BACKGROUND:Internationally, overdose is the primary cause of death among people injecting drugs. However, since 2001, heroin-related overdose deaths in the United States (US) have risen sixfold, paralleled by a rise in the death rate attributed to synthetic opioids, particularly the fentanyls. This paper considers the adaptations some US heroin injectors are making to protect themselves from these risks. METHODS:Between 2015 and 2016, a team of ethnographers collected data through semi-structured interviews and observation captured in field notes and video recording of heroin preparation/consumption. Ninety-one current heroin injectors were interviewed (Baltimore, n = 22; Chicago, n = 24; Massachusetts and New Hampshire, n = 36; San Francisco, n = 9). Experience injecting heroin ranged from < 1-47 years. Eight participants, who were exclusively heroin snorters, were also interviewed. Data were analyzed thematically. RESULTS:Across the study sites, multiple methods of sampling "heroin" were identified, sometimes used in combination, ranging from non-injecting routes (snorting, smoking or tasting a small amount prior to injection) to injecting a partial dose and waiting. Partial injection took different forms: a "slow shot" where the user injected a portion of the solution in the syringe, keeping the needle in the injection site, and continuing or withdrawing the syringe or a "tester shot" where the solution was divided into separate injections. Other techniques included getting feedback from others using heroin of the same batch or observing those with higher tolerance injecting heroin from the same batch before judging how much to inject themselves. Although a minority of those interviewed described using these drug sampling techniques, there is clearly receptivity among some users to protecting themselves by using a variety of methods. CONCLUSIONS:The use of drug sampling as a means of preventing an overdose from injection drug use reduces the quantity absorbed at any one time allowing users to monitor drug strength and titrate their dose accordingly. Given the highly unpredictable potency of the drugs currently being sold as heroin in the US, universal precautions should be adopted more widely. Further research is needed into facilitators and barriers to the uptake of these drug sampling methods.

Background

The US is experiencing an unprecedented opioid overdose epidemic fostered in recent years by regional contamination of the heroin supply with the fentanyl family of synthetic opioids. Since 2011 opioid-related overdose deaths in the East Coast state of Massachusetts have more than tripled, with 75% of the 1374 deaths with an available toxicology positive for fentanyl. Fentanyl is 30-50X more potent than heroin and its presence makes heroin use more unpredictable. A rapid ethnographic assessment was undertaken to understand the perceptions and experiences of people who inject drugs sold as 'heroin' and to observe the drugs and their use.

Methods

A team of ethnographers conducted research in northeast Massachusetts and Nashua, New Hampshire in June 2016, performing (n=38) qualitative interviews with persons who use heroin.

Results

(1) The composition and appearance of heroin changed in the last four years; (2) heroin is cheaper and more widely available than before; and (3) heroin 'types' have proliferated with several products being sold as 'heroin'. These consisted of two types of heroin (alone), fentanyl (alone), and heroin-fentanyl combinations. In the absence of available toxicological information on retail-level heroin, our research noted a hierarchy of fentanyl discernment methods, with embodied effects considered most reliable in determining fentanyl's presence, followed by taste, solution appearance and powder color. This paper presents a new 'heroin' typology based on users' reports.

Conclusion

Massachusetts' heroin has new appearances and is widely adulterated by fentanyl. Persons who use heroin are trying to discern the substances sold as heroin and their preferences for each form vary. The heroin typology presented is inexact but can be validated by correlating users' discernment with drug toxicological testing. If validated, this typology would be a valuable harm reduction tool. Further research on adaptations to heroin adulteration could reduce risks of using heroin and synthetic opioid combinations.

Background

Illicitly manufactured fentanyl and its analogues are appearing in countries throughout the world, often disguised as heroin or counterfeit prescription pills, with resulting high overdose mortality. Possible explanations for this phenomenon include reduced costs and risks to heroin suppliers, heroin shortages, user preferences for a strong, fast-acting opioid and the emergence of Dark Web cryptomarkets. This paper addresses these potential causes and asks three questions: (1) can users identify fentanyl; (2) do users desire fentanyl; and (3) if users want fentanyl, can they express this demand in a way that influences the supply?

