Hello everyone So always on the well side of life. I think you probably all know that little song No Well now if you will have it in your in your mind, and then you will associate that with fallow deer So was fallow deer always white? And I believe that you probably know what fallow deer is or if not, well, I hope I will give you some insights So To start with you have to know that there's two subspecies species of fallow deer and So the you the European fallow deer that most of you probably have seen because it is nowadays the mostly widespread and this is in fact due to humans and And the other one is the Mesopotamian fallow deer that is on the contrary very very restricted Basically from outside they look very different One is bigger than the other one, but when we look at the bones, it's a bit more difficult to see this difference Also, you see here. They have very Different geographic repetition in the Olo Sen so the after the late place show and Time like the European fallow deer was found in Western Natalia and the Mesopotamian fallow deer But they have this same They share the same story with and this relationship with humans that in the fact that they have been moved by humans to Different places maybe more restrictive for the Mesopotamian fallow deer or this is what we kind of knew from before I started to stay in with with that project and I would present you some new new things. I don't have yet like a more general Story for you because I'm still like playing with the data and everything And this is so that they're different repetition that that we know of for the Mesopotamian and the and the European and A fact is that none of none are not native to any of Mediterranean islands. So they have been either brought by humans or they swim. I mean Effectively, they can swim but not on such long distances. So we we know now from like a lot of research that they have been brought by humans So the big the big the overarching objective of my project is like to to provide a new Interpreted a perspective on the biocultural history of fallow deer and like transform of our understanding of like exchange between culture but also there's a few things about like Trying to inform modern conservation policy and especially about the Mesopotamian fallow deer, but also the European one and the so what I'm trying to do first in in the in the archaeology Archaeological level is like trying to different they did two species because it's not it's not that easy and Oh, there's there's been a lot of things assumed, but it's actually it's not it's not easy to distinguish and To to track the fall of the fallow deer dispersal and therefore like human exchange and traits and also understand specific relationship and how they have been managed a Domesticated over time So I'm trying to use like different or I will try to use different strain of data After I am done with what I'm doing at the moment, which is I'm using their geometric morphometrics Which is the quantitative representation and analysis of morphological shape using geometric coordinates instead of linear so we we get a more a More Overall a morphology it's more we we get more detail than just linear measurement and with linear measurement We cannot necessarily differentiate both fallow deer because there's a lot of overlap Because you know that female and male are very sexually dimorphic So they will be a huge overlap that we cannot necessarily tell them apart So like one Bone that I'm working on is the teeth. So this is roughly my protocol Why I'm using like fixed landmark and semi landmarks to try to get a whole geometry of the of the tooth So what I will focus now on like Mediterranean islands because this is the topic of the session But I'm working widely like all over eastern Eurasia So I will focus on Cyprus and you see that there's a lot of sites from Different periods and that was my main field word for a lot for for many years and there's loads and loads and loads of Material there is it's crazy the the relationship that these people had this fallow deer is just amazing and and then I Think in the abstract. Maybe I talked about creed, but I Unfortunately, I won't have access to any of this material. So I have to drop it off But I have well one sample from Sicily and and some samples from Mallorca And I will go there again after to get more because it's very interesting you see So if we go into the the subject of the of the data, so just to just to show you a Quick thing at first. So I I did we do use like modern reference. So here you see like European fellow dear reference that is mainly from the UK and the mess of time and tell the reference is a very small population from Israel that have been reintroduced and You can see like they're very very different But the green in the middle those are palaeolysic must time and fellow deer and you see that is less of a lot So we thought like okay Those ones are like really really really different. So that's probably a result to in breeding and and things So that's just to keep in mind the the conservation informative Conservation policy that Archaeology can can can bring like this population is really is really very very different from what we see in the past So past that a my reference is therefore palaeolysic and this time and fellow deer And when I plotted the deciphered samples at first when I saw I was like But actually so you see there's there's not very much So you have to you have to look a little bit further and then when when you take into account the And the third component you can see that there's there's starting to be like a more a Different shade between groups where that cypress is still like all over the place and I was like what does it mean? I mean why and So we we try to test the the variants of the of the overall population So that's that represent the whole sample from different period and but for each period there's a lot of variance and We came to the conclusion and that's