Slashdot Mirror
Vaccine Could Cut Heroin Addiction
JumperCable writes "Scientists at Mexico's National Institute of Psychiatry are working on a vaccine that makes the body resistant to the effects of heroin, so users would no longer get a rush of pleasure. The researchers say they have successfully tested the vaccine on mice and are preparing to test it on humans. Mice given the vaccine showed a huge drop in heroin consumption. 'It would be a vaccine for people who are serious addicts, who have not had success with other treatments and decide to use this application to get away from drugs.'"
We must close the heroin vaccine gap with Mexico before the Lohans attack again!
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
It'll be a long time before we can be sure it's safe.
However, it could be offered as a way to cut their sentence, or as part of their rehab. I'd fully support them having the option.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
What if, in addition to the pleasure due to heroin, it also diminishes other sorts of pleasure?
This sounds like it could be a small slice of hell.
Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
Does this also stop the effects of other opiates?
You keep using that word...
What happens when someone who got vaccinated with this needs anesthetics or painkillers for surgery? They don't say if it only works on heroin and not a ton of other opioids as well.
Since you have no problem with violating human rights, why not just kill addicts? Perhaps eugenics is your thing.
While heroin has never struck me as a terribly wise drug of choice, the notion of deliberately provoking an immune response to an opiate seems crazy risky...
We have a fairly extensive endogenous opioid system, with a variety of opioids and opioid receptors, in place and the results of immune system intereference with that would be... likely very unpleasant. If I were of the Mengele school of experimental medicine, I'd be fascinated to learn exactly what flavor of 'very unpleasant'; but I'm guessing that the ethics of that would be pretty shaky.
I gave the qualifier "if it is safe", so I think I'm in pretty good shape. Under that qualifier, it is far less of a "violation of human rights" to vaccine against heroin than to lock a human being in a cage for several years, wouldn't you say? Isn't that exactly what prison is, which is the normal "treatment" for the criminal class? What would you propose doing with criminals that doesn't involve "violating their human rights"? Inviting them to tea parties and giving them crumpets?
I used to be a heroin addict, then I took a methadone-tipped arrow to the knee.
Also, as the /. blurb, wouldn't this just increase the consumption for addicts since they cannot get the high they're looking for with "normal" doses, they would just increase the dosage. Right?
"..makes the body resistant to the effects of heroin, so users would no longer get a rush of pleasure when they smoked or injected it."
So they are still addicted and will feel the withdrawal effects and will then start smoking/injecting more of the substance.
Right opiates work by bonding to chemical receptors in the brain. If a vaccination makes one non-responsive IV opiate drugs like heroin then it must be making significant and lasting changes to neural chemistry. Who knows what all affects that might result in, given or still limited understanding of the brain?
I don't think conviction of a non capital crime should permit the state to make permanent changes to persons body. That is slippery slope our society needs to stay the heck away from. I really think no matter how good an idea it might seem, no matter how many people it might "help" we really need to agree that there are lines we just won't cross because they run counter to the character of our society.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
You've clearly never tried Methadone.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
First, is this really a "vaccine" i.e. a one-off long term treatment? I very much doubt it, there's little money in that. More likely it's just another form of dope that needs regular, lucrative doses that nobody who's already addicted would ever choose to take. Seriously, who's going to volunteer to go no-choice cold-turkey?
But on the slim chance that it is what it claims to be, the real question is: why focus on already addicted junkies? By the time they seek treatment they've generally already ruined their lives.
So, start earlier. Much earlier. Would you have your kids (safely) vaccinated so that they can't get hooked on common drugs?
Of course, the most harmful drugs are alcohol and nicotine, so how about we focus on finding a "vaccine" for them?
Heck, caffeine is a vile, toxic, horrible addicting substance - let's dump the antidote in the town's water supply, right?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Right opiates work by bonding to chemical receptors in the brain. If a vaccination makes one non-responsive IV opiate drugs like heroin then it must be making significant and lasting changes to neural chemistry. Who knows what all affects that might result in, given or still limited understanding of the brain?
