business.Meta, Facebook’s parent, only allows “limited” CBD and hemp advertising. Cannabis companies can’t run TV or radio commercials for their products. They are not allowed to conduct any campaigns outside their state as interstate commerce is forbidden. In Ohio – like other states – they can’t run a billboard campaign without prior approval of the state’s board of pharmacy. Many localities have zoning laws that prohibit them from operating. Many insurance carriers are reluctant to serve the industry as do a number of the country’s largest payroll service providers.Cannabis businesses are not allowed to deduct rent, payroll or other expenses that other businesses can write off. They regularly face expanded business licensing requirements. They can’t take advantage of the federal bankruptcy rules. They can’t trademark their products.And then there’s banking. Cannabis businesses can only choose from about 200 independent and community banks. I don’t mean to throw shade on these organizations, because many of them are excellent. But they oftentimes don’t offer online banking, international access, wire transfer, investment options, financial stability and other capabilities of a larger institution. When it comes to the cannabis industry, federally chartered banks like Wells Fargo, PNC Bank, JP Morgan Chase, TD Bank and Key Bank are not playing ball. Because of this, many cannabis businesses receive fewer financial services and have been forced to retain an uncomfortable level of cash, making themselves exposed to theft and crime. The banking industry realizes this but resists.Why is this? Because cannabis is still considered to be an illegal controlled substance, subject to very strict federal laws and, because it’s illegal at the federal level, many large corporations, such as banks, insurance companies and payroll services, remain spooked.It’s no surprise that, despite all the growth, many in the cannabis industry are struggling to make profits. But there’s potentially good news on the horizon. Finally, the federal government may allow banks with federal charters to do business with those in the cannabis industry.At the end of last month the Senate committee on banking, housing and urban affairs moved forward with the Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation (Safer) Banking Act, which allows banks to conduct business with cannabis companies. The House already passed a similar act, so the Senate committee’s approval is a big deal.“This legislation will help make our communities and small businesses safer by giving legal cannabis businesses access to traditional financial institutions, including bank accounts and small business loans,” the bill’s sponsors said in a joint statement. “It also prevents federal bank regulators from ordering a bank or credit union to close an account based on reputational risk.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionStill, significant hurdles exist. There remain a number of representatives in both the House and Senate who oppose the bill.“This legislation also compromises the integrity of the United States banking system by giving banks government approval to participate in illegal activity, setting a dangerous new precedent,” some Republican senators said recently in a joint statement. “Allowing banking access to a Schedule I drug sets a dangerous legal precedent and will help facilitate money laundering for drug cartels.” This opposition, combined with a leadership void in the House, could derail progress of the bill for the foreseeable future.But I’m more optimistic. The bill is not going so far as to legalize marijuana, so that should appease some of its opponents. And given the strong bipartisan support received in both the Senate and House for the Safer Banking Act, I don’t believe it’s an overreach to expect passage … eventually. When? Who knows.In the meantime, those in the industry must wait. And fight. And deal with restrictions that few other legitimate companies have to face. It’s tough enough running any business. But for those in this game, it’s a whole new level altogether. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Lab test confirms white powder found at White House is cocaine

      by

      A formal laboratory test of a white powder found in a “highly-trafficked” area of the White House has been confirmed as cocaine, NBC News reported on Wednesday, citing an unnamed official with knowledge of the investigation.A Secret Service review of visitor logs and surveillance cameras will seek to determine how the cocaine, described as being in a small, zippered bag, came to be in the executive mansion.On Sunday, the discovery prompted an evacuation of the White House. A preliminary field test by the DC fire department indicated the substance was cocaine.“We have a yellow bar saying cocaine hydrochloride,” a radio dispatch from the White House said.Initial reports said the cocaine was found in a reference library, but later reports said it was in “a work area” of the West Wing, which is attached to the mansion that houses the president and his family, the Oval Office, the cabinet room, the press briefing room and offices for staff.CBS News, citing law enforcement sources, reported that the cocaine was found in a facility used by White House staff and guests to store phones. The Secret Service indicated it was found by officers during “routine patrols”.The number of people who use the area could make it difficult to determine who was responsible for the substance, NBC said. By Wednesday afternoon, no one had claimed responsibility.The discovery of the drug prompted widespread speculation. Joe Biden and his family were not in residence at the time.The first family, including the president’s son Hunter Biden, who described his battle with addiction in a recent autobiography, returned to the residence on Tuesday.Rightwing commentators sprang into action, insinuating that Hunter Biden was likely linked to the cocaine find. That prompted Chris Jackson, a Tennessee election commissioner and longtime Democratic operative, to say on Twitter he hoped Biden “sues the hell out of everyone suggesting this”. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden reduces sentences of 31 people convicted of nonviolent drug offences

