Medics shocked as out-of-work drug addicts and alcoholics receive £7.4m in benefits

“I agree with what people have wrote, but something needs to be said about all those people, as well that think having kids seems to stop them from working. Its called JOBSEEKERS ALLOWANCE.”

“Here ya go sentinel, I've done some research for you, Just to, ya know, add some 'perspective'?

LINK-
http://tinyurl.com/9uvfz42

QUOTE-
Stoke-on-Trent has some of the highest rates of alcohol-related harm in England and this coincides with higher than average levels of social deprivation. In 2007 the Stoke-on-Trent Safer City Partnership released an Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy which recognised that the resources at the time for alcohol prevention and treatment service DID NOT MEET local demand. (My capitals)
In 2009 the Partnership commissioned a comprehensive Alcohol Needs Assessment and produced an Alcohol Delivery Plan for 2009-2011.

and LINK-
http://tinyurl.com/9uvfz42
QUOTE-
"Both documents clearly outlined that Stoke-on-Trent's gap in performance in relation to the English average in hospital admissions will continue to grow without increased intervention."


I dunno 'dear readers' what do YOU think would be the more 'constructive' approach this newspaper could have taken to the problems of ALL "drug" abuse in Stoke on Trent? (I REFUSE to make any distinction between alcohol and any other addictive 'killer hard drug')

Would perhaps, drawing it's readers attention to the lack of enough help for addicts in Stoke have been more 'constructive'?
Or was the sensationalism of highlighting the number of addicts unable to work in Stoke on Trent, in order to deliberately whip up the torch and pitchfork "plebs" into a "gas the scumbags" frenzy, more 'constructive'?

and again, any sign yet of a source for those figures? I mean, SOME of us tend to require some sort of 'evidence' before we automatically believe everything printed or reported by the media, and certainly before we start demanding summary executions,”

“A very good point stokiemart,... I have read through this 'story' and NOWHERE does the sentinel provide any back up or links to source for it's outrageous claims,

other then a very vague "Figures obtained by The Sentinel" what the HELL does that mean? come on sentinel you can't just 'make stuff up' and expect people to just simply believe it as fact, unless of course you think we are all stupid sheeple who simply believe whatever is printed in the news papers without question...... oh... hang on,... apparently there are more than enough who do exactly that,
come on... where is the source for these 'figures' lets examine them, oh and nice one quoting retired nurse Judith Streeton, who says,
"I know people can become addicted to drink and drugs but they don't have to do it. It's not like an illness or an injury. "Their money probably goes on more drink or drugs, so in some cases we're probably funding their habit."

Wow! very 'helpful' and since WHEN has Judith been an expert on this topic? what makes HER opinion carry any more weight than any other none professional expert in this particular field?
you might as well go and ask a bin man his opinion, But because she is a "nurse" we are expected to believe she has some authority on the subject, no disrespect Judith but your comment "I know people can become addicted to drink and drugs but they don't have to do it" is a bit of a give away to your total and utter lack of knowledge on the subject,
Since WHEN does anyone wake up one day and say "OH I know, I think I will become an addict today, that sounds like fun"???

What this is, is a deliberate attempt by the sentinel to 'stir things up a bit" get a bit of a barney going" it's good for for the advertising revenue isn't it? show them how many 'hits' and comments the page has got, and then make them have a bidding war to place their adverts on the page,

so COME ON give us a link or source to these "figures"......”

“Methinks the Northcliffe journo who wrote this story is eyeing up a more lucrative post in London with sister (toilet) paper Das Mail. Sorry journo, but which medics are shocked? It's just that you don't seem to say...”

“@ Anon_mow_cop
It's NOT 'my theory' and for a start I don't 'believe drugs should be legalised' certainly not ALL drugs anyway, I believe we should have an open and national debate on drugs, ALL drugs and afterwards they should all be re-classified based on their harm to the individual and to society and their addictive properties,
it shouldn't be a 'crime' to use ANY but they should be strictly controlled based on the parameters above, (this means alcohol would be up there with the other highly addictive killers like heroin and crack)
This would 'almost' destroy the involvement of the criminal gangs especially if illegal supplying carried an automatic 2 years inside for a first offence, (I say 'almost' it would without doubt greatly reduce criminal involvement, and less is better... yes?)