And those same receptors are used legitimately to reduce pain while sick or recovering from injury. If this is non-reversable that's a whole class of pain killers not available to these people later on in their lives.
No. A heroin vaccine, like the cocaine vaccine, is designed to train the immune system to launch a very targeted attack against a specific molecule surface. Not by altering or interfering with pathways or receptors or neurotransmitters. Generally the target region for the antibody is not the same as the portion of the molecule that triggers receptors.
Also, we damn near force babies and small children to get vaccinations. Chances are if we don't give the injection to addicts, we'll be giving it to kids as a form of prevention.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
Jail sentences are usually not for life. Perhaps we should also just castrate sex offenders instead of jailing them?
I am ok with giving an offender the option (maybe vaccine instead of jail time or fore reduced jail time), but forcing a person to permanently destroy a conduit of pleasure sounds too Clockwork Orange-y for my taste.
Wish I hadn't used all my mod points yesterday; this is a really good point.
This is a vaccine that can't be applied to people without some serious supervision. An addict under withdrawal who is desperate for a fix may very easily use deadly amounts of the drug.
Love sees no species.
forcing a person to permanently destroy a conduit of pleasure sounds too Clockwork Orange-y for my taste.
Treating heroin as a "conduit of pleasure" worthy of respect sounds too hippie for my taste, so we're about even. :)
I have, and if you haven't, then I dare you to take one. Bring snacks and a helmet.
The idea behind methadone is that you're not supposed to keep using it. You use it when detoxing to gradually step down, but surprise surprise, heroin addicts don't use it as intended.
Everything in moderation, including our excesses.
You'd just run into the Little Angel effect, same as with the HPV vaccine. Parents will refuse to have their kids vaccinated, because they are confident their little angel of a child would never be lured into drug abuse - and any attempt to say other wise will be taken as a personal attack on their parenting abilities.
Well for starters, stop calling them "criminals". This "crime" exists only in the law. It has no victim. In fact, the law has victims, the users.
The law has driven up the price. Where there were once a few addicts who popped pills, or smoked some opium, we now have IV drug users. Where the worst people used to be was a bit lazy and checked out, we now have desperate people commiting petty crimes to get by. This is the result of the prohibition not the drug.
The evidence keeps mounting that prohibition is the cause of the real issues. Yet, the drug users are still the criminals, and not the politicians and cops who created this situation. Some areas report 50% of burn victims are the result of meth labs. Meth labs that exist only because of prohibition. 50% of burn victims are victims of prohibition. How many of those thousands of people would still have ended up there? 1 or 2? If that!
The majority of the problem is the situation. Blaming people for playing the game as it is set up for them is ridiculous. The law created the situation, the blame resides in only one place...bad policy making.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Yeah, why not?
Although I could ask: for what purpose?
Most crimes are not commited by people addicted to heroin. Most heroin addicts do not commit crimes to feed their addiction and then, most that do both, almost are never caught.
You need to cut down on the Nixon's War on Drugs kool-aid.
NO SIG
Instead of attacking the heroine aspect, examine this from a more objective stance. What is your (society-perceived) vice and who has the right to take it away from you?
Imagine a day where insurance companies can deny you coverage because you haven't had the "cigarette/alcohol/fatty-foods vaccine".
This is stupid. Doing heroin shouldnt even be illegal.
NO SIG
At first I was thinking that as well. But notice it says that mice given the vaccine consumed less heroin. I would believe the mice were addicted too. If they consumed less, perhaps they weren't experiencing severe withdrawal either.
Quitting smoking is quite easy. I do it. Daily when I go to bed.
Snide comments aside, what you have to do first is to WANT to quit. I don't wanna quit smoking, so I could use all the nic patches and e-cigarettes and whatnot I'd wanna and it wouldn't have the slightest chance to accomplish anything. Because there is not really any drive to just do it.
Maybe soon, maybe later, maybe never there will be me wanting to quit and THEN those patches, gums and whatnot will probably work. 'til then, I could slap a patch on my tongue and it wouldn't do a thing. Well, maybe it would cause some blistering.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I was careful to qualify my controversial suggestion by restricting it to (a) if the vaccine were known to be safe, and (b) application to criminals under the influence of heroin. By "criminals" I mean people who commit serious offenses, and I'm not just talking about heroin possession, which would be sort of a circular legal argument.
