Connect with us

Culture

Live Resin: Preservation of Terpenes

Published

on


Over the last decade, there have been significant technological advances in the cannabis industry that have helped push the boundaries of cultivation and extraction. There are now numerous high-quality extractions available that can provide the cannabis connoisseur with a full-spectrum cannabinoid profile while keeping the original essence of the strain.

Throughout the hobby-grower community, there are many ways to extract specific cannabinoids. However, in the cannabis industry, there are three main extraction techniques used: 

  • supercritical carbon dioxide
  • hydrocarbon
  • ethanol

Throughout all methods, the raw plant material is subjected to a solvent, which removes the active cannabinoids and terpenes from the plant into a chemical solution before being purged of impurities and cooled. Post-production techniques give the extract its texture and consistency. 

Throughout this article, we will be focusing on an advance in terpene preservation and discussing live resin. This is a high-quality extract renowned for its immaculate terpene profile and full-spectrum cannabinoid content.

What is live resin?

Cannabis extractions are often named for their aesthetic appearance or texture, and this terpene-heavy extract is no exception. It is called live resin because the whole plant is cryogenically frozen directly after harvest, which differs from traditional extraction methods, where trichomes are aged before being processed further. 

Responsible for flavour and aroma, terpenes are volatile unsaturated hydrocarbons found within the cannabis plant. For years, many cannabis enthusiasts have known the importance of terpene preservation. As terpenes and cannabinoids degrade when exposed to higher temperatures, it is common knowledge that trichomes are best extracted in colder temperatures. This helps to separate the trichome heads from the plant. 

Live resin was first developed amongst a close group of medicinal patients in Colorado looking for new ways of preserving complete terpene profiles. These cannabis enthusiasts used a closed-loop extraction system with butane. This maintained the colder temperatures needed to produce the terpene-rich extraction. Due to this new way of fresh-freezing the plant, live resin is renowned for its full-bodied flavour and exceptional terpene profiles. Not only that, it has THC levels of up to 95%. 

How is live resin made?

Live resin is produced in many states across the US, where cannabis is legally regulated. However, unfortunately, due to EU regulations, it is illegal to purchase or manufacture any cannabis extractions throughout Europe.

Live resin is produced by licensed extraction professionals in state-of-the-art laboratories across regulated states in the US. As temperature plays an essential role in cannabis extraction, using only the highest-grade equipment is vital to preserving the terpene profile. So here is a step-by-step explanation of the delicate production process of live resin!

Fresh-freezing

Foremost, plants are either dipped into a container filled with liquid nitrogen at a temperature of -210 °C, or sealed in a dry ice freezer with temperatures maintained at -40 °C. Flash-freezing, the whole plant moments after harvest, helps to preserve the terpene profile and create an aesthetically pleasing extract. 

Cannabinoid extraction with solvents

Solvents, most commonly butane, are used to chemically separate the cannabinoids and terpenes from the plant biomass into a liquid mixture without disturbing the other plant-based matrices. The solvent is often cooled to temperatures below -40 °C which can help lock out the water-soluble components of the plant. 

Live resin can also be produced by non-polar solvents such as ethanol and CO2, but this method is rare.

Closed-loop extraction

The frozen cannabis is placed in a closed-loop hydrocarbon extractor throughout the extraction process. The frozen cannabis will be washed with the chosen solvent, removing all essential cannabinoids and terpenes. 

The hydrocarbon and plant extract solution is collected in the collection chamber, and heat will be applied to evaporate the residual solvent from the solution. The remaining oil will be collected, and the leftover solvent will be returned to the solvent tank.

The purge

The excess residue solvents are then purged from the solution using a vacuum oven at low temperatures, eliminating the risk of unwanted pressure and keeping an identical terpene profile similar to the original strain. All finished products from licensed cannabis dispensaries will be laboratory tested for residual solvents, ensuring a high-quality and clean cannabis extract.

Consistency and texture

The post-processing techniques create the unique consistency and texture of live resin. Generally, live resins are dark yellow and extremely sticky with a similar texture to wax or sauce. 