the first that Those population are mixed population and when I say mixed population is like so there's European fellow deer and Mesopotamian fellow deer and possibly hybrids and that's something that is very new because We always assume before that it was Mesopotamian fellow deer that was introduced To to the island and I will come back to that At at the end so the thing is I don't have any DNA to confirm that this the Disamples are very bad if results. So it will be difficult to so in in the state now I can I can say that they're probably a mixed population and Then if we look at Malorca and Sicily, so you can see that there's a very good distinction Mesopotamian So are they are the European fellow deer well for the for the Sicily we know that they are fellow deer and at some point they thought that they were redger, but no they are fellow deer And what about Malorca? Well from Malorca like the antlers says they look they look pretty much like European fellow deer and You you saw like that for them for the morphometrics. They also look fellow deer, but the weird thing is on the mitochondrial DNA so from the mother the genetic Sequence are Mesopotamian fellow deer they're closer to Mesopotamian fellow deer. So what does what does that mean? It's like European and Mesopotamian. Oh, so it seems here that we have like Ibrids like we have the the the clear proof of like the Ibrids so Just to summarize So on Cyprus it seems that the morphology says that there's mixed population and so maybe maybe both maybe average Honestly, when I think at first I was Because I assumed for like all I've learned before that this was the case because we only found that and I couldn't I Just couldn't believe it But when I thought about it, I'm like, but actually that could totally make sense because people in Cyprus have been Coming from different places. We know that they are trading obsidian from Anatolia. We know that some people are coming from 1100 from northern events so before there is like a more island identity there's like a group during the contact and everything from the Neolithic As a revenue thing and through the faculty and then there's start to have exchange again I haven't so I haven't looked like in Detail like through through the time to see if there's a change and stuff I was just like so for now is just like this this can make sense. They can come from different places, but So they could have imported European fellow there must be time and shallows here they hybridize on the island or maybe they already Did Found I read or maybe they hybridize on the continent. I mean, there's there's a no whole possibilities actually it's like Yeah, it's a small question that First Italy well, you know, it's morphology and he says it's your And he was a native so it was imported there by humans and my locker the most She said you're here, but the genetic says So we have like I bridge I bridge and so on on Cyprus, there's there's been this this Relationship with holiday for like over six millennia like very intensive hunting. We know now from like demographic profiles With like all age at first and then younger So there's a change in the strategy like sex ratios more balance before and then more males supposedly younger males that are not necessary for a production so but We we Think that I mean they're never really being domesticated. I don't think there was any Reason to do to do it. It's an island. They're there. They're producing well There's yeah, so But over the time to to manage to to keep them for like six millennia Then he went like really fast bronze age The population started decreasing and like antiquities almost nothing and then they disappear in probably Byzantine time But to to have kept them for so long. They must have managed in a certain way but not necessarily domesticate In in Sicily There's just not much I can say because it's very little material But it's from the Roman period. So it could be I mean most likely like imported Exotic animal that's what was kept in like a vivarium and from alokas so when we know that they are I breeze for the demographic profile we know that we have like Young animals And a high proportion of female. So it looks like they were kind of managed like Livestock and but maybe a bit more extensive than a device. So like but in still constrained area And We know like for example from Roman text Kulmela and Pini that they mentioned the knowledge of like breeding and interweaving between different species so like for example between the dromedary and camel and Horse and donkey that gives a mule. So why actually, why should it not have happened before? And and elsewhere with father we we don't know if it happened in in In nature in a nature state because there's maybe an overlapping area between the two we don't know but maybe it's the fact of human because they have transported them a bit everywhere and When you think about it examples exist for like domesticated animals, they were white once upon a time and they were domesticated so and some domestication led to Earth Not like full domestication. You can tame animals. So just there's lots of possibilities and and Even even now father they are like farmed. So are they domesticated not domesticated? They're kind of and they're quite I mean they're quite gentle animals when they weren't in route. So For the for the mail. So, yeah, thank you for your attention. And I hope to have more more stories in


