Oh please. Enough of your DARE rhetoric.

I've been on hydromorphone. It's 8x more potent than morphine on a gram basis. Heroin is only 3x more powerful than morphine. I was on hydromorphone for 4 months, and then went DOWN to oxycodone for another 6 months. After 6 months, went on hydrocodone. By all measurements of addition, I was 100% addicted.

Yeah, it felt good having the drugs. But I also quit taking them sooner because I felt my mind fogging up. I didn't like that, and took more pain to be able to think clearly. But no, your assertions that people will just drop everything to get it is blatantly false.

Homeless people will go after heroin, if they can afford it. But those that choose this route are trying to numb the fact that people don't care about their condition, and that they have very little chance to raise themselves up. It's a social reason - if I cant have a better life, I can check out with drugs.

And the problem is the people that are dying of heroin aren't the Silicon Valley tech workers with good jobs and homes that make up the majority of hacker news. They're people living in shithole towns like my hometown. The jobs left decades ago and people are just scraping by. They don't have enough savings to pack up and leave. I've got friends and family dying because it's way too accessible, and the idea of making it legal and even more accessible doesn't appeal to me or my common sense. I trust the average person to use heroin as responsibly as they'd use a military helicopter if they could afford one from a day's work--and that's not at all.

So congrats on being able to take opiates and not have a problem. If you have stable employment, your situation is in no way relevant to the people this problem is afflicting. We already know that soldiers who abused drugs during the Vietnam war were able to quit them easily upon returning because their lifestyle improved. Addicts don't have a chance to just up and get a happier life.

> And the problem is the people that are dying of heroin aren't the Silicon Valley tech workers with good jobs and homes that make up the majority of hacker news.

My girlfriend grew up in a "1%" household. She developed substance abuse problems because she was born premature, because she was adopted, because of some "adverse childhood experience", and because her doctors thought she was a candidate for chemical castration with Provera (which makes some women suicidal).

"Stress" is the main factor in addiction. For some people stress is emotional, for others it's economic, and for others it's biological...

> I trust the average person to use heroin as responsibly as they'd use a military helicopter if they could afford one from a day's work--and that's not at all.

Do you trust organized crime to provide heroin to people who are going to use it anyways?

> And the problem is the people that are dying of heroin aren't the Silicon Valley tech workers with good jobs and homes that make up the majority of hacker news. They're people living in shithole towns like my hometown.

First problem - assuming I'm in SV or other high tech areas. I'm not. I'm in south Indiana. By definition, it's a flyover state at best. BTW, most of Indiana is "shithole towns". Thanks for playing.

> The jobs left decades ago and people are just scraping by. They don't have enough savings to pack up and leave.

That's most of the USA, except for the sweet money in those big city coastal areas. Mining is done gone. Manufacture is gone - where it has come back, is 95%+ automated. IT work is menial tier 1 call center jobs, if you can find them. Trucking is still prevalent, but we all know where that's headed.

There's service jobs. That's what those sweet sweet '60s, '70s, and '80s jobs turned in to. Work your ass off for what, $8/hr? Or maybe you're "lucky" and got a $2.35/hr server job. Or maybe you work healthcare service. Oh, so you're an in-home-health aide? You physically help people with many tasks to be functional? Well, you're worth $7.35/hr . And you get to drive to and fro clients houses. And they will want you to drive them places... That's commercial driving so you're driving uninsured. Enjoy those sweet benefits.

> I've got friends and family dying because it's way too accessible, and the idea of making it legal and even more accessible doesn't appeal to me or my common sense.

Uh huh, like illegalization has made it impossible to get. Oh, that's right. That's why heroin is being cut with all sorts of shit, including fentanyl, strychnine, and other fun things. Many heroin users die cause their supply has been fucked with.

Legalizing it would provide a pure source, and accurate dosage. And it deprives criminal enterprises from capitalizing on these people. And people who are suffering real chronic pain can get their pain fix without dealing with a damned moralistic gatekeeper.

> So congrats on being able to take opiates and not have a problem. If you have stable employment, your situation is in no way relevant to the people this problem is afflicting.