      by

      President Joe Biden has ordered the federal prison sentences of 31 people to be reduced, punishments which were given to them after nonviolent drug-related convictions.In an announcement released on Friday, the White House revealed that those whose sentences were commuted would be under home confinement until a 30 June expiration date for their respective punishments. The plan is for them to then be on supervised release, with the duration of that based on their original sentence.Among those with commuted sentences were a handful of women and men who were convicted of drug possession in Iowa, Indiana, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Hawaii and Texas. Most of the convictions involved methamphetamine. Others involved cocaine, heroin and marijuana.Others on the list released Friday hailed from California, Louisiana, Missouri, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Illinois, Tennessee, Ohio and Illinois. Those given commuted sentences will not have to pay the remainder of their fines, which range from $5,000 to $20,000, the White House’s statement said.“These individuals, who have been successfully serving sentences on home confinement, have demonstrated a commitment to rehabilitation, including by securing employment and advancing their education. Many would have received a lower sentence if they were charged with the same offense today, due to changes in the law, including the bipartisan First Step Act,” the White House’s statement added.The First Step Act is a 2018 bipartisan prison and sentencing reform bill that Donald Trump signed during his presidency which seeks to expand rehabilitative opportunities for people completing their incarceration.In addition to increasing credits for time already spent in custody awaiting the resolution of cases as well as for good conduct in federal prison, the act reduces mandatory minimum sentences for certain drug-related crimes. It also officially bans a number of correctional practices, including the shackling of pregnant women.The White House on Friday also announced the release of an “evidence-informed, multi-year Alternatives, Rehabilitation, and Re-entry strategic plan”.The plan seeks to strengthen public safety by reducing unnecessary criminal justice interactions so police officers can focus on fighting crime, supporting rehabilitation during incarceration and facilitating a successful return to their communities, the White House said.It went on to lay out a variety of ways the plan aims to support people in the federal justice system, including expanding healthcare access, securing access to safe and affordable housing, enhancing educational opportunities and improving access to food and subsistence benefits.The plan additionally calls for job opportunities and access to business capital, as well as strengthening access to banking and other financial services. It also promises to reduce voting barriers for those who are eligible.Biden last October pardoned thousands of people who had been convicted in federal court of simple marijuana possession, saying: “Sending people to prison for possessing marijuana has upended too many lives and incarcerated people for conduct that many states no longer prohibit.“It’s time we right these wrongs,” Biden said at the time of those pardons. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Overdose deaths in San Francisco hit 200 in three months: ‘A crying shame’