Live from Las Vegas, it's theCUBE. Covering Edge 2016, brought to you by IBM. Now, here are your hosts, Dave Vellante and Stu Miniman. We're back, this is theCUBE. This is, we're wrapping up day two here at IBM Edge. This is the fifth year that theCUBE has been to IBM Edge. theCUBE is the worldwide leader in live tech coverage. Major Hayden this year is a principal architect at Rackspace. Good to see you, thanks for coming on. And thanks for having me. So you build OpenStack Clouds? A few times, yeah. All right, how's that going? Very well. So I work on our private cloud product at Rackspace. We call it Rackspace Private Cloud, pretty good name. And so what we do is, all over on the joke. So what we do is we go and build private clouds for customers to their spec, whatever they need. If they need storage change up, we change it. So a lot of what I work on is the open source deployment components with the OpenStack Ansible project within OpenStack. And what it does is takes all the components, takes Nova, Glance, Sender, everything, and deploys it to spec. So if a customer gives us a spec and says, I want Sender configured in this way or I want to configure it with the storage device, we can go and configure that and do that deployment form and then maintain it going forward. So that's just plain Ansible. It's an automated workflow deployment system, right? So if you're familiar with Puppet or Chef or Salt or any of the other ones, Ansible does a lot of the same things. So it'll deploy configuration files, it'll start services, stop services, and do quite a few other things in selling packages. But I think the reason that we really like it is that it's Python based, so it's OpenStack, so it makes it very easy to go back and forth. The other nice thing is you don't have to worry about an agent on the other machine. You know, you just actually just run the deployment as long as SSH is running, it works. You don't have to worry about if there's an agent on the other side that is up or down or not behaving or anything like that. All right, so Ansible was acquired by Red Hat, so no concern there. Obviously Red Hat's going to keep it open source. That's their whole mantra. I certainly hope so. No, absolutely. Jim Wider says, never again will I do anything that even smells like it might not be open source. So, yeah. No, we love it because it's something we can build upon too. So if we find something in Ansible that's very close to what we need, but we just need a little something extra, we can go and write a plugin or we can write a module and just add that in and deliver something for a customer a lot faster. And you've personally made a lot of contributions to open source, right? What's the state of OpenStack today? How would you describe it? Update our audience. So it's growing like crazy. Every time I turn around, there's a new project that's doing something or we'll be sitting there at the office and say, I wish we had something that did this and we'd look around and be like, hey, there's one that started six months ago, maybe we should go take a look. So for me, I feel like it's really vibrant. Like there's a lot of the small stuff that we used to sweat that we don't sweat anymore. Like we have agreements upon requirements. We have agreements upon how things are configured. Configuration options still are a little bit crazy, but a lot of this low hanging fruit that we used to deal with is now gone. And so we can work at lower levels within the stack a lot faster. So if you need to add a plugin to Neutron or you need to have Nova do something that it didn't do before, there's already kind of an agreement on how you should do that. You don't have to kind of step around and figure out how to do it. I guess, can you help us kind of unpack that a little bit, because when I talk to the community, simple is not the term word that comes up when people talk about open stack. It's not something that people are just going to go do it themselves, but a lot of ways that's probably where Rackspace fills in some of the gaps of, where does Rackspace fill in the gaps today? I say, where is it things that you put it together and where is it code? Where is it deployment? Where is it knowledge and fanatical support and all that?  So what we like to equate it to is, you wouldn't go order all the parts to make a car and make it yourself. You're going to go down to the car dealership, you're going to pick one that's available that you trust, from a vendor you trust. And so that's what Rackspace does. So we spend our time in the community understanding what's going on, listing the people and the projects, and then what we do is go and make really good choices on how we deploy everything. And then from there, if there's things that change or if a customer has new demands, we try to make really good choices around how that should be deployed. So I guess the long and short of it is, is that if you have a vendor that knows the open stack ecosystem well and knows how to put the parts together, it can actually be pretty simple to operate. But if you're just coming at it from the get-go and trying to grab the parts and stick them together and figure out how to get the hardware and the hypervisors together, it can be kind of a rough experience. Yeah. Where is the solutions that you're putting together helping customers beyond just the infrastructure layer? I think the hot topics we've talked about at this show, things like security, networking tends, networking and storage both tend to be kind of boat anchors for a lot of IT infrastructures. How do the Rackspace solutions help there? So first off on security, within our product, and we've done this in open source, is that we apply security hardening for you in an automated fashion. So it runs, takes about a minute to 90 seconds to run during the deployment, and you can fix it and forget it. So when your auditor shows up and says, hey, it's time for your PCI audit, are you hardening your systems? You can show them the document, we're hardening to the spec, here's our exceptions. And I think the rest of it around networking and storage is being able to, instead of going to a customer and saying, what are the myriad of options that you want to choose from? Maybe we have a small set that we recommend and say, okay, you can have storage locally on the hypervisor, or maybe you hook it up to a sand device, or maybe you have Ceph, or maybe you have sender, just like a plain LVM type sender. So