Outline Argument Premises and Conclusions for Clean Needles Benefit Society and Programs Don’t Make Sense?
Question by muellerdavidallen: Outline argument premises and conclusions for Clean Needles Benefit Society and Programs Don’t Make Sense?
CLEAN NEEDLES BENEFIT SOCIETY
USA Today
Our view: Needle exchanges prove effective as AIDS counterattack.
They warrant wider use and federal backing.
Nothing gets knees jerking and fingers wagging like free needle-exchange
programs. But strong evidence is emerging that they’re working.
The 37 cities trying needle exchanges are accumulating impressive
data that they are an effective tool against spread of an epidemic now in its
13th year.
• In Hartford, Conn., demand for needles has quadrupled expectations—
32,000 in nine months. And free needles hit a targeted
population: 55% of used needles show traces of AIDS virus.
• In San Francisco, almost half the addicts opt for clean needles.
• In New Haven, new HIV infections are down 33% for addicts in
exchanges.
Promising evidence. And what of fears that needle exchanges increase
addiction? The National Commission on AIDS found no evidence. Neither
do new studies in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Logic and research tell us no one’s saying, “Hey, they’re giving away
free, clean hypodermic needles! I think I’ll become a drug addict!”
Get real. Needle exchange is a soundly based counterattack against an
epidemic. As the federal Centers for Disease Control puts it, “Removing
contaminated syringes from circulation is analogous to removing mosquitoes.”
Addicts know shared needles are HIV transmitters. Evidence shows
drug users will seek out clean needles to cut chances of almost certain
death from AIDS.
Needle exchanges neither cure addiction nor cave in to the drug
scourge. They’re a sound, effective line of defense in a population at high
risk. (Some 28% of AIDS cases are IV drug users.) And AIDS treatment costs
taxpayers far more than the price of a few needles.
It’s time for policymakers to disperse the fog of rhetoric, hyperbole and
scare tactics and widen the program to attract more of the nation’s 1.2 million
IV drug users.
PROGRAMS DON’T MAKE SENSE
Peter B. Gemma Jr.
Opposing view: It’s just plain stupid for government to sponsor dangerous,
illegal behavior.
If the Clinton administration initiated a program that offered free tires to
drivers who habitually and dangerously broke speed limits—to help them
avoid fatal accidents from blowouts—taxpayers would be furious. Spending
government money to distribute free needles to junkies, in an attempt to
help them avoid HIV infections, is an equally volatile and stupid policy.
It’s wrong to attempt to ease one crisis by reinforcing another.
It’s wrong to tolerate a contradictory policy that spends people’s hardearned
money to facilitate deviant behavior.
And it’s wrong to try to save drug abusers from HIV infection by perpetuating
their pain and suffering.
Taxpayers expect higher health-care standards from President Clinton’s
public-policy “experts.”
Inconclusive data on experimental needle-distribution programs is no
excuse to weaken federal substance-abuse laws. No government bureaucrat
can refute the fact that fresh, free needles make it easier to inject illegal
drugs because their use results in less pain and scarring.
Underwriting dangerous, criminal behavior is illogical: If you subsidize
something, you’ll get more of it. In a Hartford, Conn., needle-distribution
program, for example, drug addicts are demanding taxpayer-funded needles
at four times the expected rate. Although there may not yet be evidence of
increased substance abuse, there is obviously no incentive in such schemes
to help drug-addiction victims get cured.
Inconsistency and incompetence will undermine the public’s confidence
in government health-care initiatives regarding drug abuse and the
AIDS epidemic. The Clinton administration proposal of giving away needles
hurts far more people than [it is] intended to help.
Find Drug Rehabs Through Drug Addiction Hotlines.
Find Drug Rehabs Through Drug Addiction Hotlines. – Most addicts cannot stop taking drugs on their own. The drug they have taken have altered their brain in such a way that they develop a seemingly insatiable craving. If someone addicted to drugs is determined to stop, they can only succeed if they enter a drug rehabilitation program. More often than not, people who need help do not know how to find drug rehabs in the area or in other parts of the country. 24 Hours Help in Your Area Call Today Phone No: (866) 786-4960 drugrehabsin.com
Drug Rehab in Pa: Drug Rehabs – the Battle Against Addiction
Drug addiction is undoubtedly one of the great tragedies of our society. Drug abuse is claiming lives by the thousands. For those who do survive drug addiction, there is a never-ending struggle to remain whole.
Drug abuse was once considered the plague of youthful indiscretion. Times have changed, however, and being no respecter of persons, the drug culture has spread its tentacles into all levels of society and every age group.
According to Mayo Clinic statistics, 19.5 million people over the age of 12 use illegal drugs in the United States. The National Institute on Drug Abuse reports that actual costs related to drug abuse in the United States is nearing $ 200 billion annually.