Multiple consistencies and textures can be achieved through different purging processes, including: ‘sugar wax’, with a grainy, wet sugar-like texture, ‘raw jelly’, with a highly sticky jelly-like texture, and ‘sauce’, winterized with a sticky liquid consistency similar to a café condiment sauce. Winterization is the process of removing the plants’ fat, waxes and lipids.

How is live resin consumed?

Live resin can be used in various ways, but due to its sticky texture, it is always recommended to use a dab tool when handling it. So let us guide you through the top two consumption methods!

1. Dabbing live resin

Dabbing is the act of dabbing a small amount of cannabis concentrate onto a heated surface which will vaporize on contact. It has become extremely popular within the cannabis subculture, and many concentrate enthusiasts use a dab rig to consume live resin. 

A dab rig is a small glass water pipe, similar to a glass bong. However, in place of the bowl in a standard bong, there is either a glass or titanium nail, which will act as your surface for dabbing. The glass rig comprises four main parts: the mouthpiece, downstem, body and nail.

Mouthpiece

The mouthpiece is where the vapour is inhaled from. In comparison to a standard glass bong, it is a lot smaller. 

Body

The body is the main chamber where the smoke enters before it is inhaled. It is attached to the downstem and the mouthpiece and is slightly filled with water to filter the vapour before it is inhaled. 

Downstem

This is attached to the nail and acts as a passageway for the vaporized concentrate into the main chamber.

Nail or banger

This acts as a thermal conductor and is where the concentrates are dabbed onto. A nail has a small surface area and can be made of titanium or glass. In comparison, a banger is primarily made of quartz and is more like a dish.

Once the nail or banger has been pre-heated, the concentrate is dabbed onto a small surface of the nail or banger and vaporized. It is often left for around 30 to 45 seconds to cool down to reach this optimal temperature, but this can vary depending on the material of the nail. 

Dabbing connossuiers often recommend using a quartz thermal nail or banger made from the highest quality quartz glass. Quartz retains the full terpene profile and provides the user with an efficient and heat-effective dab. It is a great alternative to titanium. 

There are various temperatures for dabbing, but the optimal temperature is around 285 °C, preserving essential terpenes and cannabinoids. Low-temperature dabs make the most out of your concentrates and limit waste, whereas high-temperature dabs over 350 °C can destroy the terpene profile and eliminate all beneficial cannabinoids. 

However, suppose you are looking to get the perfect temperature every time. In that case, an electric nail or e-nail allows you to pre-set your rig to a specific temperature by using electronic coils to heat the nail or banger and maximize cannabinoid efficiency. 

The vapour is pulled into the downstem and through water in the main chamber. Once the vapour has filtered through the water, it can be inhaled through the mouthpiece that connects to the main chamber.

2. Vaporizing live resin

For health-conscious cannabis consumers, portable vaporizers make enjoying concentrates extremely easy. 

Wax pens are designed explicitly for extracts and can handle the thick consistency of different extractions like shatter, sauces, oils, and live resins. A wax pen uses an atomiser to heat the concentrate chamber, which is often ceramic. This maintains the highest quality vapour until it can be inhaled.

Dried flower vaporizers such as the Pax 3 and Davinci IQ2 often include a concentrate chamber and are perfect for extracts. There are three types of vaporizers: conduction, convection, and hybrids. So which kind of vaporizer is best for live resin?

A conduction vaporizer is one where the cannabis comes into direct contact with a heated surface, in this case, the concentrate chamber. A convection device pushes hot air over and through the dry flower, and a hybrid combines the two. With such a terpene-rich extract as live resin, a hybrid vaporizer is recommended for optimal flavour. 

How to store live resin

Like all cannabis products, many environmental factors can diminish quality and potency. The most influential factors include the following: 

  • sunlight
  • heat
  • air 
  • moisture

Over time, oxidation and heat can break down the crystalline and cannabinoid structure. So it is always recommended to store your live resin correctly!

It is best to store your extractions in a dark place, away from any light, to avoid degradation of the terpene profile and cannabinoid content. Airtight containers allow the live resin to maintain its unique terpene profile, protecting it from direct contact with air and moisture.