we go to the customer with scenarios, and of course if they need to customize from there, we can go and do customizations. But we can say, hey look, based on what you told us you want to accomplish, these two scenarios might work for you, and then from there we can make small customizations, instead of going fully custom from the start. Yeah, so we're quite bullish on open source, love to support all the solutions out there. We've definitely heard from customers gone from the, oh, there's open source there, to oh, I want open source. How many of the clients that you're working with are not only asking for open source, but actively contributing to various projects? Quite a few actually, and it's growing, slowly but surely, and sometimes I'll find, for example, in our OpenStack project, OpenStack Ansible that does all the orchestration. We'll have someone show up and say, hey, I'd love to contribute code, and we look at where they're from, and they're like, oh, this company's huge.  And they're like, yeah, we do, and we found your stuff, and we want to start using that. So it's really exciting, and I think the thing I like about that the most is that we find out these use cases that we didn't think about before. So we might say, oh, look, this will never be a bottleneck, and someone will show up from, I don't know, cable or a telecom vendor and say, oh, yes, that is a bottleneck, and then we can regroup around that and try and figure it out. So you're talking about a big financial services institution? Potentially, yeah.  Definitely, yeah, so there's a lot of people who do Dev and test, like for example, like maybe you have an IT department that doesn't want to go and rack servers constantly. They can go rack a bunch, deploy OpenStack on it, and then allocate that out to people. So if marketing needs to test drive a marketing campaign, they can do it. If finance needs to go and crunch a bunch of numbers, they can do it.  But at least it gets you out of the data center. You're not racking a box, everything's software defined. All right, so let's talk about Rackspace, the company for a little bit. There's been a lot of changes over the last few years.  You've been there for a bit. You know, what's going on there? What's the kind of the big, you know, overarching strategy? Yeah, so I mean, I've been there for 10 years and we've gone through lots of changes in 10 years. So I've been there when we were private and public. And so one thing I'll say is what we always try and do and one thing that we do is we always reorganize ourselves around what customers need. And of course that changes a lot, you know, as technologies show up or as different demands from customers show up. And so I think one thing we've always done is really try to figure out like, what do the customers need and how can we be there to serve them in the best way possible? So some of the newest stuff we've been working on is saying, we'll support you wherever you go. So if a customer says, hey, I love this offering from Amazon. I want to go there. We'll say, hey, we can help you with that offering. We can help you manage it. And then we can figure out how to deploy it. So a good example I like to give is if a customer says, hey, I need a database on Amazon. Well, we can go and give them a recommendation of putting the database server in EC2 or using the minus QL as a service and then kind of the trade-offs you get between each and the pricing. So I think really, I guess the summary of that is we try to adapt to what our customers need. So if there's changes we need to make, if there's, if we need to shift things in the business, we make those shifts for the customers. And what about, what's the relationship with IBM? What are you guys doing with those guys? Is it a power play? Yeah, yeah, so open power. That's true, yeah. So it's been talked about a lot at the conference already but we're very involved with open power. I think one of the things we've seen, I think it's been beaten to death at this conference but Moore's law is kind of going away a bit. I guess that's an understatement. I saw some tweets. Quite a few. We're going to say it one more time. But yeah, I mean all day yesterday that was the thing, Moore's law is going away. So you have to have more specialized hardware for specialized workloads. And so we at Rackspace have looked into power as one of those things where combining power with CAPI, the accelerators, being able to give customers greater performance, the performance that they're looking for that wouldn't necessarily come from a chip refresh. So if a customer has a database workload or some type of computational workload, we can find a way to accelerate that and say instead of waiting for that next processor generation, let's accelerate that workload to where you don't really have to worry about it anymore and you can go focus on something else. And so open power is something we've been involved with and we created the barrel-eye board which I believe you can actually go out and purchase from a vendor today. And we're consistently working on that with IBM. Great. All right, well thank you very much for coming on theCUBE. We'll give you the last word. Final thoughts on what's next for you guys? What's next for you personally? Where are you headed? Well, I definitely think there's more on power. I'm excited about these specialized workloads, like finding the exact machine that can get you that performance that you're looking for and taking those things that almost you're like you were afraid of, like I want to do deep learning but I don't have the computational power for that. Well, what if you did? And really trying to figure out how to get that to work. Great, excellent. Well, thanks very much for coming on theCUBE. Major, I appreciate it. Thanks. All right, keep it right there, everybody. Stu and I would be back at the wrap day two of Edge right after this is theCUBE. We're live from IBM Edge, right back.


