◎ Guo Suo
In the drug policy article written by Shen Boyang in the name of "Puma" in 2014, he indeed wrote that if decriminalization is too radical for Taiwan, it can refer to foreign experience and "establish community centers to provide drug users with drugs and clean needles" and introduce social workers to assist. Now the Kuomintang has seized on this text and transformed it into "providing drugs to drug addicts at the community center next to your home" and even further claimed that this is "helping and encouraging drug abuse." But discussing public policy cannot rely solely on a few panic-inducing words. In particular, Luo Zhiqiang of the Kuomintang directly described "community centers" as neighborhood activity centers in the imagination of ordinary people, and then inferred harm reduction measures as encouraging drug abuse, which also went beyond policy facts. What we should really ask is, what is harm reduction? What is community service?
A drug policy article written by Shen Boyang in 2014 mentioned that Taiwan can refer to foreign experience and "establish community centers to provide drug users with drugs and clean needles." (File photo, taken from Xiangxiang Forum, synthesized by this newspaper)
The answer actually lies in Taiwan’s own public health history. Long before Shen Boyang wrote that article, Taiwan had already promoted drug-addicted AIDS harm reduction programs, and hospitals were not the only places that implemented cleaning needles. Data from the Department of Disease Control and Prevention shows that in 2006, the national clean needle program expanded to 23 counties and cities, and the counseling and consultation stations include different types of bases such as "community pharmacies, hospitals, health clinics, and laboratories." Practical research in Taoyuan also records that pharmacies, health bureaus, and volunteers have all participated in the distribution and recycling of needles. Until 2026, the CDC will still publish a list of clean needle enforcement sites, health education consultation stations, needle automatic service machines and recycling bins nationwide. In other words, "services entering the community" and "turning community activity centers into drug distribution centers" are not the same concept at all. More importantly, statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that there were 3,378 new HIV infections in 2005, of which 2,425, or about 72%, were injecting drug addicts. After promoting health education, clean needles, and methadone substitution therapy, the number of infections among injecting drug addicts dropped significantly. This is not a rhetoric suddenly invented by any political party today, but a public health policy that Taiwan has actually implemented for many years.
Please read on...
Dr. Chen Zhaoan, who specializes in surgery and urology, recently opened a needle vending machine in Taichung, attracting tens of thousands of people to make pilgrimages. (Photo taken from Facebook)
Luo Zhiqiang particularly emphasized that "methadine is medical treatment." This sentence is not wrong in itself, but it just explains why you can't stop thinking when you see the word "drugs." Methadol is a second-level controlled drug in Taiwan. The CDC has clearly stated that it can be used for maintenance treatment of heroin addicts to reduce thirst and withdrawal symptoms. The WHO still lists maintenance treatment of methadone, butylnorphine and other opiate agonists, as well as injection services as important harm reduction measures. The basic spirit of public health is not to pretend that risks do not exist, but to reduce harm when risks already exist. Providing condoms in public spaces is to reduce the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, but does it encourage risky sexual behavior? Providing safety helmets is to reduce accident casualties, but does it encourage car accidents? The same goes for providing clean needles. The CDC even specifically clarified that harm reduction policies "never encourage" drug use, but are intended to control the AIDS epidemic. Replacing "reducing the secondary harm caused by drug abuse" with "encouraging drug abuse" may be a loud political slogan, but it reverses the most basic cause-and-effect relationship in public health.
A truly mature anti-drug policy has never been about choosing between "strict anti-drugs" and "taking care of drug addicts." Drug supply should be investigated, drug trafficking should be investigated in accordance with the law, and addicts also need addiction treatment. However, before a person successfully recovers from addiction, the government still must prevent him from being infected with HIV, hepatitis B or hepatitis C by sharing needles, let alone allow the chain of infection to continue to spread to other people. The syringe program guidelines issued by the WHO this year still include such measures in the complete harm reduction system; Taiwan also implemented them twenty years ago. Therefore, what is really worthy of testing in this debate is not who shouts "national anti-drug" the loudest, but whether politicians have the ability to distinguish between "drug legalization", "alternative treatment", "clean needles", "community services" and "harm reduction policies". Shen Boyang's writing in 2014 can be criticized, and he should be asked to clarify what kind of system "providing drugs" refers to; but the same standard should also apply to Luo Zhiqiang. By exaggerating "community-based harm reduction services" as "drugs are being distributed next to your home" and then describing public health measures as encouraging drug use, the problem of drugs is not answered, but people's fears are turned into political fuel. The anti-drug campaign can be firm, but the discussion should be precise. Because truly saving the next generation depends on science, medical treatment, law enforcement and effective policies, rather than poisoning the word "harm reduction" together.
Kuomintang legislator Luo Zhiqiang exaggerated "community-based harm reduction services" as "drugs are being distributed next to your home" and then described public health measures as encouraging drug abuse. This only turned people's fears into political fuel. (File photo)
(The author is a freelance reviewer)