Cool temperatures are ideal, and storing live resin in the fridge in an airtight container is perfect. However, avoid storing directly in the freezer due to the possibility of high humidity in the concentrate container. Freezing any trapped water vapour will create unwanted moisture that can degrade the cannabinoid and terpene content.

Does live resin have benefits over other extractions?

Many cannabis connoisseurs praise live resin for its unique terpene profile and high potency, so let us check out the benefits of live resin compared to other cannabis extractions. 

1. Cannabinoid content of live resin

Rather than the cannabinoids being left to degrade over time, the freezing process preserves a full-plant extract with higher cannabinoid levels than other extracts, ideal for those looking to benefit from the entourage effect.

Live resin is highly potent. With a potential THC content of up to 95%, medicinal users looking for high-THC dosing will only need to consume minimal amounts compared to other extracts. 

2. The terpene profile of live resin

Terpenes can be broken down into two categories: sesquiterpenes and monoterpenes. Together, they make up the complex terpene profile of the cannabis plant. Monoterpenes are compounds with a smaller molecular structure directly responsible for the fresh, uplifting terpenes like linalool and limonene. Sesquiterpenes are accountable for the deeper undertones, such as caryophyllene and humulene. 

Due to their smaller molecular structure, monoterpenes are the first to evaporate once a cannabis plant has been harvested. Cannabis plants contain a more significant proportion of sesquiterpenes. In 2015, High Times surveyed the results of the Michigan Cannabis Cup and found that live resin is around 2% richer in monoterpenes and contains 11% fewer sesquiterpenes by weight than other extractions.

It is well known that as the inflorescence ages, the terpene content decreases. Still, due to the complex cryogenic freezing process, live resin preserves the plant’s terpene profile from the moment it is harvested. 

A study titled The volatile oil composition of fresh and air-dried buds of Cannabis sativa states that over 55% of the original terpene profile is thought to be lost during the drying and curing process! Live resin keeps the terpenes which would have been lost due to oxidation throughout the drying and curing process, even before the extraction process has begun. 

Many other extraction methods damage the plant’s terpene profile, and it is a sad fact that various solvent-based extraction companies reintegrate terpenes lost during the extraction process back into their product post-extraction. These artificial terpenes are not produced by the cannabis plant and do not give the user a full-spectrum plant extract. They also affect viscosity, and isolated terpenes are added to lower the product’s viscosity, potentially affecting its final finish.

3. The production time of live resin

Live resin is also quicker to produce, as there is no need to dry and cure the flowers after harvest. This allows expert extractors the chance to create more products per year. 

However, like all extractions, the terpene profile, texture and aesthetics can change depending on the quality of the flower, and the final product will only be as good as the frozen flower it was made with. 

What are the negative aspects of live resin?

Although there are many benefits of live resin, there are some negatives.

Is live resin dangerous to produce?

There have been various reports of people making BHO extracts at home using open-loop systems, and the consequences have been disastrous. It has been reported that amateur “blasting” methods may result in flammable vapour pooling in enclosed spaces and igniting when exposed to a spark.

This can be seen in Colorado, where there has been a dramatic increase in the number of patients presenting with burns associated with BHO production over the past seven years.

It is also essential to ensure that the final product is free from residue and solvents. So, purchasing your extracts from a licensed retailer where all products have been laboratory tested is always recommended. 

Is live resin expensive? 

There have been various reports regarding the average return from the dried flower. Many growers believe around a 3 to 5% return is moderate, with high-yielding strains having the potential to make a 7-8% return. Due to the limited return from live resin, products can be costly. 

However, due to the increased demand for top-shelf, high-quality extractions, prices have become more affordable for the average cannabis user in America. Due to the constant market fluctuations, it is not easy to put an exact price on live resin, but at the time of writing, an average gram of high-quality live resin in the US can range from $20 to $60 (€20 to €60).

Is live resin the future of extractions?

Some producers are content with using solvents to extract cannabinoids and terpenes. However, scientists and cannabis enthusiasts will continue to push the boundaries to create better, cleaner, more effective extracts. Unfortunately, due to the meagre return rate and exceptional terpene preservation, live resin is one of the priciest extracts.