Friends, on this special occasion, I salute all the brave hearts who sacrificed their lives for establishing peace in the Korean Peninsula. Korea is proud to have contributed to this cause by deploying 60 para-filled hospitals in the Korean Peninsula during the war. I salute the resilience and resolve of the Korean people who have built a great country rising from the assays of war. I also appreciate the efforts made by President Moon Jae-in to preserve and promote peace in the Korean Peninsula. The government and people of India stand by the government and the people of the Republic of Korea in their quest for permanent peace in the Korean Peninsula.


Hi everyone, we're gonna take a couple of seconds here while people are still trickling in and then we're gonna get started. Okay, good evening everyone. We're going to get started here. I'm Adelina Iften, I'm a professor at the Schulich School of Law and the coordinator of the Criminal Justice Coalition. It is my pleasure to welcome you tonight to the last event of the Criminal Justice Speaker Series. And we are going to end the series with a very topical subject. We are gonna be talking about the opioid crisis and the safe supply. We have three wonderful speakers that will be talking about their work on this issue, both their work separately and their work together. First, we have Matt Bohr, who is the program coordinator with the Canadian Association of People Who Use Drugs. And he will be in conversation with my colleagues, Professor Matt Firder, who is also the director of the Health Law Institute at Delhousey, as well as Professor Sheila Wildman, who is also with the Health Law Institute at Delhousey. And she is a founding fellow with the McCacken Institute for Public Policy. Before I turn it to Matt, I just a couple of things that I want to note. First of all, you're gonna see at the bottom of the screen, there is a Q&A box. So I do want to invite you to use it and to type your questions there during the talk. And I will come back at the end after our three speakers would have presented and filtered the questions for them. Also do note that the session is recorded. You're not gonna appear on the recording, only the speakers will, but you will be able to watch it afterwards on the Shirley Schools of Laws YouTube channel. Okay, and with that said, I'm gonna welcome our three speakers and turn it to Matt. My name is Matthew Bon on the program coordinator with the Canadian Association of People Who Use Drugs. And I just finished my slide, Jack. So I was hoping that Alina would talk a little bit longer but we're good to go. So let me share my screen here and put us in slide show mode, play from the beginning. So as I said, my name is Matthew Bon. You know, I am someone who uses drugs pretty much daily. My drug of choice is fentanyl. And I like to think that I'm a survivor of a overdose crisis because I've known way too many people that haven't made it out a lot. You know, I actually carry a lot of grief and trauma over that because sometimes I think that, you know, why not me and why them, but trying to change that energy into something positive. You know, and last year I had an opportunity. I was doing a lot of freelance writing and they called my friend in Montreal and I said, you know, can we write a letter to an editor to like a medical donor and he's like, sure. And I really didn't know what I was getting myself into. And I knew he was really, really smart and really knew how to kind of navigate that system. And I had no idea. And a fun little fact, the first draft of this was actually written while I was on mushrooms. So just keep that in mind if you ever read this paper. Couple of my national and international affiliations, I was pretty much affiliated with every local harm reduction organization that you could imagine from Directional 180, Mainline, Hand-Up, Halifix. You name it, I probably have worked there if it's over the cold, if it's Coverdale. But now I've been doing more national and international work. So I am the program coordinator with the Canadian Association of People Use Drugs. We do a lot of drug policy work and we're based at Oda Dartmouth. I'm a national board member for the community and students for sensible drug policy. We actually have a Dalhousie chapter so I encourage you to either reach out to me or reach out to some of the chapter, the chapter coordinator with the national board or I can put you in contact with the two local chapter leaders and revive this chapter. I'm one of the leads in this organic group that kind of happened really because of COVID which was the Pan-American Network of Drug User Activists and we're actually looking at creating a Delphi survey right now to look at people in North America, Central America, Latin America and South America. People use drugs and see what are the real issues that people who use drugs are facing and experiencing. And I recently took on an international board seat for the International Network on Health and Hepatitis and Substance User INSU which is out of Australia. I'm hoping I get to go there this year. I know Matt's gonna shake his head that maybe Farmer will pay for me but we'll go to the next slide. So before I do the rest of the presentation I'd like to do, I know it was