More ass-umptions. I got in a nasty bike accident while working at starbucks. They put me on unpaid medical leave. Job didn't pay well to begin with, and their insurance ended up covering none of my physical therapy. Great insurance it wasn't. I was soon laid off for not being able to do the job. So yeah, I did over a year of opiates, while being unemployed and unemployable. Just blows your narrative all to hell, doesn't it?

> Addicts don't have a chance to just up and get a happier life.

Did it occur to you, that drugs provide a temporary "happier life"? Our society sure as hell isn't interested in fixing these chronic problems of homelessness, lack of food, poverty. They're still thrown away - out of sight, out of mind. Or, it's their problem for being lazy or laggard or making bad choices or getting the wrong degree or joining the military.

So yeah, if we're not willing to start providing ways up for these people, then yeah, provide drugs. It at least provides a snapshot of "not suffering", albeit for a while.

I knows several people that tried Heroin a few times and gave it up, but where addicted to cigarettes. Different people have different drug preferences ans I doubt we have good statistics on this stuff.

I like many people where given opioids post surgery and ended up tossing the pills vs finishing the prescription, yet people get really addicted to the same medication.

Indeed, it's entirely possible for people to take heroin at the weekends or similar, and put it down without problems, and I know several friends who do it irregularly without getting addicted - although only smoking, I've never heard of anyone injecting IV heroin who wasn't an addict...

Injections are apparently much more potent than smoking, so it makes sense that people already addicted prefer that to keep the required amount lower. For recreational uses, smoking would just be much more practical.

Indeed. The bio-availability from 'chasing the dragon' on tin-foil is something like 50% or even less, although in the UK at least powdered heroin is adulterated with things like caffeine (which causes heroin to vaporize at a lower temperature) to make smoking more effective. Obviously IV injecting gives 100% bio-availability, though.

I’d like to take the opportunity and thank you for posting here. It’s hard enough to find reports of people that are going through a withdrawal, so being able to engage in a discussion is a rare opportunity. I wish you all the best in that process.

> There aren't many people who try heroin a couple times then realize they're busy and drop it forever.

Millions of people have used legal opioid painkillers and moved on with their lives. Some people get addicted but for the legal opioids it's far from true that "once someone gets a taste of it, their life is forever changed."

Is heroin that much more addictive than the legal variants?

No it isn't. You don't get addicted straight away, you have to work at it.

Just like cigarettes, you have one and don't like. Tastes foul, gives you a headache. But if you persevere, smoke 1, then more then more. Then after 10 days / 2 weeks of daily smoking you are starting to get addicted, same for heroin. You use it once, and if is any good, you are sick, violently so (vomiting, not dope sick), but persevere for 1-2 weeks the addiction will take hold.

Addiction tends to happen more with heroin, because people who would tend to trying it have other issues on in their life to give them the impetus to keep on trying it.

Only about 10% of people who try heroin go on to become addicted.

The first few tries just aren't pleasant.

Cocaine or methamphetamine are probably more psychologically addictive, although not as physically addictive.

And, for addicts, coming off heroin is unlikely to kill you. Coming off alcohol might.

10% is not a number to trivialize.

I've noticed a lot of people on HN are for all drugs being legalized, but they look at it from the perspective of fairly wealthy and highly educated tech workers with stable lifestyles. Coming from a small town in the rust belt where people struggle to even imagine a future, heroin is way too easy of an escape.

I think helping people who've become addicted is good, but these aren't things that should be legal and accessible for people to start using.

10% is the rate of the people that ever try, and those are currently likely to be the people that are predisposed to develop an addiction. I don't think this can be generalized to the whole population.

> but these aren't things that should be legal and accessible for people to start using.

Then impose a full ban on alcohol as well? It's about as addictive and ranks higher in danger to health than heroin. And it's pretty much freely available to any adult. Well, the US tried, it didn't work out all too well.

> I think helping people who've become addicted is good, but these aren't things that should be legal and accessible for people to start using.

When addictive substances are illegal they're more accessible than when they're managed appropriately.

Johann Hari tells in Chasing the Scream about a city in the UK that used to have a legal heroin program. Addiction rates were a fraction of the rate of a nearby city with similar economic prospects. The difference was that the addicts who lived under prohibition had to advertise to their friends to support their habit.

Patients who could get what they needed from the NHS had no need to promote heroin/cocaine/etc to their friends.