Author Topic: Safe Injection Sites in Ontario and the Idea of 'Evidence'  (Read 2783 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
All you're doing is throwing around ad hominem attacks (results of the studies are biased because the researchers are biased; yet, you've provided no evidence demonstrating that) to try to discredit the preponderance of evidence that supports the effectiveness of SIS.
You seem to be completely missing the point. I will repeat what I have said above: the bias comes from the criteria chosen to define "effective". i.e. just because you decide that that reducing the number of drug overdoes deaths means the SIS is "effective" that does not compel me to to agree that your criteria are reasonable. As I also stated above: to be effective the SIS would have to increase the rate at which addicts get clean and there is little evidence of that.

So there no onus on me to prove anything. I simply do not agree with the criteria that you want to use. The onus is on you to provide an argument for why your criteria are more appropriate that mine. i.e. please explain why keeping addicts alive but addicted is defined as success when what these addicts really need is to get off drugs. How many resources are been taken away from detox centers and recovery homes because governments are obsessing about enabling drug addictions by reducing the incentive to clean up?