You said-
"If you could garantee that drug-related crime would actually drop if they were legalised I would support your cause"

Obviously I can't "guarantee" anything what I CAN do, is post a link to what happened in Portugal when in 2001 they decriminalised (not legalised) ALL drugs,
THIS is just ONE link, Google "Portugal Drug laws" there are loads more, and the vast majority say the same things, and these are NOT 'my words' and I'm certainly NOT making it up,

just ONE link-
http://tinyurl.com/cxzzx6b

and a couple of quotes, again, NOT MY WORDS,

"Portugal Decriminalized All Drugs Eleven Years Ago And The Results Are Staggering"

On July 1st, 2001, Portugal decriminalized every imaginable drug, from marijuana, to cocaine, to heroin. Some thought Lisbon would become a drug tourist haven, others predicted usage rates among youths to surge.
Eleven years later, it turns out they were both wrong.
Portugal's move to decriminalize does not mean people can carry around, use, and sell drugs free from police interference. That would be legalization. Rather, all drugs are "decriminalized," meaning drug possession, distribution, and use is still illegal. While distribution and trafficking is still a criminal offense, possession and use is moved out of criminal courts and into a special court where each offender's unique  situation is judged by legal experts, psychologists, and social workers. Treatment and further action is decided in these courts, where addicts and drug use is treated as a public health service rather than referring it to the justice system (like the U.S.), reports Fox News." end quotes

THIS is what we should be doing.... in MY opinion of course, OH and at the risk of "filling up" my postings, one last quote, (since you did ask)

QUOTE-
"The resulting effect: a drastic reduction in addicts, with Portuguese officials and reports highlighting that this number, at 100,000 before the new policy was enacted, has been halved in the following ten years. Portugal's drug usage rates are now among the lowest of EU member states,"

These aren't my 'opinions' they are FACTS,

First red arrows done by me cause I really care,”

“@ gormhenghast

Do you see where it says "ADD your comments" above the little box that you type in? Now, I get the impression that the creators of this web site added this function in order to allow readers of this site to 'add their comments' and as all sorts of people from all sorts of backgrounds 'add their comments' the chances are that they aren't always going to agree,
I am 'grown up' enough to accept this, The easy answer would be for 2 or more adults who disagree to either, indulge in an adult and respectful debate, or to ignore each other, I'm OK with either option,
Things I'm NOT 'OK' with are other posters telling me "what I think" or what I can or can't say, or to shut up, or being personally offensive and/or indulging in pathetic and childish name calling,
There are plenty of posters here who I disagree with from time to time, but we are able to behave like 'grown ups' and discuss the points WITHOUT the need for insults, There are others who seem to believe not agreeing with them is a personal insult (you meet this type all the time in pubs) and can only 'respond' with a barrage of abuse, When subjected to this type of response I ALWAYS 'give as good as I get' or just ignore them,
NOW-
Firstly a couple of quotes from you,
"You truly are addicted to this kind of response, ill informed unfocused and with total gullibility"
and-
"That is the addiction, you take in the tripe, believe it and then manifest it in a way that is so symptomatic of the addict"

Firstly "ill informed",,,,, Did you actually bother to read the link I posted?
Here is a quote or 2,
"The commission is chaired by Dame Ruth Runciman with a membership that includes the former head of the British Medical Research Council, Prof Colin Blakemore, and the former chief inspector of constabulary, David Blakey.
The UKDPC's membership also includes Prof John Strang, head of the National Addictions Centre, Prof Alan Maynard, a specialist in health economics, and Lady Ilora Finlay, a past president of the Royal Society of Medicine"