      by

      Drug-related deaths surged by 41% in San Francisco in the first quarter of this year – with one person dying of an accidental overdose every 10 hours, as the fentanyl crisis continues to ravage the US west coast.San Francisco saw 200 people die of overdoses in the past three months compared to 142 in the same months a year ago, according to reports by the city’s medical examiner.Those living on the streets were particularly hard hit – with twice as many unhoused people dying of overdoses between January and March compared to a year earlier.Fentanyl was detected in most of the deaths. The city’s minority populations were particularly hard hit. A third of the overdose victims were Black, despite Black people making up only 5% of the city’s population.“It’s a crying shame that a city as wealthy as San Francisco can’t get its act together to deal with overdose deaths,” said Dr Daniel Ciccarone, a professor of addiction medicine at the University of California San Francisco, who said the city’s increasingly punitive approach to handling drug users has only heightened their overdose risks.“We’re a politically divided city between the people who have a lot of money and want the streets swept and those who think a compassionate, science-based, health approach is appropriate,” he said.The spike in deaths began in December and was particularly apparent in January, when 82 deaths put the city’s overdose fatalities at an all time high. This came just after the city government closed a key outreach center, where drug users were using with medical supervision, and increased policing in San Francisco’s drug-plagued Tenderloin district.Last summer, voters recalled the city’s liberal district attorney and the San Francisco mayor London Breed appointed a new district attorney, Brooke Jenkins, who vowed to take a law-and-order approach to the problem and has since stepped up arrests of drug dealers.Then in December, Breed closed the Tenderloin Center, a facility designed to provide daytime shelter for the unhoused, along with housing referrals, food, addiction treatment and health services. The center had unofficially allowed drug use in a supervised outside area. Attendants used Narcan to reverse more than 330 opiate overdoses in the 11 months the center was open, according to city data.The center, which served more than 400 people daily, was opposed by some in the community, who said it was drawing drug users to the already-impacted neighborhood.Breed said in December she had been disappointed by the low number of visitors at the center who ultimately accepted help to get off of drugs. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, fewer than 1% of visits resulted in someone getting connected to addiction treatment services.Since closing the center, Breed has sought $25m to increase police overtime with the priority of arresting drug dealers.“We are dealing with multiple serious public safety challenges locally, from a fentanyl-driven overdose epidemic, open-air drug dealing, property crime in our residential and commercial neighborhoods, increasing gun violence and prejudice-fueled incidents,” she said in a March letter seeking more federal help in policing and prosecuting cases.Last week, the California governor, Gavin Newsom, promised to send in resources and personnel from the national guard and the California highway patrol to bolster policing.Gary McCoy of HealthRIGHT 360, the nonprofit that ran the drug overdose prevention portion of the Tenderloin Center, said the government’s law-enforcement focused approach is backfiring and is instead pushing drug users into isolation, where they are more at risk of overdose deaths.“Something that has been sold to folks as a strategy that is going to work and help tackle the overdose crisis is having the exact opposite effect,” said McCoy, adding that the police tactics create dangers that go beyond the fact that health officials no longer have the chance to witness and reverse overdoses at the Tenderloin Center.“When people don’t have a safe place to go, when they’re using in doorways and public places and they’re afraid of getting caught and put in jail, they tend to rush and use more substance,” he said. “And when they rush, there’s a higher risk of overdose.”Ciccarone said other safe use centers around the world, including one in Melbourne Australia that opened five years ago, have shown to reduce overdoses, bring drug use off the streets and help get addicts into treatment. But he cautioned it takes far longer than 11 months to see the results.“People expected too much from it too soon,” he said of San Francisco’s center. “It gave the outward appearance that people were congregating to consume drugs. But here we have it closed for three months and the first three months show a tremendous rise in overdose deaths.”The city’s supervisors have pushed to replace the Tenderloin Center, which was designed as a temporary measure, with 12 smaller “wellness hubs” around the city. These would provide health and shelter services, as well allowing supervised drug use to prevent overdose deaths.But last summer, Newsom vetoed legislation that would have allowed supervised drug use centers in three California cities, including San Francisco. And the plan for the wellness hubs stalled, after San Francisco’s city attorney raised the objection that the city could wind up bearing significant legal liability.Breed has said she supports the wellness hubs.“These are difficult situations because this involves legal advice, significant criminal liability which we cannot just ignore,” said the mayor, according to KTVU news. Nonprofits are now seeking a way to fund the overdose prevention portions of their operations without city funding.In a statement, the San Francisco Department of Health (SFDPH) said it has undertaken a host of measures to prevent overdoses, including adding hundreds of new beds for addiction recovery treatment, expanding neighborhood street care teams and making Narcan and medication-assisted addiction treatment options more available.“SFDPH recognizes that any overdose death is one too many and mourns the loss of each of these lives,” the department said. It added the department is also looking for legal ways to open supervised use clinics. “These deaths drive us to find more ways to prevent overdoses and reduce the harms caused by fentanyl.”Breed and the new district attorney have touted increased arrests and jail time for drug dealers. In a April blog post, the mayor said police made 162 arrests for drug possession for sales in the last three months of 2022, an 80% increase, and are seizing dozens of kilograms of narcotics.“These enforcement actions will continue, while our street outreach teams continue to go out and offer services and treatment,” wrote Breed.But Alex Kral, an epidemiologist at the independent nonprofit research institute RTI International, who led an evaluation of the Tenderloin Center, said the drug dealing arrests actually make the drug supply more dangerous by forcing users to go to people they don’t know for their drug supply and forcing users into hiding.“You’re making an unpredictable drug market even more unpredictable,” he said.“We’ve spent the last 50 years trying to arrest our way out of this and it’s clearly not working. The conditions on the streets are getting worse, the drugs are becoming more dangerous and the health of the community is much, much worse with increased policing.”According to San Francisco supervisor Hillary Ronen, who has championed the idea of wellness hubs, the city has failed to come up with any new tactics to deal with a “horrific crisis”.“We closed the Tenderloin Center with no plan in place to replace it,” she said. “Fentanyl is corrupting every part of the drug supply and all the social problems that underlie the drug addiction crisis continue – widespread poverty, trauma with no access to mental health care, inequality, and homelessness.”“What did we expect to happen?” More

