Addictions
Why is B.C.’s safer supply program shrinking?

By Alexandra Keeler
Experts say physicians have lost their ‘zeal’ for prescribing safer supply amid growing concerns about diversion and effectiveness
Participation in B.C.’s safer supply program — which offers prescription opioids to people who use drugs — has dropped by nearly 25 per cent over the past two years, according to recent government data.
The B.C. Ministry of Health says updated prescribing guidelines and tighter program oversight are behind the decline.
But addiction experts say the story is more complicated.
“Many of my addiction medicine colleagues have stopped prescribing ‘safe supply’ hydromorphone to their patients because of the high rates of diversion … and lack of efficacy in stabilizing the substance use disorder (sometimes worsening it),” said Dr. Launette Rieb, a clinical associate professor at the University of British Columbia and addiction medicine specialist.
“Many doctors who initially supported ‘safe supply’ no longer provide it but do not wish to talk about it publicly for fear of reprisals,” she said in her email.
Missing data
B.C. has had safer supply programs in place province-wide since 2021.
Participation in its program peaked at nearly 5,200 individuals in March 2023, and then declined to fewer than 3,900 individuals by December 2024. This is the most recent data publicly available, according to B.C.’s health ministry.
In an emailed statement, the ministry attributed the decline to updated clinical guidance and more restrictive prescribing practices “aimed at strengthening the integrity and safety of the program.”
In February, the province updated its safer supply prescribing guidelines to require most patients of the program to consume prescription opioids under the supervision of health-care professionals — a practice known as “witnessed dosing.”
The B.C. government has not released any data on how many patients have been transitioned to witnessed dosing.
The ministry did not address Canadian Affairs’ questions about whether patients are being cut off involuntarily from the program, whether fewer physicians are prescribing or whether barriers to accessing safer supply have increased.
‘Dependence, tolerance, addiction’
Some experts say the decline in safer supply participation is due to physicians being influenced by their peers and public controversy over the program.
Dr. Karen Urbanoski, an associate professor in the Public Health and Social Policy department at the University of Victoria, says peer influence plays a significant role in prescribing practices.
A 2024 study found the uptake of prescribed safer supply in B.C. was closely tied to prescribers’ professional networks.
“These peer influences are apparent for both the uptake of [safer supply] prescribing and its discontinuation — they are likely playing a role here,” Urbanoski said in an email to Canadian Affairs.
Urbanoski also points to the broader environment — including negative media coverage and uncertainty about program funding — as factors behind the decline.
“Media discourse and general politicization of [safer supply] has likely had a ‘cooling effect’ on prescribing,” she said.
Dr. Leonara Regenstreif, a primary care physician and founding member of Addiction Medicine Canada, says many physicians embraced safer supply without fully grasping its clinical risks. Addiction Medicine Canada is an advocacy group representing 23 addiction specialists across Canada.
Regenstreif says physicians too young to have practiced during the peak of OxyContin prescribing were often enthusiastic prescribers of safer supply in the program’s early days. OxyContin is a prescription opioid that helped spark North America’s addiction crisis.
“In my experience, the MD colleagues who have embraced [safer supply] prescribing most zealously … never experienced the trap of writing scripts without knowing what was ahead — dependence, tolerance, addiction, consequences,” her emailed statement says.
Now, many of these physicians are looking for an “exit ramp,” Regenstreif says, as concerns over safer supply diversion and its treatment benefits grow.
Reib, of the UBC, says some of her colleagues in addictions medicine fear speaking out about their concerns with the program.
“Some of my colleagues have had their lives threatened by their patients who have become financially dependent on selling their [hydromorphone],” said Rieb.
The College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C., which represents physicians in the province, referred Canadian Affairs’ questions about declining program participation to the health ministry and the BC Centre on Substance Use. The centre was unable to provide comment by press time.
Public backlash
The decline in B.C.’s safer supply participation unfolds amid mounting scrutiny of the program and its effectiveness.
