Connect with us

Addictions

B.C. addiction centre should not accept drug industry funds

Published

6 minute read

The British Columbia Centre on Substance Abuse. (Photo credit: Alexandra Keeler)

News release from Break The Needle

By Canadian Affairs Editorial Board

 

Data released this week brought the welcome news that opioid-related deaths in Alberta have decreased substantially since last year. Opioid-related deaths have also decreased in B.C., although not as dramatically as in Alberta.

While the results are encouraging, more work needs to be done. And both provinces, which have taken very different approaches to the drug crisis, need to understand how their drug policies contribute to these results.

Fortunately, B.C. and Alberta both have research centres devoted to answering this very question. But we are disheartened to see that B.C.’s centre, the British Columbia Centre on Substance Abuse, accepts funding from pharmaceutical and drug companies.

As Canadian Affairs reported this week, the B.C. centre’s funding page lists pharmaceutical company Indivior, pharmacy chain Shoppers Drug Mart and cannabis companies Tilray and Canopy Growth as “past and current funders of activities at BCCSU — including work related to research, community engagement, and clinical training and education.”

This funding structure raises major red flags. Pharmaceutical and drug companies benefit from continued drug use and addiction. And in a context where B.C. has favoured harm-reduction policies such as safe consumption sites and safe supply, the risk of conflicts is especially high.

Indivior is the producer and manufacturer of Suboxone, a drug commonly prescribed to treat opioid-use disorder. Canada’s drug crisis has driven a surge in demand for prescription opioids to treat opioid-use order, with the number of Canadians receiving Suboxone and similar drugs up 44 per cent in 2020 from 2015, according to the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction.

Indivior is also the subject of at least two class-action lawsuits claiming the company failed to disclose adverse health effects associated with using Suboxone.

In 2021, Shoppers Drug Mart made a $2-million gift to the University of British Columbia to establish a pharmacy fellowship and support the education of pharmacist-focused addiction treatment at the British Columbia Centre on Substance Use. A conflict of interest exists here as well, with pharmacies benefiting financially from continued demand for drugs.

Consider, for example, if B.C.’s centre produced research showing pharmaceutical interventions were not effective or less effective than other policy measures. Would researchers feel pressure to not publish those results or pursue further lines of inquiry? Similarly, would Indivior or Shoppers Drug Mart continue to provide funding if the centre published research in this vein?

These are not the kinds of questions researchers should have to consider when pursuing research in the public interest.

Subscribe for free to get BTN’s latest news and analysis – or donate to our investigative journalism fund.

In response to questions about whether accepting drug industry funding could compromise the objectivity of their research, the British Columbia Centre on Substance Abuse referred Canadian Affairs to their website’s funding page. This page states their research is supported by peer-reviewed grants and independent ethical reviews to ensure objectivity.

We would argue such steps are not sufficient, not least because conflicts of interest are a problem whether they are real or perceived. Even if researchers at the centre are not influenced by who is funding their work, the public could reasonably perceive the objectivity of their research to be compromised.

It is for this reason that ethics laws generally require officeholders to avoid both actual conflicts of interest as well as the appearance of conflicts.

It is also why the government of Alberta, in launching their new addictions research centre, the Canadian Centre of Recovery Excellence (CoRE), has taken steps to safeguard the integrity of its work. The government has imposed legislative safeguards to ensure CoRE cannot receive external funding that could be seen to compromise its research, a spokesperson for the centre told Canadian Affairs.

It would be difficult to overstate the importance of the work done by the B.C. centre, CoRE and other centres like it. It is imperative that governments of all levels and stripes have quality, trusted research to inform decision-making about how best to respond to this tragic crisis.

The B.C. government and British Columbia Centre on Substance Abuse ought to implement their own safeguards to address these conflicts of interest immediately.


This article was produced through the Breaking Needles Fellowship Program, which provided a grant to Canadian Affairs, a digital media outlet, to fund journalism exploring addiction and crime in Canada. Articles produced through the Fellowship are co-published by Break The Needle and Canadian Affairs.