AND THIS-

"The report says their analysis of the evidence shows that existing drugs policies struggle to make an impact and, in some cases, may make the problem worse"

and the link again, just in case anyone might want to read the article,
http://tinyurl.com/8otz6lb
Not exactly 'ill informed' people talking "tripe" certainly not in my opinion anyway, of course we could ignore the experts (because they 'talk tripe') and believe the politicians and the sentinel readership with their "gass them" and their 'well informed' "Scum" or "low life" comments, because they are really intelligent and helpful contributions to the 'debate'
I also understand about diabetes as well, as my stepson's girlfriend is diabetic and I see how this impacts on her life,
I'm truly sorry if my long posts annoy you (you could just not read them) But I see drug abuse and addiction as a Very complicated subject requiring more than a moronic "GAS THEM" or "SCUMBAGS" response,

First red arrow was done by ME,”

“Addicts CAN be cured very cost-effectively using "The Sinclair Method", adopyed by the Finnish Government to combat massive abuse of alcohol amongst the general population:

http://tinyurl.com/8emzvae

and here http://tinyurl.com/9l4378y

It is a medical condition for which there is a medical solution:

Book Description
Publication Date: October 23, 2012
Finally, there is a cure for alcoholism. This is the first step.

Featuring new and updated information and studies, including an introduction by actress Claudia Christian, the second edition of The Cure for Alcoholism delivers exactly what millions of alcoholics and families of alcoholics have been hoping for: a painless, dignified, and medically proven cure for their addiction. Backed by 82 clinical trials and research that extends back to 1964, The Sinclair Method deploys an opiate-blocking medication in a very specific way—in combination with ongoing drinking—to extinguish the addictive "software" in the brain. The de-addiction process rolls back the addictive mechanism in the brain to its original pre-addicted state—before the first drink was consumed, making this program an actual cure for alcoholism.

Drs. Roy Eskapa and David Sinclair of The Sinclair Method have put together a sound scientific book that proves that with this particular method, alcoholism can be cured in more than 78 percent of patients. What's more, the treatment avoids the dangerous withdrawal symptoms, allowing patients to detox gradually and safely while they are still drinking. This removes the need for expensive and unpleasant inpatient rehabilitation programs. Actual drinking levels and cravings automatically decrease until control over alcohol is restored. The bottom line is that patients can control their drinking or stop altogether with the simple yet powerful process outlined in The Cure for Alcoholism.

Including a new introduction by actress Claudia Christian about The Sinclair Method's impact on her life, updated trial information, and a letter explaining the treatment that can be given to doctors by patients, The Cure for Alcoholism is a revolutionary book for anyone who wants to gain control over drinking.
Source(s):
http://tinyurl.com/8emzvae

and here http://tinyurl.com/9l4378y”

“@ johntoe I do apologise I pitched my comments so high as you missed every point, probably the red mist descended? You truly are addicted to this kind of response, ill informed unfocused and with total gullibility as to what the paper and the Tories are trotting out, its a good job they are not whipping up a fervour of a pogrom against any particular group that could be violated by their spin in the form of an assault, I can see you and your type leading the way.

That is the addiction, you take in the tripe, believe it and then manifest it in a way that is so symptomatic of the addict, all I am saying is question the issue before you attack carte blanche, there are hundreds of different addictions in this group, lumped into two categories, drugs and alcohol they are but two of those. Prescribed drugs etc. me I am an addict myself to insulin, there is no difference than someone on anti depressants, or is it that depression is not an illness, just a weak minded individual that some on this thread are so eager to point out that they are stronger than the weakest, chest out, pull yourself together and onwards and upwards, the A500 has been littered recently by these poor souls. Wake up from your addiction johntoe see the trees that means you re in a wood.”

“Anon_mow_cop - well present policy isn't working is it?

I think all rational people would say it's a monumental (and very expensive failure). Shall us intelligent adults move on and try something else?”

“EDWARD SAMUEL MILIBAND WILL SORT IT ,CAMERON WILL GO BACK TO COLDSEAL WINDOWS....AND THE BANKERS WELL..”