Rieb says that the program’s framing — as free, safe and widely available — may run counter to longstanding public health strategies aimed at reducing drug use through pricing and harm awareness.
“Drivers of public use of substances are availability, cost, and perception of harm,” she said. “[Safe supply] is being promoted as safe, free and available for the asking.”
There have been reports of youth gaining access to diverted safer supply opioids and developing addictions to fentanyl as a result. Last September, B.C. father Gregory Sword testified before the House of Commons that his teenage daughter died after accessing diverted safer supply opioids.
B.C.’s recent decision to overhaul its prescribing guidelines followed revelations of a widespread scam by dozens of B.C. pharmacists to exploit the safer supply program to maximize profits.
Experts also note that Canada still lacks the evidence needed to assess the long-term health outcomes of people in safer supply programs. There is currently no research in Canada tracking these long-term health outcomes.
“There is a lack of research to date on retention on [safer supply],” said Urbanoksi.
Rieb agrees. “There are many methodological problems with the recent studies that conclude [the] benefit of pharmaceutical alternatives (‘safe supply’),” she said.
“We need long term studies that look at risks/harms as well as potential benefits.”
Regenstreif says the recent drop in participation may have an unintended upside — encouraging more people with substance use disorders to try what she sees as a more effective treatment: opioid agonist therapy, or OAT. This therapy uses medications like methadone or buprenorphine to reduce withdrawal symptoms and cravings.
“If fewer people are accessing [safer supply] tablets … more people with [opioid use disorder] might accept proper OAT treatment,” she said.
This article was produced through the Breaking Needles Fellowship Program, which provided a grant to Canadian Affairs, a digital media outlet, to fund journalism exploring addiction and crime in Canada. Articles produced through the Fellowship are co-published by Break The Needle and Canadian Affairs.
Addictions
Toronto offering free drug kits with pipes, syringes across city

From LifeSiteNews
Toronto’s so-called ‘harm reduction’ program delivers free drug kits, including crack and meth pipes and syringes, via a hotline and reportedly over 100 distribution sites.
The city of Toronto is delivering drug kits across the city via a drug hotline, as part of its “harm reduction” plan.
The city of Toronto is operating a Mobile and Street Outreach program to allow residents to call a hotline and have drug kits, complete with pipes for smoking crack or meth, naloxone, syringes, condoms, delivered to them for free.
“The province of Ontario made it clear that there was no place for ‘safe consumption,’ for the consumption of drugs anywhere near schools and daycare centers,” Canadian commenter Ben Mulroney in a July 22 episode of his show.
“And instead, what we’ve noticed is the rise of the use of drugs and the giving out of all the materials that you need to do drugs in homeless shelters across this city,” Mulroney continued.
Mulroney interviewed a Toronto resident named Amy working with the New Toronto Initiative, who explained how the city’s drugs policies are exacerbating, not solving, the drug crisis.
Amy shared that she collected a free drug kit from the Queen West “harm reduction” center in Toronto. The kit included an OD package, to help someone who is suffering from a drug overdose.
However, it also included pipes for smoking crack or meth, naloxone, syringes, condoms, and instructions on “safer crystal meth smoking,” such as how to use a meth pipe.
According to the City of Toronto, the drug kits were only to be distributed from five supervised consumption treatment centers in Ingleton, Lake Ontario, Victoria Park, and Don Valley Parkway.
However, Amy revealed that there are “over 100 distribution sites in the city of Toronto.”
Additionally, the city’s “Street & Mobile Van Outreach” program delivers “harm reduction supplies” across the city.
“This stuff is supposed to be circumscribed to these five locations,” Mulroney explained, adding that, despite this, “the city has decided that they’re circumventing that by offering mobile delivery.”
The supplies provided by the mobile service include injecting and smoking supplies, which can be delivered within 20 to 40 minutes of calling the hotline.
Furthermore, earlier this year, Toronto began building new homeless shelters, including one in Amy’s neighborhood, which raised concerns regarding community safety.