Live resin keeps the flower’s original terpene profile. It offers the consumer the chance to enjoy the plant’s accurate terpene content, which is impossible with other extraction methods such as dry sift and supercritical CO2 extraction

Although it is a personal preference and there is a wide range of concentrates available, if you are looking for flavour, live resin should be at the top of your list!

Have you tried live resin, or have you had any experience with dabbing? Do you think extracts are the future of cannabis, or are they unnecessarily strong and expensive? Please let us know in the comments below! 

  • Disclaimer:

    Laws and regulations regarding cannabis use differ from country to country. Sensi Seeds therefore strongly advises you to check your local laws and regulations. Do not act in conflict with the law.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture

Mile High 420 Fest returns in April, but you have to be 21 to attend

Published

on

By



Denver’s signature Mile High 420 Fest recently announced its return to Civic Center park this year. The event, which takes place on, well, Thursday, April 20, celebrates the unofficial holiday with music, food trucks, vendors and and a communal smokeup at 4:20 p.m.

New in 2023: The festival will be limited to attendees aged 21 years and up, though that shouldn’t come as a surprise. Last year, Mile High 420 Fest promised it would impose an age limit at future events after fielding concerns from parents about open cannabis consumption onsite.

(It is technically illegal to smoke weed in public places, Denver police like to remind locals, but that doesn’t stop it from happening at the festival.)

Read the rest of this story on DenverPost.com.



Source link

Continue Reading

alcohol abuse

More Weed, More Problems? – Cannabis | Weed | Marijuana

Published

on

By


More weed, more problems? As in, if you smoke all day, everyday, your life is likely a hot mess with no hope of redemption? According to recent research from CU Boulder, the answer to “more weed, more problems” is no.

According to researchers, legalizing recreational cannabis at the state level does not lead to an increase in substance use disorders. Or even increased use of illicit drugs among adults. In fact, it may even decrease issues related to alcohol abuse.

A study involving over 4,000 twins from Colorado and Minnesota found no correlation between cannabis legalization and any increases in cognitive, psychological, social, relationship, or financial problems.

“We really didn’t find any support for a lot of the harms people worry about with legalization,” said lead author Stephanie Zellers. “From a public health perspective, these results are reassuring.”

The study, published in Psychological Medicine, was conducted by researchers from the University of Minnesota, CU Boulder and the CU Anschutz Medical Campus. The study used data from two of the nation’s most extensive and longest-running twin studies: one located at IBG and the other at the Minnesota Center for Twin Family Research.

What Are Twin Studies? 

More Weed, More Problems?

Can twin studies prove that more weed doesn’t equal more problems? Well, what are twin studies?

Twin studies are research designs that compare identical (monozygotic) and fraternal (dizygotic) twins. The idea is that identical twins share all their genes, while fraternal twins share only about half of their genes.

So any differences between the two types of twins can help researchers identify which traits or conditions are likely influenced by genetics and which are likely influenced by environment. Researchers can use twin studies to study a wide range of topics, including genetics, development, and health.

IBG stands for Institute of Behavioral Genetics, a research center at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Minnesota Center for Twin Family Research located at the University of Minnesota.

Both centers conduct twin studies and have been collecting data over the years. And both centers are among the nation’s most prominent and longest-running twin studies. They provide researchers with a wealth of data on genetic and environmental factors related to human behaviour and development.

The Problem with Twin Studies

Of course, Twin studies are not without their critics.

  1. Assumption of equal environments: Twin studies sometimes assume that identical and fraternal twins are raised in similar environments, but this may not always be the case. For example, identical twins may be treated more similarly than fraternal twins, which could affect the results.
  2. Limited generalizability: Researchers often conduct twin studies on small, specific samples, such as twins from a particular country or region. This limits the generalizability of the findings to other populations.
  3. Missing heritability: Twin studies estimate the proportion of variation in a trait or condition due to genetics. But they do not account for all the genetic variation that may influence the trait or condition.
  4. Complexity of human behaviour: Many complex human behaviours and conditions, such as mental disorders or intelligence, likely result from multiple genes and environmental factors. Twin studies may not fully capture these interactions.
  5. Selection bias: Twins who volunteer for studies might differ from twins who do not volunteer, which can bias the results.

