A bill that includes $3.7 billion to fight the opioid crisis is advancing to the Senate floor, and there’s another bipartisan bill in the House. These, along with approval earlier this month of a generic version of suboxone from the FDA, show that Washington is making headway in working to counter the deadly opioid crisis that has devastated many parts of the country.
But while these efforts are laudable, they do not include support for proven harm reduction measures such as syringe access, supervised injection sites, and increased access to naloxone. If lawmakers are serious about combating the opioid crisis, they should consider harm reduction to reduce the deadly consequences of the crisis that kills 115 people each day in the U.S.
Harm reduction is an approach based on the idea of lessening the negative impacts of drug use. Although at times controversial, harm reduction measures are often an easy way to reduce the immediate impact of drug use and save lives.
Syringe access programs, also known as needle exchanges, provide clean equipment to users of injection drugs. These programs reduce instances of sharing syringes, thereby decreasing the likelihood of the transmission of blood-borne infections as well as reducing new cases of HIV and hepatitis C. Although critics argue that these programs enable drug users, in reality they ensure that people who would be using drugs anyway are able to do so without causing further harm to themselves.
Moreover, these programs allow health workers to begin conversations with those using drugs about treatment. While the federal government recognizes the importance of clean needles and the positive impact of syringe access programs, currently federal funding cannot be used to purchase needles themselves.
A second harm reduction measure that lawmakers should consider is safe injection sites. These are designated locations where individuals who are using injection drugs can do so under medical supervision. These sites also provide information about treatment for addiction as well as other services. Safe injection sites also cut down on public drug use and improper disposal of syringes that pose a threat to communities. There are currently no safe injection sites in the U.S. despite dozens of studies showing that these facilities curtail overdose deaths and lead to increased participation in treatment.
Additionally, lawmakers should consider facilitating easier access to naloxone. Naloxone is an extremely safe medication that blocks the effects of opioids and can reverse the effects of an overdose. While many state laws have made access to naloxone easier, a federal law that allowed its purchase over the counter would drastically increase access. Indeed, U.S. Surgeon General Jerome M. Adams M.D., M.P.H., released a statement in April urging more individuals including family and friends of those who are at risk of overdose to carry naloxone.
Lawmakers seem to realize that the bills on the Hill are not the whole answer to the ongoing crisis. In an op-ed Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., and Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, explained “we know there is no silver bullet. While these bills have great potential to help our communities and reduce stigma, they were not our first efforts to address the opioid crisis, and they won’t be our last.”
Despite such concessions, there is broad bipartisan support for legislation combating the opioid crisis, and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle should consider measures to save lives and reverse the impact of addiction through harm reduction.
