From: (Peter McDermott) Subject: Re: disinfection? Date: 1995/12/21 newsgroups: alt.drugs.hard In article <4b6hg9$oqu@news.xs4all.nl>, simpa@xs4all.nl (simon boerboom) wrote: [...] >I would like your opinion about the following questions: > >1 Is iodine a possible disinfectant? > If so, how to use it; if not why not? Never heard of it being used. >2 Is heating the syringe safe? It's fine so long as the syringe doesn't melt. However, if you've got two fiends with two works, the first boils his and it melts (which some do) what happens then? Perhaps they both use the second? > [Clean the syringe with cold water. put the syringe in parts. > Boil water in a pan. Put the different parts in the boiling > water. Let the water cook for 10 minutes [it was 5 minutes, > we changed it to 10 because of HCV]. Stir a few times > and check if there are no bubbles. Assemble the syringe > again.] > >3 Is cleaning syringe with bleach safe? > [Clean the syringe with cold water. Another time with water. > Fill the syringe with thin bleach, at least 5% active > chlorine. Let it work at least 30 seconds while shaking. > Empty the syringe. Fill again with fresh bleach. Wait again > half a minute while shaking the syringe. Empty the syringe > and clean twice with water.] The safest and best, but still not 100%. HIV can lodge in tiny scratches in the plastic. Some authorities recommend cold soapy water for the first rinse, while others use a 2 + 2 + 2 regime. (Rince twice with cold water, twice with bleach, twice with cold water again and then repeat.) But for my money, it's always best to use your own. >4 Any other suggestions? ==================================================================== From: askdfh@askldjfh.net (emanlluF) Subject: Re: Syringe Design Help Needed! Date: 1996/01/30 newsgroups: alt.drugs.hard >I am a mechanical engineering student at columbia university. Currently I >am working on a non-reusable syringe design (to help prevent hiv >transmission between iv drug users). You appear to be serious. Are you aware that such syringes have already been developed? Are you aware that every major HIV/Drugs expert has denounced this idea as one that will actually _Promote_ HIV infection?? I realize that to those unfamiliar with the IV world this seems like a good idea, but there are two basic flaws that would cause such a thing to backfire: 1) Dopefiends are FAMOUS for finding ways of getting around such limitations. Whether it's binders designed to make pills impossible to inject or laws restricting the availability of syringes-Those who NEED opioids to function (as well as other IV users ) WILL find a way to get around such restrictions. Problem is, the ways we find will always increase the danger of using (time to retell your silicon-diconol stories Peter?). If a "non-reusable" syringe can be used once, people will find a way to make it usable twice... 2) More importantly, to stem the spread of HIV infection we need MORE syringes in circulation, not LESS. The net effect of distribution of a syringe that really did fail after one use would be a reduction in the number of usable syringes available. Hence, MORE sharing...and MORE HIV. I have a feeling you may then argue that these single use syringes should be distributed or legalized. Such an argument would seem to be based on the belief that IVDUs LIKE to share rigs. This is simply untrue. Any regular IVDU prefers his or her own set. It's only novices and a few couples who prefer sharing. The solution to the IV/HIV connection is very simple: Repeal the remaining laws (only what? 10 states?) prohibiting purchase of sets without a script, at the same time exchange/distribution programs are expanded to reach those without even the money to purchase a sterile set for a quarter. ==================================================================== From: askdfh@askldjfh.net (emanlluF) Subject: Re: Syringe Design Help Needed! Date: 1996/01/31 newsgroups: alt.drugs.hard >Does _anyone_ really "want" to share needles? Isn't it only a matter of >limited resources, ie, two people--one needle? No. There are people who do it not out of need. The vast majority are couples who consider it an expression of trust. I used to live with a couple who had bags of clean rigs but would always split the same once loaded rig (the story I posted here about shooting hydrogen peroxide happened to this couple). However, the number of such people is miniscule compared to the number who do it strictly out of need, as you say. > >As far as the rest goes, I am a bit confused. First of all, I don't think >you really mean "circulation" do you? No, I mean circulation. I'm just speaking in terms of reality. Until rigs are so legal, so ubiquitous, and so cheap that no one but the above crazies would consider sharing (like no one would share toilet paper...), then the reality is- rigs are in "circulation". Do you know how many of the "sterile", "sealed", rigs on the street are used "re-seals"?? And then I don't see anything >"wrong" with non-reusable needles, per se, as long as they are adequately >available. (One really _shouldn't_ re-use a needle, even on oneself.) Unless it's a re-usable glass one. But reusing your own "disposable" rig is preferable to taking chances...including chances with possible "re-seals" bought on the street. Do you know how to sharpen a dull disposable point? >Also it might give incentive to those aberrant few who really _like_ to >share needles, as they will spare themselves some effort and just get >their own works. Um... I think the same principle applies= Those who _want_ to get around something will always find away. Such people will return to the days of "droppers". >Well, I suppose there's the rub. Politicians might look at the single-use >needle as a way of controlling drug use rather than reducing the harm >caused by it. I _think_ public health pressure stopped the single-use movement several years ago, but I could be wrong... .