Twin Studies Disprove More Weed, More Problems? 

More Weed, More Problems?

The researchers of this “more weed, more problems” study compared the 40% of twins who reside in states where recreational cannabis is legal to those who live in states where it remains illegal to understand the overall impact of legalization.

Researchers have been tracking the participants, who are now between the ages of 24 and 49, since their adolescence. They’ve been gathering information on their use of alcohol, tobacco, cannabis and several other illicit drugs, as well as assessing their overall well-being.

By specifically comparing twins within 240 pairs, in which one twin lives in a state with legal cannabis and the other where it is not, the researchers aimed to identify any changes caused by cannabis legalization.

The researchers previously found that identical twins residing in states where recreational cannabis is legal tend to use it around 20% more often than their twins living in states where it remains illegal.

So does that mean more weed, more problems?

To answer this question, the team compared survey results that examined 23 indicators of “psychosocial distress.” Including the use of alcohol and illicit drugs like cocaine and heroin, psychological distress, financial difficulties, cognitive issues, unemployment, and relationship issues both at home and at work.

“We included everything we had data on with the goal of getting a well-rounded look at the impacts on the whole person,” said Zellers. “Big picture, there’s not much there.”

No, More Weed Does Not Equal More Problems

More Weed, More Problems?

So is “more weed, more problems” debunked?

Researchers found no relationship between legal cannabis and an increased risk of “cannabis use disorder” or dependency.

For years, critics have called cannabis a “gateway” drug to harder substances like cocaine and heroin. The researchers found no changes post-legalization.

“For low-level cannabis use, which was the majority of users, in adults, legalization does not appear to increase the risk of substance use disorders,” said co-author Dr. Christian Hopfer.

Not only does this study question the “more weed, more problems” narrative, but it also shows legal cannabis’ benefit. People in legal states are less likely to develop alcohol dependency problems, including driving drunk.

“Our study suggests that we should not be overly concerned about everyday adult use in a legalized environment. But no drug is risk-free,” said John Hewitt, professor of psychology and neuroscience at CU Boulder.

While the study found no adverse effects on the daily lives of cannabis-consuming adults, the study also found no evidence that legal cannabis benefited people’s cognitive, psychological, social, relationship, or financial status.

Overall, the study seems to suggest the same thing we have before. Substances are neutral. It is the person who can choose to use or abuse them. But the drugs themselves have no innate power of control.





Source link

Continue Reading

All about Cannabis

The Case Against Safe Supply? – Cannabis | Weed | Marijuana

Published

on

By


Is there a case against safe supply? Lately, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has faced criticisms for his opposition to safe supply sites, also known as “safe injection sites” or “overdose prevention sites.”

These are facilities where people use substances under the supervision of trained staff. These facilities aim to reduce the harm associated with drug use by providing a safe and hygienic environment and access to clean needles and other supplies, counselling, and medical care in case of overdose.

With broad “public health” support, critics cast Poilievre’s opposition as an ideological bulwark against the evidence-based compassion of left-wing progressives.

But are safe supply sites evidence-based? What about the experts, like Dr. Julian Somers or Dr. Vincent Lam, who disagree with the established narrative?

Or is the idea taboo? That there may be some unintended consequences of flooding our communities with accessible opioids?

How can a policy be evidence-based if we treat all opposition as misinformation not worth considering?

Safe Supply Reduces Addiction? 

The Case Against Safe Supply?

In the movie Vancouver is Dying, filmmaker Aaron Gunn documents how addicts will use legal means to acquire methadone and then sell it on the street for fentanyl. Doctors have confirmed they’ve heard the same from some of their patients.

It’s a narrative no one wants to hear, but it’s true: some people like fentanyl.

True, some people take another drug someone else has laced with fentanyl, and that’s a problem with prohibition. But in other cases, people actively seek out the high associated with fentanyl.

