Search

Background: By the year 2000, Canada faced high levels of illicit drug use and related harms. Simultaneously, a fundamental tension had raisen between continuing a mainly repression-based versus shifting to a more health-oriented drug policy approach. Despite a wealth of new data and numerous individual studies that have emerged since then, no comprehensive review of key indicators and developments of illicit drug use/harm epidemiology, interventions and law/policy exist; this paper seeks to fill this gap.Methods: We searched and reviewed journal publications, as well as key reports, government publications, surveys, etc. reporting on data and information since 2000. Relevant data were selected and extracted for review inclusion, and subsequently grouped and narratively summarized in major topical sub-theme categories.Results: Cannabis use has remained the principal form of illicit drug use; prescription opioid misuse has arisen as a new and extensive phenomenon. While new drug-related blood-borne-virus transmissions declined, overdose deaths increased in recent years. Acceptance and proliferation of - mainly local/community-based - health measures (e.g., needle exchange, crack paraphernalia or naloxone distribution) aiming at high-risk drug users has evolved, though reach and access limitations have persisted; Vancouver's 'supervised injection site' has attracted continued attention yet remains un-replicated elsewhere in Canada. While opioid maintenance treatment utilization increased, access to treatment for key (e.g., infectious disease, psychiatric) co-morbidities among drug users remained limited. Law enforcement continued to principally focus on cannabis and specifically cannabis users. 'Drug treatment courts' were introduced but have shown limited effectiveness; several attempts cannabis control law reform have failed, except for the recent establishment of 'medical cannabis' access provisions.Conclusions: While recent federal governments introduced several law and policy measures reinforcing a repression approach to illicit drug use, lower-level jurisdictions (e.g., provincial/municipal levels) and non-governmental organizations increasingly promoted social- and health-oriented intervention frameworks and interventions, therefore creating an increasingly bifurcated - and inherently contradictory - drug policy landscape and reality in Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lack of legal regulation and oversight of scheduled drugs in Canada has led to an unsafe drug supply responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands. In addition to contributing to the worst unregulated drug poisoning crisis in Canada's history, the policy framework prohibiting non-medical access to certain drugs has exacerbated numerous public health and safety concerns. An alternative approach to prohibition is for government to retake control of the currently illegal drug market through legal regulatory mechanisms. This paper presents the work of an ongoing international collaboration of organizations advocating legal regulation and some of the knowledge translation tools used to educate and engage the public on legal regulation within Canada. In order to encourage thinking and decision-making among stakeholders in a productive way, models of legal regulation for various substances were created as discussion tools to emerge values and considerations supporting different approaches. The models focus on five questions: 1) who has access to drugs; 2) how access is obtained; 3) where drugs can be accessed; 4) how much people can obtain; and 5) where drugs can be consumed. The models were presented to stakeholders in the context of an international meeting on legal regulation, and then adapted to a more "user-friendly" form: a collaborative negotiation-based Regulation Game, which was presented at a workshop in Montréal, Canada. Engaging different stakeholder groups on policy choices of legal regulation revealed initial barriers that we feel more confident can be overcome through creative and innovative tools such as the Regulation Game. Use of the game as a foundation for more traditional focus groups could be effective in reducing barriers to fulsome policy discussions on legal regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lack of legal regulation and oversight of scheduled drugs in Canada has led to an unsafe drug supply responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands. In addition to contributing to the worst unregulated drug poisoning crisis in Canada's history, the policy framework prohibiting non-medical access to certain drugs has exacerbated numerous public health and safety concerns. An alternative approach to prohibition is for government to retake control of the currently illegal drug market through legal regulatory mechanisms. This paper presents the work of an ongoing international collaboration of organizations advocating legal regulation and some of the knowledge translation tools used to educate and engage the public on legal regulation within Canada. In order to encourage thinking and decision-making among stakeholders in a productive way, models of legal regulation for various substances were created as discussion tools to emerge values and considerations supporting different approaches. The models focus on five questions: 1) who has access to drugs; 2) how access is obtained; 3) where drugs can be accessed; 4) how much people can obtain; and 5) where drugs can be consumed. The models were presented to stakeholders in the context of an international meeting on legal regulation, and then adapted to a more "user-friendly" form: a collaborative negotiation-based Regulation Game, which was presented at a workshop in Montréal, Canada. Engaging different stakeholder groups on policy choices of legal regulation revealed initial barriers that we feel more confident can be overcome through creative and innovative tools such as the Regulation Game. Use of the game as a foundation for more traditional focus groups could be effective in reducing barriers to fulsome policy discussions on legal regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Harm reduction interventions reduce mortality and morbidity for people who use drugs (PWUD), but are contentious and haphazardly implemented. This study describes volume and content of Canadian newspaper coverage of harm reduction produced from 2000 to 2016.Methods: Searches of 54 English-language newspapers identified 5681 texts, coded for type (news reports, opinion pieces), tone (positive, negative, or neutral/balanced coverage), topic (health, crime, social welfare, and political perspectives on harm reduction), and seven harm reduction interventions.Results: Volume of coverage doubled in 2008 (after removal of harm reduction from federal drug policy and legal challenges to Vancouver's supervised consumption program) and quadrupled in 2016 (tracking Canada's opioid emergency). Health perspectives on harm reduction were most common (39% of texts) while criminal perspectives were rare (3%). Negative coverage was over 10 times more common in opinion pieces (31%) compared to news reports (3%); this trend was more pronounced in British Columbia and Alberta, a region particularly affected by Canada's opioid emergency. Supervised drug consumption accounted for 49% of all newspaper coverage.Conclusions: Although federal policy support for harm reduction waxed and waned over 17 years, Canadian newspapers independently shaped public discourse, frequently characterizing harm reduction positively/neutrally and from a health perspective. However, issue framing and agenda setting was also evident: supervised drug consumption offered in a single Canadian city crowded out coverage of all other harm reduction services, except for naloxone. This narrow sense of 'newsworthiness' obscured public discourse on the full spectrum of evidence-based harm reduction services that could benefit PWUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]