High Sobriety New York Times Feature
High Sobriety has unwittingly created a media splash. We always thought there would be interest, but never anticipated the media interest we have seen. The truth is, harm reduction isn’t new, we didn’t invent the wheel. In the era in which we live, where people die daily from addiction, we saw not only an opportunity but a moral imperative to try something different. Yesterday the New York Times published a piece about a client of High Sobriety. The HS team thought it was fairly reported. The one thing with which we take issue is the perspective of Dr. Mark Willingbring. The doctor comments:
“I’m not prone to making exaggerated or unqualified statements and in this case I don’t need to make any: It doesn’t work,” he said. “Like trying to cure alcoholism with Valium.”
The comparison of “trying to cure alcoholism with valium” doesn’t work. While we don’t disparage the doctor’s opinion, he misses the point. Were someone to choose replacing alcohol with valium, they are still vulnerable to long reaching consequences, even death. That’s not true of replacing cannabis for other substances. While people argue “there are lethal doses of cannabis” the amount is absurd and death by ingestion isn’t a realistic concern. Unless the DEA comes through the door, guns blazing, death by cannabis is a remote and distant possibility. That’s a big difference and a large piece that Dr. Willingbring seems to be missing. As always at High Sobriety, we welcome feedback and discourse.
Check out the Times article and share your thoughts with us.
Author: Joe Schrank, Editor in Chief