social land acknowledgement and just an acknowledgement for the acknowledgement is that this is just one very small piece of what we need to do to really build some meaningful and meaningful relationship building with the indigenous tribes of Turtle Island. So I'd like to acknowledge that I'm presenting today for McMoggy, the Ancestral and Unceded Territory of the McMonnell people. This territory is covered by the British Treaty covered by the Treaties of Peace and Friendship which McMack and the Wulass II he signed at the British Crown in 1725. The treaties did not deal with the surrender of lands and resources but in fact recognize McMoggy and the Wulass II we key title and established the rules for what was to be an ongoing relationship between nations. Honoring this treaty relationship through land acknowledgement is just one of the many steps that can be taken towards reconciliation as outlined in the 94 calls to action issued by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada in 2015. And this is my favorite paragraph to it but I think we all really have to think about what we're gonna do to really become more self-aware with our cultural competency. So every individual in every institution has a role to play in making the need to change this to dismantle systemic racism and oppression against black and indigenous people in Canada. We think one action that anyone can take is raising your own cultural awareness, learning about other cultures, asking questions, reading, listening, becoming more self-aware. It may seem simple enough but we're going into a process and we have to be prepared to be humble at any point because we're entering a lifelong journey and we will make mistakes. As long as we keep an open mind and open heart through this acknowledgement and the harm reduction philosophy we commit ourselves to this lifelong work in creating effective change within our society. So I don't think I read the title of my publication but I have it right here so I will read it because this word is not a really well-known word even among some people that you would think that I would thought may have known it but unless you're an epidemiologist or whatnot you may have not heard it. So the publication was called addressing the syndemic of HIV, hepatitis C, overdose and COVID-19 among people who use drugs, the potential roles for decriminalization and safe supply. So when we're talking about the pandemic and epidemic and overdose crisis, a housing crisis, public health emergencies, for people who use drugs and a lot of other marginalized and racialized communities what we're really talking about is the syndemic. Knowing a syndemic is when two or more social or health diseases or issues negatively impact each other to worsen the disease trajectory so come for each illness. A great example is if somebody is homeless and they have HIV and they're hepatitis C co-infection there's a good chance that they may not be adhering to their hepatitis C medication or even their anti-retroviral medication for their HIV. So that's really gonna impact their co-infection. So I'd like to think of this crisis as a syndemic. So you'll see this word and I'll kind of explain it a little bit more as we go. So first of all, I just wanted to acknowledge some of the people that we lost this year and up in the left-hand corner where you have Jesse Harvey he's from Boston and why do I have somebody from Boston here because we actually got pretty close to the pandemic and he started the first church of safe injection and he was gonna try to apply for a religious exemption to hand out safe syringes and drug testing in the locks on cats. And Maine, Massachusetts only public health authorities can give out safe supplies and it's illegal if you don't otherwise but you can tell he went out in his red car every day and he did it and this was a guy that was going places and every time I hear somebody doesn't matter if I know them or not I really feel something very strong and it goes back to what I said at the beginning and I don't know why them and not me. Jude Bryant is like the mother Teresa of harm reduction advocacy. She's from Australia. Luckily she didn't die of a drug overdose but I thought it was good to acknowledge her and all the work that she has done. I recently wrote a piece for filter on women who are leading the safe supply movement in Canada and I wanted to kind of put her in but it just didn't really fit. So I wanted to acknowledge her today and then this one up in the corner is probably that the hardest one that I put up there but I thought I had to, you know I'm still grieving over Jesse. Jesse's the one on the your left, my right. Well, I guess my left now too but he's this guy here. I've known him for quite some time. This was a day where we had rock the dock come down to calm good solutions. We did some fundraising. You can see we had our disposal bucket as we got all the money and we did actually a really good job Jesse was really getting, he was getting and he was trying his hardest and I really believe that the absence based culture and health acts killed him, right? Like he tried to, he came off his opioid agnes therapy program and then he used again and his tolerance wasn't the same and he didn't make it. So back