Drug Rehab Treatment- Lowering the Drinking Age: The Dark Side of Prescription Drugs
“I lost everything when the police raided my house looking for prescription drugs. My husband and two little children were home that night. I was so ashamed I couldn’t even look at them. I was arrested, put in handcuffs and locked up. My husband divorced me. My children were taken away from me. I knew I had hit bottom.”
Sylvia* is a 44 year-old radiologist, former president of the PTA, and prescription drug addict.
An Invisible Epidemic
A great deal has been written about alcoholism and drug addiction over the last two decades. However, information regarding prescription drug abuse and addiction only seems to surface when someone famous has a problem and needs treatment or dies.
Clean Needles Benefit Society and Programs Don’t Make Sense Do the Premises Support the Conclusions?
Question by muellerdavidallen: Clean Needles Benefit Society and Programs Don’t Make Sense Do the premises support the conclusions?
CLEAN NEEDLES BENEFIT SOCIETY
USA Today
Our view: Needle exchanges prove effective as AIDS counterattack.
They warrant wider use and federal backing.
Nothing gets knees jerking and fingers wagging like free needle-exchange
programs. But strong evidence is emerging that they’re working.
The 37 cities trying needle exchanges are accumulating impressive
data that they are an effective tool against spread of an epidemic now in its
13th year.
• In Hartford, Conn., demand for needles has quadrupled expectations—
32,000 in nine months. And free needles hit a targeted
population: 55% of used needles show traces of AIDS virus.
• In San Francisco, almost half the addicts opt for clean needles.
• In New Haven, new HIV infections are down 33% for addicts in
exchanges.
Promising evidence. And what of fears that needle exchanges increase
addiction? The National Commission on AIDS found no evidence. Neither
do new studies in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Logic and research tell us no one’s saying, “Hey, they’re giving away
free, clean hypodermic needles! I think I’ll become a drug addict!”
Get real. Needle exchange is a soundly based counterattack against an
epidemic. As the federal Centers for Disease Control puts it, “Removing
contaminated syringes from circulation is analogous to removing mosquitoes.”
Addicts know shared needles are HIV transmitters. Evidence shows
drug users will seek out clean needles to cut chances of almost certain
death from AIDS.
Needle exchanges neither cure addiction nor cave in to the drug
scourge. They’re a sound, effective line of defense in a population at high
risk. (Some 28% of AIDS cases are IV drug users.) And AIDS treatment costs
taxpayers far more than the price of a few needles.
It’s time for policymakers to disperse the fog of rhetoric, hyperbole and
scare tactics and widen the program to attract more of the nation’s 1.2 million
IV drug users.
PROGRAMS DON’T MAKE SENSE
Peter B. Gemma Jr.
Opposing view: It’s just plain stupid for government to sponsor dangerous,
illegal behavior.
If the Clinton administration initiated a program that offered free tires to
drivers who habitually and dangerously broke speed limits—to help them
avoid fatal accidents from blowouts—taxpayers would be furious. Spending
government money to distribute free needles to junkies, in an attempt to
help them avoid HIV infections, is an equally volatile and stupid policy.
It’s wrong to attempt to ease one crisis by reinforcing another.
It’s wrong to tolerate a contradictory policy that spends people’s hardearned
money to facilitate deviant behavior.
And it’s wrong to try to save drug abusers from HIV infection by perpetuating
their pain and suffering.
Taxpayers expect higher health-care standards from President Clinton’s
public-policy “experts.”
Inconclusive data on experimental needle-distribution programs is no
excuse to weaken federal substance-abuse laws. No government bureaucrat
can refute the fact that fresh, free needles make it easier to inject illegal
drugs because their use results in less pain and scarring.
Underwriting dangerous, criminal behavior is illogical: If you subsidize
something, you’ll get more of it. In a Hartford, Conn., needle-distribution
program, for example, drug addicts are demanding taxpayer-funded needles
at four times the expected rate. Although there may not yet be evidence of
increased substance abuse, there is obviously no incentive in such schemes
to help drug-addiction victims get cured.
Inconsistency and incompetence will undermine the public’s confidence
in government health-care initiatives regarding drug abuse and the
AIDS epidemic. The Clinton administration proposal of giving away needles
hurts far more people than [it is] intended to help.
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
81
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
What Is the Difference Between Drug Abuse and Drug Addiction?
Question by Chronic: What is the difference between drug abuse and drug addiction?
I am witing something freelance and just wondering if anyone can give me an addequite difference between drug abuse and drug addiction.
The definition of an addict is: 1. To cause to become physiologically or psychologically dependent on a habit-forming substance
2. To occupy (oneself) with or involve (oneself) in something habitually or compulsively
Definition of drug abuse: he use of illegal drugs or the inappropriate use of legal drugs. The repeated use of drugs to produce pleasure, to alleviate stress, or to alter or avoid reality (or all three).