My vices have nothing to do with commission of serious crimes against others, therefore your examination is based on a false equivalence. Conversely, people who commit serious crimes against others forfeit many of their natural human rights -- we lock them in cages and take away their freedom. Safely taking away their heroin addiction could in many cases be a lesser violation of their natural rights than a prison sentence, and in the opinion of probably most of society, would in fact be doing them a favor.
Yep. Methadone has all the addictive qualities without all the pleasing euphoria.
So people are getting addicted to something with no pleasant qualities? Please explain your logic.
While the GP may possibly be wrong about the lack of "pleasing euphoria", it's very easy to be addicted to something with no pleasant qualities. People who have never been addicted to anything are usually unaware of the difference between a psychological addiction and a physical addiction.
I'm a smoker, and I don't really enjoy it at all anymore. My lungs hurt if I smoke too much (which I definitely do on occasion); I cough up goo most mornings; I could really do with the extra cash from quitting; and I'm a father and hate the idea of my little girl growing up seeing me with a cigarette in my mouth. BUT, I still haven't quit despite several attempts. The reason for this is that the withdrawals are so extremely unpleasant that in a moment of weakness, I end up smoking again.
On the other side of the coin, I really enjoy taking LSD on occasion. It's fun, it's stress relieving, it's cheaper (and less harmful) than a night out with alcohol; and I would even say that I'm better at my job because of it (I'm a software developer and have definitely had moments of "insight" while tripping). All of that said, I could never take it again and it'd be no problem at all. LSD is not physically addictive (it could in theory be psychologically addictive, as with anything enjoyable (think "chocoholics"); however due to the fact that it's a pretty intense experience, taking it too often would remove the fun for me at least).
It's basically very easy to be addicted to something with no pleasant qualities; and also (as should be obvious) to not be addicted to something that brings a lot of pleasure.
My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
Methadone is typical for people so addicted that cold turkey would kill them
This is not true. No one dies from opiod withdrawal. Oh sure you FEEL like you're going to die, and I'm sure some have comitted suicide because of this. But the withdrawal itself is relatively harmless unless you already have severe circulatory problems (some patients can develop hypertension in the first few days).
Benzodiazepine (like valium, ativan, etc) (seizures), alcohol (seizures, hypoglycemia, arrhythmias) and cocaine (long QT syndrome leading to fatal arrhythmia) withdrawal can all kill you. But not opioids. Your whole body will ache, you will have the shits, you will feel like you are on fire, your head will feel like it is exploding and you will feel like you have a cold and be coughing like crazy. But you won't die.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I've been a herion addict and was on methadone and the Buprenorphine trials we had here for a bit. I was an herion addict for about 10 years, let it control my life, homeless and all that crap. Got on methadone on and off for some years, did the Bupernorphine trials, got back on methadone again.
Even though I wanted to quit using dope, i would always end up back because want wasn't enough. While I was on methadone last, I got to talk to a shrink, and after a bit, found out I was dyslexic and ADHD and other fun stuff that I should of found out before my mid 30's. It was getting help for my ADHD and dyslexia that made it so I was finally able to say Fuck you to herion, and even methadone. I volunteerly lowed my dose till it was down to nothing, and stopped going to the stupid ass methadone clinic. By that time, I hated it and the people that went there and mostly the policies they have there.
Making it so people can't feel the high of doing Herion is going to make them do other drugs so they can feel something. Plane and simple. I knew a girl who'd OD because she had one of those thingies they put in your stomache so you can't get high. She kept trying and you want to know whats up with her now? She talks to herself. Mentally, she's gone. Kept trying to get high. She didn't die from it, but she's no longer the person she was.
You want to get herion addicts to stop? You need to find the reason why they are a heroin addict and fix those. Me? I was confused, I didn't understand people and people didn't seem to understand me. Stress and frustration were my enemies, and they didn't matter if I was high. Unfortunetly, being a herion addict means you don't get high as much as you get well.