Break The Needle. Our content is always free – but if you want to help us commission more high-quality journalism, consider getting a voluntary paid subscription.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author

Addictions

London Police Chief warns parliament about “safer supply” diversion

Published on

London Police Chief Thai Truong testifies to House of Commons Standing Committee on November 26, 2024.

By Adam Zivo

“Vulnerable individuals are being targeted by criminals who exchange these prescriptions for fentanyl, exacerbating addiction and community harm,” said London Police Chief Thai Truong.

Thai Truong, the police chief of London, Ontario, testified in parliament last week that “safer supply” opioids are “obviously” being widely diverted to the black market, leading to greater profits for organized crime. His insights further illustrate that the safer supply diversion crisis is not disinformation, as many harm reduction advocates have speciously claimed.

Truong’s testimony was given to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health, which is in the midst of an extended study into the opioid crisis. While the committee has heard from dozens of witnesses, Truong’s participation was particularly notable, as safer supply was first piloted in London in 2016 and the city has, since then, been a hotbed for opioid diversion.

“While the program is well intentioned, we are seeing concerning outcomes related to the diversion of safe supply medications… these diverted drugs are being resold within our community, trafficked to other jurisdictions, and even used as currency to obtain fentanyl, perpetuating the illegal drug trade,” he said in his opening speech. “Vulnerable individuals are being targeted by criminals who exchange these prescriptions for fentanyl, exacerbating addiction and community harm.”

He later clarified to committee members that these vulnerable individuals include women who are being pressured to obtain safer supply opioids for black market resale.

Safer supply programs are supposed to provide pharmaceutical-grade addictive drugs – mostly 8-mg tablets of hydromorphone, an opioid as potent as heroin – as an alternative to riskier street substances. The programs generally supply these drugs at no cost to recipients, with almost no supervised consumption, and have a strong preference for Dilaudid, a brand of hydromorphone that is manufactured by Purdue Pharma.

Addiction experts and police leaders across Canada have reported that safer supply patients regularly divert their hydromorphone to the black market. A recent study by Dr. Brian Conway, director of Vancouver’s Infectious Disease Centre, for example, showed that a quarter of his safer supply patients diverted all of their hydromorphone, and that another large, but unknown, percentage diverted at least some of their pills.

Truong’s parliamentary testimony, which mostly rehashed information he shared in a press conference last July, further corroborated these concerns.

He noted that in 2019, the city’s police force seized 847 hydromorphone pills, of which only 75 were 8-mg Dilaudids. Seizures increased after access to safer supply expanded in 2020, and, by 2023, exploded to over 30,000 pills (a roughly 3,500 per cent increase), of which roughly half were 8-mg Dilaudids. During this period, the number of annual overdose deaths in the city also increased from 73 to 123 (a 68 per cent increase), he said.

Relatedly, Truong noted that the price of hydromorphone in London – $2-5 a pill – is now much lower than in other parts of the province.

As an increasing number of police departments across Canada have publicly acknowledged that they are seeing skyrocketing hydromorphone seizures, some safer supply advocates have claimed, without evidence, that these pills were mostly stolen from pharmacies, and not diverted by safer supply patients. Truong’s parliamentary testimony dispelled this myth: “These increases cannot be attributed to pharmacy thefts, as London has had only one pharmacy robbery since 2019.”

The police chief declined to answer repeated questions about the efficacy of safer supply, or to opine on whether the experimental program should be replaced with alternative interventions with stronger evidence bases. “I’m not here to criticize the safe supply program, but to address the serious challenges associated with its diversion,” he said, noting his own lack of medical expertise.

The chief emphasized that, while more needs to be done to stop safer supply diversion, the addiction crisis is a “complex issue” that cannot be tackled solely through law enforcement. He advocated for a “holistic” approach that integrates prevention, harm reduction and treatment, and acknowledged the importance of London’s community health and social service partners.

Our content is always free. Subscribe to get BTN’s latest news and analysis,

or donate to our journalism fund.

In response to Truong’s testimony, NDP MP Gord Johns, an avid safer supply advocate, downplayed the importance of the diversion crisis by arguing that “people aren’t dying from a safer supply of drugs; they’re dying from fentanyl.”

