The Heroin Prescribing Debate: Integrating Science and Politics
- 21 May 1999
- journal article
- policy forum
- Published by American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in Science
- Vol. 284 (5418) , 1277-1278
- https://doi.org/10.1126/science.284.5418.1277
Abstract
People dependent on heroin who do not respond to other treatments have been treated by a combination of heroin and methadone. In this Policy Forum, Bammer et al. argue that the debate about the merits of this treatment could be substantially informed by clinical trials that meet rigorous scientific standards. Because of the complexities of working with the dependent user population and the social and individual risks associated with this potential treatment, a series of interlocking trials with various designs and control groups are essential, and social impacts must also be monitored. Heroin will always be a second- rather than first-choice treatment, and if trials show that it has any value, the political outcome will be medicalization, not legalization.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Randomised trial of heroin maintenance programme for addicts who fail in conventional drug treatmentsBMJ, 1998
- Feasibility of prescribing injectable heroin and methadone to opiate‐dependent drug users: associated health gains and harm reductionsThe Medical Journal of Australia, 1998
- Prescription of diamorphine, dipipanone and cocaine in England and WalesDrug and Alcohol Review, 1997
- Heroin prescribing in the “British System” of the mid 1990s: data from the 1995 national survey of community pharmacies in England and WalesDrug and Alcohol Review, 1997
- Programme for a Medical Prescription of NarcoticsEuropean Addiction Research, 1997
- Evaluation of Heroin Maintenance in Controlled TrialArchives of General Psychiatry, 1980