Poll: Do you think taxpayer money should go toward Narcan carried by emergency personnel?

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

Over the weekend in Lancaster County, there was a spike in overdoses.

Lancaster EMS, Lancaster County’s busiest emergency services provider, reported treating and transporting 62 overdose patients between Friday morning and Sunday night at midnight.

While most of these cases were due to synthetic marijuana overdoses, the primary issue in Central Pennsylvania is opioid use and overdoses.

Officers began carrying Narcan in order to revive people who have overdosed, but some are against this decision.

For example, one sheriff in Ohio has said his deputies will never carry the medication.

“We don’t do the shots for bee stings, we don’t inject diabetic people with insulin. When does it stop?” Richard Jones told The Washington Post.

“I’m not the one that decides if people live or die. They decide that when they stick that needle in their arm.”

Jones told the Post that his deputies have never carried Narcan and that has been his stance since he was first elected in 2004.

He furthered his stance by saying that Narcan is the wrong approach for a war on opioids that “we’re not winning.”

Jones also said that he favored stronger prevention efforts to prevent people from first using the drug.

Of course, the opioid epidemic is not limited to Central Pennsylvania, as it clearly is affecting the people of Ohio, and the rest of the country as well.

Our question is, do you think taxpayer money should go toward Narcan carried by emergency personnel?

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.