Anyways, I think this is the wrong approach big time. But it doesn't surprise me, people don't understand addiction, and that is why a lot of people get addicted to stuff.
Be seeing you...
The idea behind methadone is that you're not supposed to keep using it. You use it when detoxing to gradually step down, but surprise surprise, heroin addicts don't use it as intended.
The term generally used is 'methadone maintenance therapy' - the key being the 'maintain' part of it. While some people do wean themselves off it the drug entirely, that's considered an added benefit. That's why they are set up as 'clinics'. The theory behind MMT, is that methadone doesn't give the INTENSELY EUPHORIC rush of heroin because you can't (safely) inject or snort it. Thus, the intense craving for another hit of heroin is diminished as well as the societal issues surrounding getting that hit. You do become physically addicted to the methadone and will go through withdrawal without it. But it's long enough acting that once a day dosing is sufficient for most people. Thus, the addicted person can maintain a much more normal life that the typical free range heroin addict.
With the rise of methadone on the street (it's really impressive on how many people have methadone in their urine toxicology screens in the ER), it's become apparent that this part of society has come up with new uses for an old drug (this is America! Innovate!). Aside from it's value in chronic pain - and a subset of people who get addicted to narcotics started out with chronic pain - it does blunt withdrawal symptoms. So if you have a bad, say, oxycodone habit but can't get the pills, you can take a methadone and chill out for a day or two or twenty. Then switch to the short acting drug that give you the real high when you can get it. You just can get a good dealer anymore.....
Then there are those folk that find that they can get a buzz with methadone. Usually you have to mix it with something else, but hey, that's not a problem. Actually it is - most of the methadone deaths are usually where you have a combination of psychoactive drugs on board. While you might be able to guess at the lethal dose of a particular drug, when you combine them it gets much more complicated.
You can have some interesting conversations with ER patients once you take out the endotracheal tube.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
"If they consumed less, perhaps they weren't experiencing severe withdrawal either."
Jumping to conclusions.
Perhaps they were just as high as before, just with less heroin.
addiction is the problem, not prohibition
addiction creates an interrupt switch in your mind that prevents you from maintaining productive work and relationships
i understand the problems with prohibition. what i don't understand is why some people, such as yourself, seem completely oblivious as to what addiction is, what it means, and what it does to people's lives, completely independently of any other causes and effects on this issue
if you can't speak meaningfully on the subject of addiction, you really should stop commenting on the subject of drug use
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
History isn’t encouraging, given heroin’s original use was as a safe cure for morphine addiction.
HRH The Duke of Windsor
Yes, methadone is more addictive and harder to kick than heroin. it is basically synthetic heroin so why not "improve" on those qualities? Methadone is just the substance used by clinics to keep their patients from having to go out and score real dope, and all the crime that goes with feeding that habit. Someone who was doing $80 of heroin a day can now take about $10 worth of methadone and not be sick.
And to anyone who hasn't tried heroin - don't bother. Yes it makes you feel incredible, but that is a short honeymoon. Messing with heroin only ends in three ways - death, jail, or kicking the habit. Two of them are no fun at all, and the only option left gets you back to where you started. It isn't cool or glamorous at all.
"But this one goes to 11!"
Long term studies have shown no decrease in lung function. It's not yet known why this is, if there is something in tobacco that is very bad, or something in MJ that somehow has a protective factor, or if it's just the habits or what.
I am referring to the Clockwork Orange movie where the "cure" to violence addiction had the side effect of turning off the pleasure music. will taming one part of the mind disable other parts in some subtle fashion. Maybe its not coincidence that many artists are bipolar: extreme creatively may be a mental outlier.
The consequences of what must be done to obtain illegal, unsafe heroin is the problem.
Smack is illegal because it is considered Sinful, and Sin must be punished without respect to actual social damage. The War on Some Drugs is a moral obligation to Jesus (or your Middle Eastern Sky Fairie of choice).
Booze escaped Prohibition after years of spectacularly destructive blowback, but the US is delighted to tolerate the War on Some Drugs, build police empires to continue it, fund the destabilisation of Mexico, and drive Mexicans to immigrate from the country our policies are wrecking. Since the only objective of life is Salvation, terrestrial suffering and consequences are not relevant.