Argument/analysis

Existing evidence, while limited, suggests that some users can identify fentanyl, although not reliably, and some desire it, but because fentanyl is frequently marketed deceptively as other drugs, users lack information and choice to express demand effectively. Even when aware of fentanyl's presence, drug users may lack fentanyl-free alternatives. Cryptomarkets, while difficult to quantify, appear to offer buyers greater information and competition than offline markets. However, access barriers and patterns of fentanyl-related health consequences make cryptomarkets unlikely sources of user influence on the fentanyl supply. Market condition data indicate heroin supply shocks and shortages prior to the introduction of fentanyl in the United States and parts of Europe, but the much lower production cost of fentanyl compared with heroin may be a more significant factor CONCLUSION: Current evidence points to a supply-led addition of fentanyl to the drug market in response to heroin supply shocks and shortages, changing prescription opioid availability and/or reduced costs and risks to suppliers. Current drug users in affected regions of the United States, Canada and Europe appear largely to lack both concrete knowledge of fentanyl's presence in the drugs they buy and access to fentanyl-free alternatives.

Since 2001, heroin-related overdose deaths in the United States have risen six-fold, a rise unaccounted for by the expanding user population. Has heroin become a more dangerous drug? Reports of fentanyl and its analogs, often concealed in or sold as heroin, have also increased sharply. This article investigates heroin injectors' perceptions and experiences of changes in the heroin supply in the East Coast city of Baltimore, Maryland, currently facing an epidemic in heroin- and fentanyl-related overdose deaths. Unusually, Baltimore's heroin market is divided between two types: "Raw," believed to be Colombian in origin and relatively pure, and the more adulterated "Scramble" (raw heroin traditionally blended with quinine and lactose). Users reported that Scramble heroin, while gaining market share, has become a highly unstable product, varying dramatically in appearance, intensity of onset, duration of action, and effect. Some considered that Scramble was no longer "heroin," but was heavily adulterated or even replaced, mentioning fentanyl, benzodiazepines, and crushed opioid pills as additives. There was intense awareness of overdose as a present danger in users' lives, which they linked to the recent adulteration of the heroin supply. Responses to this perceived adulteration varied, including information gathering, attraction, avoidance, taking precautions, and acceptance.

Background

Opioid and methamphetamine co-use is increasing across the USA with overdoses involving these drugs also rising. West Virginia (WV) has led the US in opioid overdose death rates since at least 2013 and rising co-use of methamphetamine with opioids has played a greater role in deaths over the last 5 years.

Methods

This study used rapid ethnography to examine methods and motivations behind opioids and methamphetamine co-use from the viewpoint of their consumers. Participants (n = 30) were people who injected heroin/fentanyl also using methamphetamine who participated in semi-structured interviews.

Results

We found multiple methods of co-using opioids and methamphetamine, whether alternately or simultaneously and in varying order. Most prioritized opioids, with motives for using methamphetamine forming three thematic categories: 'intrinsic use', encompassing both inherent pleasure of combined use greater than using both drugs separately or for self-medication of particular conditions; 'opioid assisting use' in which methamphetamine helped people manage their existing heroin/fentanyl use; and 'reluctant or indifferent use' for social participation, reflecting methamphetamine's low cost and easy availability.

Conclusions

Methamphetamine serves multiple functions among people using opioids in WV. Beliefs persist that methamphetamine can play a role in preventing and reversing opioid overdose, including some arguments for sequential use being protective of overdose. 'Reluctant' uptake attests to methamphetamine's social use and the influence of supply. The impact on overdose risk of the many varied co-use patterns needs further investigation.

After publication of the original article [1], the authors identified an error in Acknowledgements section. The below disclosures is missing. "Dr. Ciccarone has received compensation in the past 36 months for: being on the Scientific Advisory Board for Celero Systems; providing expert testimony for Motley Rice LLP; being a one-time consultant for Arbor Pharmaceuticals; all outside the submitted work". The original article has been corrected.

Background

West Virginia is a largely rural state with strong ties of kinship, mutual systems of support and charitable giving. At the same time, wealth inequalities are extreme and the state's drug overdose fatality rate stands above all others in the USA at 51.5/100,000 in 2018, largely opioid-related. In recent years, harm reduction services have been active in the state but in 2018 Charleston's needle and syringe program was forced to close. This paper considers the risk environment in which the state's drug-related loss of life, and those attempting to prevent it, exist.

Methods

This rapid ethnographic study involved semi-structured interviews (n = 21), observation and video recordings of injection sequences (n = 5), initially recruiting people who inject heroin/fentanyl (PWIH) at the Charleston needle and syringe program. Snowball sampling led the research team to surrounding towns in southern West Virginia. Telephone interviews (n = 2) with individuals involved in service provision were also carried out.

Results

PWIH in southern West Virginia described an often unsupportive, at times hostile risk environment that may increase the risk of overdose fatalities. Negative experiences, including from some emergency responders, and fears of punitive legal consequences from calling these services may deter PWIH from seeking essential help. Compassion fatigue and burnout may play a part in this, along with resentment regarding high demands placed by the overdose crisis on impoverished state resources. We also found low levels of knowledge about safe injection practices among PWIH.