Why? Because people like drugs. This seemingly banal fact has been obscured by “addiction experts” and other busybody public health officials who claim people become slaves to their habits and cannot make rational choices.

This ideology is labelled “evidence-based,” but what evidence do we have that addiction is a disease of the brain or a medical condition requiring a lifetime of recovery? Brain scans don’t reveal the inner thoughts of people.

It is perfectly valid to view addiction as a person’s choice to cope with underlying emotional or psychological problems. People who struggle with addiction can regain control of their lives by understanding the reasons behind their behaviour.

They can make a conscious decision to change their drug habits. Even eliminate them.

We’ve become a society that chastises personal responsibility and accountability as symptoms of “white privilege” and “structural racism.” So there’s little surprise that we haven’t solved our addiction issues.

Public health approaches addiction under the false assumption that it’s a disease. This leads to policies like safe supply sites, which, as Dr. Kelly Anthony put it, “consigns the addict to be a slave forever.”

Who Criticizes Safe Supply? 

The Case Against Safe Supply?

Dr. Kelly Anthony is one of the few doctors in Canada willing to criticize “safe supply.” She says other doctors and academics are unwilling to publicly criticize safe supply due to political pressures, shaming, shunning, and silencing done to critics. 

Look no further than the Ontario College of Psychologists going after Jordan Peterson for his dissent for a clear example of the witch-hunt that occurs when you step off the plantation. (Regardless of what you think of Peterson, a professional has the right to criticize the prevailing unscientific narratives of their profession, especially on social media.)

The B.C. government is targeting Dr. Julian Somers for his opposition to safe supply. Somers has maintained a database that links information about B.C.’s vulnerable populations to days spent in hospitals, detention centres, and their medications or income assistance.

Overall, this database has helped researchers accurately measure the impacts of government policies. Researchers have used it in over 30 provincial reports, 60 peer-reviewed publications and several graduate theses. 

Somers recently used the data to research the government’s anti-poverty programs.

The conclusion? B.C.’s current approach to homelessness is ineffective. It is better to prioritize rehabilitation, employment, and social reintegration. A “safe supply” of free drugs fosters dependency.

B.C. Government Wants Safe Supply Dissidents Silenced

“Portugal has 64 therapeutic communities and zero consumption sites. British Columbia has zero therapeutic communities and 40-something consumption sites,” Dr. Somers told the National Post

In February 2021, Dr. Somers presented his findings to the B.C. government. Did the government follow an “evidence-based” public health initiative?

Of course, not. The government told Somers to destroy the database from which he got this information. Of course, Somers has refused to comply. 

So the government has locked Dr. Somers out of future research with them. He’s been the subject of harassment from safe supply advocates. Conferences that disagree with his opinions on safe supply have disinvited him.

The British Columbia Centre on Substance Use calls Somer’s research “low quality.”

This Doctor Gets It

The Case Against Safe Supply?

Dr. Vincent Lam is a physician concerned that we’re replacing fentanyl addicts with hydromorphone addicts. 

He wrote in the Globe and Mail“If you are a proponent of “safe supply,” the ineffectiveness of prescribed hydromorphone in replacing street fentanyl supports the argument of making pharmaceutical grade heroin available instead, with more open access to this higher potency molecule.”

Dr. Lam doesn’t seem to be captured by the magic thinking of public health. He realizes that addicts are chasing a high. By giving them access to drugs with lower euphoria, “the notion of “safe supply” looks more like an infinite escalator than a destination. As dose and potency escalate, risk and harm escalates, and yet “safe supply” is sold as harm reduction,” he wrote.

“On the ground, the irony is that current “safe supply” does not meet the opioid requirements of those who are at highest risk – but it is these high-risk users whose lives it is meant to save.”

This Doctor Also Gets It

COVID-19: Vancouver's Downtown Eastside - a potential powder keg for coronavirus cases

Another doctor, Dr. Paxton Bach, who works in Vancouver‘s Downtown East Side, is on the fence.