While it is true that 81 per cent of overdose deaths in 2024 involved fentanyl, addiction physicians across Canada have repeatedly debunked Johns’ argument as misleading. The dangers of diverted hydromorphone is not that it directly kills users, but rather that it easily hooks individuals into addiction, leading many of them to graduate to deadly fentanyl use.

Johns previously faced criticism when, in a September health committee meeting, he seemingly used parliamentary maneuvers to reduce the speaking time of a grieving father, Greg Sword, whose daughter, Kamilah, died of drug-related causes after she and her friends got hooked on diverted hydromorphone.

There is currently no credible evidence that safer supply works. Most supporting studies simply interview safer supply patients and present their opinions as objective fact, despite significant issues with bias and reliability. Data presented in a 2024 study published in the British Medical Journal, which followed over 5,000 drug users in B.C., showed that safer supply led to no statistically significant mortality reductions once confounding factors were fully filtered out.

An impending update to Canada’s National Opioid Use Disorder Guideline, which was recently presented at a conference  organized by the Canadian Society of Addiction Medicine, determined that the evidence base for safer supply is “essentially low-level.” Similarly, B.C’s top doctor acknowledged earlier this year that safer supply is “not fully evidence-based.”


This article was syndicated in The Bureau, an online media publication that investigates foreign interference, organized crime, and the drug trade.

Our content is always free – but if you want to help Break The Needle commission more high-quality journalism, consider getting a voluntary paid subscription.
Continue Reading

Addictions

Parliament votes for proposal recommending hard drug decriminalization

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Canadian MPs have voted 210 to 117 in favor of a proposal to decriminalize simple possession of heroin, cocaine and all other illegal drugs across Canada despite the disastrous effects of lax drug policies already observed.

Canada may be one step closer to decriminalizing hard drugs as the majority of MPs voted in favor of a proposal recommending the move.

According to information published November 25 by Blacklock’s Reporter, MPs voted 210 to 117 in favor of a proposal recommending the decriminalizing of the simple possession of heroin, cocaine and all other illegal drugs across Canada. While the proposal is non-binding, it could point to how MPs would vote on a future bill seeking to augment the law.

“Why has it come to this?” Conservative MP Jacques Gourde, who opposes such a move, questioned. “We have reached the end of the road and nothing better lies ahead if we continue down this path.”  

The recommendation, which received a House majority with only Conservative MPs voting against it, suggested “that the Government of Canada decriminalize simple possess of all illicit drugs.”  

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s cabinet was noncommittal in their response to the suggestion, saying, “The government recognizes there are increasing calls from a wide range of stakeholders to decriminalize the simple possession of drugs as another tool to reduce stigma that can lead many to hide their drug use and avoid seeking supports including treatment.” 

“The government is exploring policy approaches and a broader framework that would ease the impact of criminal prohibitions in certain circumstances,” the Cabinet continued. 

The Trudeau government’s consideration of nationwide decriminalization comes despite drug-related deaths skyrocketing in the province of British Columbia after decriminalization was implemented there by the Trudeau government in 2023. In fact, the policy was considered so damaging by the left-wing controlled province that it had to ask to have certain aspects of the policy, such as the public use of drugs, rescinded earlier this year.

Other soft-on-drug policies have already been implemented by the Trudeau government, including the much-maligned “safer supply” program.

Safe supply” is the term used to refer to government-prescribed drugs given to addicts under the assumption that a more controlled batch of narcotics reduces the risk of overdose. Critics of the policy argue that giving addicts drugs only enables their behavior, puts the public at risk, disincentivizes recovery from addiction and has not reduced – and sometimes even increased – overdose deaths when implemented.    

Gunn, who has since become a Conservative Party candidate, previously noted that his film shows clearly the “general societal chaos and explosion of drug use in every major Canadian city” since lax policies were implemented.  

“Overdose deaths are up 1,000 percent in the last 10 years,” he said in his film, adding that “every day in Vancouver four people are randomly attacked.”  

Continue Reading

Trending

X