USians talk shit about Muslims enforcing Sharia, but Xtian superstition is barely tamed here and drives extremely expensive and destructive national policy.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
This can't be safe. It's literally impossible.
Rather, this is cruel and unusual punishment, and is prohibited by the US constitution and international law. It in fact is much more of a violation of human rights than locking someone in a prison cell. That's assuming you can even find a victim to make this worthy of punishment.
You (yes, every one of you) synthesize and use opiates every day, in the form of opioid peptides (dynorphin, enkephalin, endomorphin). You may even eat things that block enkephalinase, making these opioid substances last longer. They are critical to proper somatic function, and have been described thoroughly as such in the literature.
Heroin (diacetylmorphine) and other strong opiates (synthetic and naturally derived) are used every day in palliative care to alleviate intolerable, intractable, suicide-provoking pain for the terminally ill.
Do you actually support forcing someone to take this substance, thus ensuring they'll meet their end years later screaming in agony and begging for death? Do you support forcibly and permanently defeating a person's own pain modulation system? Are you against human dignity in general, or just not thinking things through?
This isn't a vaccine, because vaccines (i) actually have a health benefit; (ii) don't cause permanent and substantial psychological changes; and (iii) are generally recognized as safe.
Freedom from forced psychotropic modification is a fundamental human right. Humans have a god-given right to possess and use the opiate receptors in their brain.
You have no right to force *anyone* to do this, ever. Doing so would put you on the same level as the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, or the WWII atrocities.
Spend that money on nicotine gum/patches so you'll live to see your daughter grow up.
Older generations didn't really have good options for quitting smokes (besides cold turkey). We do. Use them.
Check out my world simulator thingy.
Addicts do get off opiates and stay off for extended periods of time, although it is difficult and there is a constant risk of relapse. Withdrawal symptoms go away after a fairly short time, but the craving generally comes back from time to time, and can be triggered by "reminders" of drug use. So a vaccine that made it harder to "fall off the wagon" in response to an attack of craving would likely be helpful to abstinent addicts.
You're confusing addiction with habituation. Reasonable, since they've convieniently changed the word "addiction." Addiction used to be a physical dependancy -- if you quit, you had bad physical symptoms. Caffiene withdrawal gives you headaches. Alcohol withdrawal gives you the shakes, and if you're badly addicted it can give you hallucinations and even result in death. Same with heroin, sudden withdrawal can be fatal.
Habituation is being used to doing something, generally something pleasant, that becomes a habit. If you have a glass of orange juice every morning for five years and one day you can't have it, you're going to crave that orange juice badly. That's habituation.
That's how nicotine patches work -- they let you get over the habituation before you have to start fighting the physical withdrawal. With some substances like caffiene or nicotine, the habituation can be worse than the actual addiction.
Free Martian Whores!
I think you are asking entirely the wrong questions. No, legality doesn't directly matter to the addict. However, it matters to the supply chain that brings him his drugs. Legality is why heroin and OCs are available, and opium and codine are not. Many addicts would choose safer drugs and other routes of administration if they had the option.
Even the swiss heroin study shows addicts can hold down jobs if the heroin is provided to them at a price similar to what we would expect it to be on an open market. They didn't even explore the real situation that would develop if not for prohibition.
Wouldn't it be better if he never picked up a needle? What about the 50% of burn victims who are there because of incompetent meth production? Wouldn't their lives be better if they could have bought a bottle of pills at a reasonable price?
Addiction is a problem, but its a problem magnified by prohibition. How much faster could addiction be dealt with without stigma? If a person could say to his doctor or family "yah Ive been taking alot of this lately". Alcoholism is bad enough but at least people can admit to it and talk about it.
Would his life have been improved by jail time? Maybe getting HIV sharing needles in jail? Sharing needles, another great tradition caused by prohibition. First driving up the prices until people turn to IV use because high strength product is all their dealers will supply and they can afford... then making needles unavailable or dangerous by labeling them as paraphenelia...leading to more time in jail.