He says, “Safe supply is the most immediate tool that I have available to try and stop somebody from dying tomorrow. But I worry that a discussion on safe supply in isolation, without talking about the systematic drivers of substance use, is incomplete. I’m less worried about de novo opioid-use disorder tomorrow with some diverted hydromorphone tablets, but I do wonder where this ends up taking us over the next 10 years without addressing these bigger questions.”

So what are these bigger questions? 

Dr. Lam recognizes that addiction often results from something else, whether it’s trauma, mental illness, poverty, or physical injury and pain.

“These are at once so diffusely powerful and inadequately addressed, that those of us who wield prescription pads are easily seduced by the promise of a solution by prescription, just as opioids promise solace in the smooth form of a nice, safe pill,” he writes.

Dr. Lam recalls Oxycodone, in which its manufacturer, Purdue, made unfounded claims of safety and non-addictiveness. They promised Oxy was a pain-killing solution; instead, it became a critical step in today’s opioid crisis.

The Case Against Safe Supply?

The Case Against Safe Supply?

Dr. Nick Mathew, a psychiatrist in Vancouver, wrote: “The benefits of the B.C. safe supply model are entirely unproven and theoretical. The downsides of increasing the amount of opioids in the population have a known harm.”

And indeed, it doesn’t take a doctor or “addictions expert” to see the problems with it. Safe supply sites:

  • Encourage drug use: Some critics argue that safe supply sites enable and condone drug use rather than promoting abstinence and discouraging drug use.
  • Divert resources from other programs: Critics argue that governments could better apply taxpayer resources to other programs, such as addiction treatment or housing support. This is Poilievre’s argument.
  • Legal issues: There are legal concerns about safe supply sites, especially in Canada, and it is a matter of ongoing debate.
  • Impact on public order: Some critics argue that safe supply sites have increased crime and disorder in the surrounding area. Whether we can solely attribute Vancouver’s tent cities to safe supply remains to be seen. But the injection sites have been influential.
  • Ethical concerns: Some critics argue that providing a safe place to use drugs may be morally or ethically problematic and that safe supply sites may condone drug use.
  • Lack of evidence: Critics argue that the effectiveness of safe supply sites is still unclear and not supported by enough scientific evidence.

Simon Fraser University issued a report that looked at 15 years of research. They concluded there were no documented benefits of safe supply sites.

Disagree? Then read the report and criticize how they came to their conclusions. Don’t do what the Toronto Star did and call it “critically low-quality” without giving any real reason as to why.

“Experts” responded that they were “disappointed” to see “this offensive and flawed report come from researchers working at a Canadian university, and request that [the government] give no serious consideration to it when deliberating safe supply policy.”

But according to Dr. Somers, one of the report’s authors, “We summarize and reference the abundant evidence that chronic consumption of opioids and stimulants causes harm to humans. This is not controversial.” 

Not Seeing for the Forest for the Trees

The Case Against Safe Supply?

The debate between public health busybodies and concerned physicians fails to capture the core of this issue. The B.C. Coroners Service has consistently reported that the toxicity of illegal drugs is causing drug deaths.

It has nothing to do with addiction or dependency. It is a problem of prohibition and regulation. The solution to our opioid crisis is to legalize all drugs, especially heroin. 

The issue isn’t drugs. It’s people who misuse drugs. Just like the gun issue isn’t about the guns per se, but the people who misuse them.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre may misdiagnose the opioid crisis and the homelessness problem. But his critics are no better. They are often worse.

The issues related to safe supply, drug addictions, homelessness, and mental health all stem from the same origin. Corporate profiteering sanctioned by the government under the guise of “public health” or “regulation” or whatever soundbite they’re deceiving you with this week.

It’s what created the opioid crisis we have today. And it’s sowing the seeds of the next drug-related crisis. It’s the reason behind our skyrocketing costs of living and all the unnecessary wars of the last 80 years.

It’s the origin behind our corrupt politicians, lying media, and pill-pushing doctors. In most circles, this type of corporate and government power merger is called fascism. 

Perhaps you have a grandfather or great-grandfather who risked his life fighting against that system and for the freedom of private property and voluntary trade.

Are their deaths in vain? Or is this the decade we finally do something about it?





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 The Art of MaryJane Media