    • 100 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      FDA approves overdose-reversing Narcan for sale without prescription

      by

      The US Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday approved selling naloxone without a prescription, setting the overdose-reversing drug on course to become the first opioid treatment drug to be sold over counters in the US.It is a move some advocates have long sought as a way to improve access to a life-saving drug, though the exact impact will not be clear immediately.The best-known form of naloxone is Narcan, an approved branded nasal spray made by Emergent BioSolutions in Gaithersburg, Maryland. It can reverse overdoses of opioids, including street drugs such as heroin and fentanyl and prescription versions including oxycodone.Making naloxone available more widely is seen as a key strategy to control the US overdose crisis, which has been linked to more than 100,000 deaths a year. The majority of those deaths are tied to opioids, primarily potent synthetic versions such as fentanyl that can take multiple doses of naloxone to reverse.Advocates believe it is important to get naloxone to people who are most likely to be around overdoses, including people who use drugs and their relatives. Police and other first responders often carry it.Emergent BioSolutions said Narcan would become available over-the-counter by late summer. Other brands of naloxone and injectable forms will not yet be available over the counter, but could be soon.Harm Reduction Therapeutics, a non-profit which has funding from the OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma, has an application before the FDA to distribute its version of spray naloxone without a prescription.Even before the FDA’s action, pharmacies could sell naloxone without a prescription because officials in every state have allowed it. But not every pharmacy carries it. And buyers have to pay for the medication – either with an insurance co-pay or for the full retail price. The cost varies, but two doses of Narcan often go for around $50.The drug is also distributed by community organizations that serve people who use drugs, though it is not easily accessible to everyone who needs it.Emergent has not announced its price and it is not clear yet whether insurers will continue to cover it as a prescription drug if it is available over the counter.However, the FDA decision clears the way for Narcan to be made available in places without pharmacies, including convenience stores, supermarkets and online retailers.Jose Benitez, lead executive officer at Prevention Point Philadelphia, an organization that tries to reduce risk for people who use drugs with services including handing out free naloxone, said over-the-counter access could help a lot for people who don’t seek help or who live in places where it is not available.Now, he said, some people are concerned about getting naloxone at pharmacies because their insurers will know they are getting it.“Putting it out on the shelves is going to allow people just to pick it up, not have stigma attached to it and readily access this life-saving drug,” he said.The US Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, which now covers prescription naloxone for people on government insurance programs, says coverage of over-the-counter naloxone would depend on the insurance program. It has not given any official guidance.Maya Doe-Simkins, a co-director of Remedy Alliance/For the People, which launched last year to provide low-cost and sometimes free naloxone to community organizations, said her group would continue to distribute injectable naloxone.One concern is whether people who buy Narcan over the counter will know how to use it, said Keith Humphreys, a Stanford University addiction expert, though the manufacturer is responsible for clear directions and online videos.One benefit of having pharmacists involved, Humphreys said, is that they can show buyers how to use it. Humphreys also said there are fears that if the drug is not profitable as an over-the-counter option, the drugmaker could stop producing it. More