Yes.... addiction is bad, its terrible.... but prohibition makes in unmanageable and life destroying.
I want to save lives. None of those meth cooks needed to burn. Nobody needed to be murdered in turf wars. Nobody needed to be denied finanacial aid for college over a few joints. This is atrocity that makes a bad situation worst.
Ask yourself this...if your son didn't have a supportive family, where would he be now? Would his life be made better by going to jail? Lot of people in those situations. Not everyone is middle class and has the support network to recover. They are the ones who really get ground up in this system. Not the middle class kids with strong families who get spared from the real horrors.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Since you're an EMT and should know what you're talking about, is this site bogus?
Free Martian Whores!
I'm a long time heroin user. I have used for the past 16 years on and of and have always managed to earn enough to pay for my habit even if I have had to work 3 jobs.
Due to being short of work currently (hours in a shop and 3 or 4 local pc repairs a week) I am currently on a suboxone prescription instead of using as I refuse to steal, beg or borrow for my habit. I have used methadone in the past and it is awful evil stuff. You get a buzz but it's not as good as a heroin buzz yet the withdrawals from methadone are the worst thing ever. I can easily take the pain of heroin withdrawal but methadone is far worse and withdrawals can last a month.
Until recently I was surviving on opium tea made from poppy heads that I ordered from an online dried flower/craft shop. The withdrawals from poppy tea are also far worse than heroin withdrawal.
Sorry to sound heartless here, but it didn't kill you, did it?
You went through hell and may surely felt like you were going to, but the withdrawal did not and would not kill you. Opiate withdrawal is not like alcohol. Alcohol withdrawal can definitely kill an addict; without it you slip into a coma. As someone else noted in this thread, most die during withdrawal because they OD trying to relieve their symptoms.
I had a loaded gun on my bed with me. It was 50/50... could have went ether way... Find out for yourself. Get some Oxycodone 30's or some Heroin and snort the shit for a month then come back and report how your withdrawal went. I wasn't even shooting the stuff. If I had been I would be dead from suicide.
My concern is a bit more practical. Depending on the method by which it blocks the "high," it might conceivably render all opiates ineffective at pain control. Someone who gets this vaccine and then later needs major invasive medical treatment might be completely screwed. Sure, you can turn the pain off with anesthetics, but once the person wakes up from surgery the real fun begins.
Then there's cancer-related pain. Mine is (relatively) minor and I could probably do without pain killers without wanting to off myself most days, but I know people who would be perfectly justified in choosing suicide to "living" without the ability to use pain killers for something like aggressive pancreatic or bone cancer.
You deserve the father of the year award for taking LSD
Being AC, you're probably never going to come back and check for this reply, which is a shame.
LSD is non-harmful and non-addictive, I really only take it around 2 to 3 times a year, and I'd never be in a horribly altered state in the presence of my daughter (on LSD unlike other substances, the presence of mind to make sensible decisions isn't diminished). I'd contend it's significantly less bad that I do that than the large number of men that quite legally get drunk and do stupid stuff in the presence of their children.
My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
Does it makes you a better person?
I believe yes.
If so, how come you protect your child from it?
Because she's too young to make rational decisions about powerful psychotropic substances. The same reason I drive a car myself, but wouldn't let my daughter behind the wheel for the next 15 years.
Honestly, when she's old enough (probably somewhere between 16 and 25 - depending on how emotionally and mentally mature she is), I'll happily introduce her to it.
As much as I would like to think that you can "discover" something good by using LSD, dont you have the risk of starting to believe something stupid or plain crazy ? Like "using LSD is good thing"
Basically no. LSD doesn't make you "believe" anything. It gives you a different perspective on your own views of the world and you take what you want/can from that. Some people take nothing from it and just view the trip as "a good time" (or a bad time), others take a lot from it. I can't and don't say that everyone who takes it and changes their worldview changes it for the better, but self-analysis and consideration of one's own worldview is sorely lacking in today's society, so I'd make a fair bet that the opportunity to at least examine one's own thoughts is overall more positive than negative.
My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan