Heroin overdose cure: It exists, but how do you get it?

[Aractus]

No, my argument is that people with medical conditions are required to buy their own needles from the pharmacy. Why should people who have a medical disorder have to buy them, and people who self-harm be given them for free?

From a purely pragmatic point of view in a country with health care, there are many good reasons. The biggest is the same ones as for free contraception. You could probably supply free needles for every addict in the country for what it would cost to treat one person with HIV.

Then there are the hidden costs. We have to keep our sharps bins in a locked compound because a full, sealed bin has a street value of about 20 quid to people who crank them to reuse.

Finally and perhaps most importantly, you're missing the significant bit of the exchange. It's not what they take away, it's what they bring back. Every infected needle they bring back to swap is one they don't drop in the street, or at the park. The public health benefits alone make it worthwhile.

While those are good points they are not absolute. A needle could be infected with HIV, however after just a few minutes the needle will be harmless. On the other hand Hepatitis B can survive, or so it's claimed, for a number of days. Thus a needled infected with Hep B will stay infected for a longer duration.

But what you've failed to address is the actual problem that needle exchanges try to address - and that is infection from sharing needles, not infections from discarded needles.

And then there is the unjust aspect to it which you haven't addressed - it's not right to give people who don't need something that item for free while those who do need them do not receive them for free. What's the problem with charging something? Imagine the vending machine dispenses needles for $0.70c, or if a needle is returned dispenses one for 0.20c? Where's the problem with that model?