praktik said:What I don't understand is what they counted as "one life". Lilnick said that "there were 273 witnessed overdoses with no fatalities". These people are buying their drugs off the street, and one of the dilemmas caused by creating a black market in heroin and cocaine is that purity becomes unpredictable. It is likely that many of these overdoses would have occurred even if the drugs were consumed off-site, because overdoses are often caused by hidden spikes in purity that catch users off-guard. Let's say that 70% of these cases were caused by purity fluctuations, that leaves us with around 171 overdoses that we can say would have occurred even if consumed off-site.
Overdoses require immediate attention in the extremely short-term, the lucky ones get treatment and live, if we assume the city would have seen 171 overdoses even without Insite, there's probably a fair number of them that would have resulted in death due to not getting care in time -> say 40%, to low-ball it a bit...
That means that Insite's supervision and intervention saved at least 68 lives, and that's a conservative figure.
I appreciate what you're trying to say with his post but your numbers seemed picked at random and your information seems a little off. Spikes in purity have little effect on the overdose rate. It is periods of abstinence that cause the increased risk (recently released from jail/treatment centre).
The fatal overdose rate is 10% on the high side, not 40% on the low.