However, the city assured Amy that the homeless shelter will not be a “safe injection” site. Later, Amy learned that the shelters will be handing out the euphemistic “harm reduction kits,” which include drug supplies.
“And if you are telling us that in homeless shelters it is now open season for people to consume drugs at their leisure, then you are putting people who never had any interaction with drugs right next to people who do,” Mulroney warned.
As LifeSiteNews previously reported, a government funded vending machine is dispensing drug supplies and contraception just meters away from a Toronto school.
The distribution of the kits comes after the Liberal “safe-supply” program was deemed such a disaster in British Columbia that the province asked former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to recriminalize drugs in public spaces. Nearly two weeks later, the Trudeau government announced it would “immediately” end the province’s drug program.
“Safe supply” is a euphemism for government-provided drugs given to addicts under the assumption that a more controlled batch of narcotics reduces the risk of overdose. Critics of the policy stress that giving addicts drugs only enables their behavior, puts the public at risk, disincentivizes recovery from addiction, and has not reduced – and sometimes has even increased – overdose deaths when implemented.
Beginning in early 2023, Trudeau’s federal policy effectively decriminalized hard drugs on a trial-run basis in British Columbia.
Under the policy, the federal government allowed people within the province to possess up to 2.5 grams of hard drugs without criminal penalty. Selling drugs remained a crime.
Since its implementation, the province’s drug policy has been widely criticized, especially after it was found that the province broke three different drug-related overdose records in the first month the new law was in effect.
The effects of decriminalizing hard drugs in various parts of Canada have been exposed in Aaron Gunn’s recent documentary Canada is Dying and in the U.K. Telegraph journalist Steven Edginton’s mini-documentary Canada’s Woke Nightmare: A Warning to the West.
Addictions
Critics question conclusions of new Ontario “safer supply” study

A new study links safer supply to health improvements, but critics say results are muddied by methadone use and extra supports
A new study that compares safer supply with a traditional approach to addiction treatment has ignited debate among addiction experts.
The study, published in The Lancet Public Health in April, examined health outcomes for people receiving safer supply and compared them to a similar group of people receiving methadone, a drug used to reduce drug cravings and withdrawal symptoms.
It concluded that safer supply programs significantly improved participants’ health outcomes. Safer supply provides people at high risk of overdose with prescription opioids as a safer alternative to toxic street drugs.
But critics question the study’s conclusions. They note that many safer supply participants had access to more support services and that the majority also received methadone. These factors make it difficult to identify which treatment drove the positive results.
“The study did not compare [safer supply] to methadone, but rather the initiation of both with several other unaccounted variables,” wrote psychiatrists Dr. Robert Tanguaya and Dr. Nickie Mathew in a formal critique also published in The Lancet.
Findings
The peer-reviewed study is the first in Canada to compare the health outcomes for people receiving safer supply with those receiving methadone through a program known as opioid agonist therapy. Opioid agonist therapy, or OAT, is widely used to treat opioid use disorder.
The study, which was led by teams at Unity Health Toronto, ICES, the University of Toronto and the Ontario Network of People Who Use Drugs, followed about 1,700 Ontarians who started treatment between 2016 and 2021. Half were receiving prescribed hydromorphone through Ontario’s safer supply programs; the other half were receiving methadone through an OAT program.
Participants were tracked for up to one year. Both groups saw improvements, including fewer overdoses, emergency room visits, hospital stays and new infections.
“The findings suggest [safer supply] programs play an important, complementary role to traditional opioid agonist treatment in expanding the options available to support people who use drugs,” the study says.
However, when compared against each other, the safer supply group had higher rates of overdose, ER visits and hospital admissions than those on methadone.
Still, the authors conclude that safer supply can complement methadone, especially for people who do not respond well to traditional options like OAT.
Subscribe for free to get BTN’s latest news and analysis – or donate to our investigative journalism fund.
Confounders
In their May 27 critique in The Lancet Public Health, psychiatrists Tanguay and Mathew say the study fails to isolate the effects of safer supply.