Conclusions

Hostility faced by PWIH may increase their risk of overdose fatalities, injection-related injury and the risk of HIV and hepatitis C transmission by deterring help-seeking and limiting the range of harm reduction services provided locally. Greater provision of overdose prevention education and naloxone for peer distribution could help PWIH to reverse overdoses while alleviating the burden on emergency services. Although essential for reducing mortality, measures that address drug use alone are not enough to safeguard longer-term public health. The new wave of psychostimulant-related deaths underline the urgency of addressing the deeper causes that feed high-risk patterns of drug use beyond drugs and drug use.

Heroin overdose, more accurately termed 'heroin-related overdose' due to the frequent involvement of other drugs, is the leading cause of mortality among regular heroin users. (Degenhardt et al., 2010) Heroin injectors are at greater risk of hospital admission for heroin-related overdose (HOD) in the eastern United States where Colombian-sourced powder heroin is sold than in the western US where black 'tar' heroin predominates. (Unick et al., 2014) This paper examines under-researched influences on HOD, both fatal and non-fatal, using data from a qualitative study of injecting drug users of black tar heroin in San Francisco and powder heroin in Philadelphia Data were collected through in-depth, semi-structured interviews carried out in 2012 that were conducted against a background of longer-term participant-observation, ethnographic studies of drug users and dealers in Philadelphia (2007-12) and of users in San Francisco (1994-2007, 2012). Our findings suggest three types of previously unconsidered influences on overdose risk that arise both from structural socio-economic factors and from the physical properties of the heroin source-types: 1) retail market structure including information flow between users; 2) marketing techniques such as branding, free samples and pricing and 3) differences in the physical characteristics of the two major heroin source forms and how they affect injecting techniques and vascular health. Although chosen for their contrasting source-forms, we found that the two cities have contrasting dominant models of drug retailing: San Francisco respondents tended to buy through private dealers and Philadelphia respondents frequented an open-air street market where heroin is branded and free samples are distributed, although each city included both types of drug sales. These market structures and marketing techniques shape the availability of information regarding heroin potency and its dissemination among users who tend to seek out the strongest heroin available on a given day. The physical characteristics of these two source-types, the way they are prepared for injecting and their effects on vein health also differ markedly. The purpose of this paper is to examine some of the unexplored factors that may lead to heroin-related overdose in the United States and to generate hypotheses for further study.

This qualitative study documents the pathways to injecting heroin by users in Philadelphia and San Francisco before and during a pharmaceutical opioid pill epidemic. Data was collected through in-depth, semi-structured interviews (conducted between 2010 and 2012) that were, conducted against a background of longer-term participant-observation, ethnographic studies of street-based drug users and dealers in Philadelphia (2007-12) and San Francisco (1994-2007, 2012). Philadelphia and San Francisco were selected for their contrasting political economies, immigration patterns and source type of heroin. In Philadelphia the ethnographers found heroin injectors, usually white users, who had started their opiate using careers with prescription opioids rather than transitioning from other drugs. In both Philadelphia and San Francisco, most of the young heroin injectors interviewed began, their drug-use trajectories with opioid pills--usually Percocet (oxycodone and acetaminophen), generic short acting oxycodone or, OxyContin (long-acting oxycodone)--before transitioning to heroin, usually by nasal inhalation (sniffing) or smoking at first, followed by injecting. While most of the Philadelphia users were born in the city or its suburbs and had started using both opioid pills and heroin there, many of the San Francisco users had initiated their pill and sometimes heroin use elsewhere and had migrated to the city from around the country. Nevertheless, patterns of transition of younger injectors were similar in both cities suggesting an evolving national pattern. In contrast, older users in both Philadelphia and San Francisco were more likely to have graduated to heroin injection from non-opiate drugs such as cannabis, methamphetamine and cocaine. Pharmaceutical opioid initiates typically reported switching to heroin for reasons of cost and ease-of-access to supply after becoming physically and emotionally dependent on opioid pills. Many expressed surprise and dismay at their progression to sniffing and subsequently to injecting heroin. Historically and structurally these users found themselves caught at the intersection of two major developments in the opiate supply: (1) an over 500% increase in opiate pill prescription from 1997 to 2005 resulting in easy access to diverted supplies of less stigmatized opiates than heroin and (2) a heroin supply glut, following the US entry of Colombian-sourced, heroin in the early 1990s, that decreased cost and increased purity at the retail level. A nationwide up-cycle of heroin use may be occurring among young inner city, suburban and rural youth fueled by widespread prescription opioid pill use.