“It is unclear from this study whether the benefits attributed to [safer supply] initiation came from the prescribed … hydromorphone or not,” they wrote.
One concern is that most safer supply participants were also on methadone — a highly dose-dependent medication — and the study did not account for how much of each drug they received.
Dr. Leonara Regenstreif, a primary care physician who specializes in substance use disorders, raised a similar point in an email to Canadian Affairs.
She noted that 84 per cent of safer supply participants in the study were already on methadone when they began receiving hydromorphone.
“It would take a lot of fudging to be able to say [safer supply] was responsible for an outcome, when that group was actually receiving two drugs,” she said.
The main study’s authors did not respond to requests for comment. Instead, they directed Canadian Affairs to their May 27 response to Tanguay and Mathew’s critique, also published in The Lancet.
Wraparound care
Critics also say that improved outcomes among safer supply participants may be due to the extensive additional health care they received while on safer supply.
This additional care was evidenced in study participants’ medication costs.
In the year after treatment began, median medication costs for safer supply patients rose by more than $13,000 per person. By comparison, costs for those on methadone rose by about $1,600.
Glen McGee, a statistics professor at the University of Waterloo, says this suggests safer supply participants may have received broader care, including treatment for other conditions like HIV or hepatitis C.
“This could suggest treatment [of the safer supply group] involved more thorough care in addition to [safer supply], which could also account for some of the improved outcomes,” he said.
In their response to Tanguay and Mathew’s critique, the main study’s authors said the additional care is not a flaw — it reflects how Ontario’s safer supply model is designed.
“Embedding hydromorphone prescriptions within other health and social services that address the complex needs of people at high risk of drug-related harms is a deliberate and defining feature,” they wrote.
McGee suggests the challenge of isolating the impact of broader care makes it difficult to draw broad conclusions about safer supply’s role in patients’ health outcomes.
“The analyses in the main paper seem reasonable, but the conclusions are perhaps too strong,” said McGee. “We don’t necessarily know if [safer supply] alone would be as effective.”
Overdose risk
Critics also focused on safer supply participants having a higher risk of overdose than those in opioid agonist therapy.
Although safer supply patients were more likely to stay in treatment than methadone patients, overdose rates remained higher for safer supply patients — even after adjusting for people who dropped out from the methadone group.
The study authors say this is likely because safer supply patients started at higher risk and many continued using street drugs early in treatment.
“The smaller decline among [safer supply] recipients might reflect higher baseline risk and greater ongoing exposure to the unregulated drug supply early in treatment,” they wrote.
They also noted that very few people died in either group, showing that treatment — whether safer supply or methadone — offers protection.
However, Regenstreif urges caution.
“If you peel away the stats language, underneath it all you have a cohort with higher risks of opioid toxicity and other hazards of ongoing drug use,” said Regenstreif.
This article was produced through the Breaking Needles Fellowship Program, which provided a grant to Canadian Affairs, a digital media outlet, to fund journalism exploring addiction and crime in Canada. Articles produced through the Fellowship are co-published by Break The Needle and Canadian Affairs.
Our content is always free – but if you want to help us commission more high-quality journalism, consider getting a voluntary paid subscription.
-
Daily Caller2 days ago
Trump Halts Preferential Treatment For ‘Unreliable, Foreign-Controlled’ Wind Energy
-
conflict2 days ago
Putin Not Backing Down To Trump Despite Sanctions, Tariff Threats
-
Business2 hours ago
Trump sends letters to 17 Big Pharma companies demanding they end ‘abusive drug pricing’
-
COVID-192 days ago
Tamara Lich’s Prosecution Is A Warning To Western Canada
-
Business2 days ago
McTeague: Will Carney cave to radical climate activists?
-
Artificial Intelligence14 hours ago
AI ‘therapist’ encourages user to go on killing spree: ‘I’d love to see you try’
-
Daily Caller12 hours ago
Obama Made Watergate Look Like A Parking Ticket
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta’s New School Library Guidelines Make Sense