to the syndemic. So the first syndemic was and it's still going on was the Savva's Syndemic, the Substance Abuse Finance and HIV AIDS Syndemic and this would have been, you know, late 90s. What has I said before, the hallmark of the syndemic is the presence of two or more disease states that adversely interact with each other and negatively effecting the mutual course of each disease trajectory, enhancing vulnerability in which are made more delirious by experience and inequities. So practically people living in poverty, people living with, you know, multiple mental health and social issues, physical issues, they're all in syndemics and you know, really COVID-19 is not a pandemic, it is a syndemic and we should be looking at it as one. So a big part of what I do at Caput is a national drug user group and we are an organization that was formed in 2009, unofficially, officially in 2011. We received funding in 2018 through the Substance Use and Addiction Program with Health Canada. Our whole board is made up of current or former people who use drugs. We don't have any non-drug users on your board and I would say at least 80% of them are current drug users, including myself. We do everything in English and French. This is one of our most infamous documents. I actually would love to do a bibliometric analysis and write a paper on how many times this has been cited in academic literature but I learned a new trick where I can actually get a DOI number for grade literature. So that's what I'll be doing with some of our new material coming out. But if you want the links to them where I can send out the slides and all our material afterwards. But so safe supply is not your traditional form of opioid agnes therapy. It's not methadone. It's not buprenorphine. It's not slow release oral morphine. Some may even argue it's not heroin-assisted treatment. Safe supply is meant to be safe and it's meant to be taken home, unsupervised. We all know that drugs have consequences to them but they have benefits and they have risks but we speak so much on the harms that it de-abilitates research. It has this social perspective that just doesn't allow us to get to where we need to be to prove and show the evidence even though I would argue there's tons of evidence proving that safe supply is in need and we need it yesterday. The states have 200 people a day dying. We have 14, that's a lot of lives. The definition we have in this booklet is safe supplies. Any substance or drug that is traditionally only found on the illegal market and we wanna see a regulated supply. Now where drugs are still criminalized, the safest and most direct route to assay supplies through medical prescribing but I'm someone who uses fentanyl daily and the lot it's just I'm not gonna cut it. Heroin Compassion Clubs. This is another form of safe supply. This is probably one of my favorite in the great literature documents. It was created by the BCCSU and a Compassion Club. I'm not sure if everybody knows what one is but a Compassion Club is like think about the medical marijuana days where everybody got together and backed each other up, they put all their money in, they pulled it up, they got a cheaper price, they got a better product and we do that with heroin and not surprisingly, it's mainly women who do this with heroin because a woman can't just go into a heroin assisted treatment program and ask for heroin if they have two kids or maybe if they're just not even a parent but unlike the last thing we need is these evidence-based services and then CPS getting in the way and taking away children of mothers that are just trying to stay alive. So a few safe supply initiatives and you may see some names here that are familiar. This is our older one though. So this would have been our first draft of our securing safe supply during COVID-19 and beyond scoping review and knowledge mobilization. We have Matthew Herter and Sheila Wildman. We also have myself Natasha Tuznerd who's the Executive Director of Canadian Association of People Who Use Drugs, Michael Puglies, and Brianna Chang and this project wouldn't have happened without them. Emily Kamal, Claire Botkin, Dr. Claire Botkin, Dr. Tommy Brothers, Dr. Leah Gange, Candace LePage, Dr. Aiden Schien, Dr. Dan Lerner. So we have an international team and we were granted a CIHR Knowledge Synthesis Grant to look at to do a scoping review on safe supply and we knew going into this that there wasn't gonna be a lot of literature on safe supply and we had to get crafty and I'll let Matt speak a little bit more to that. But if you look at the authors, myself and Natasha, the two drug users are the first two and I think our team is the best research experience I ever had and I feel very lucky to be able to have been there, to have been a part of it from day one and I don't wanna jinx anything but we have it under review at the International Journal of Drug Policy and yeah, soon we'll have a publication on this. Another safe supply, I don't know if I'd call it a paper, I'd call it more of a guidance document. I want I think like four national safe supply working groups now but this one was done by Jessica Hales, Dr. Jillian Cola, Thomas Mann, Emmett O'Reilly, Dr. Nankie Ray, Dr. Andrea Serader, Kaput actually was able to do an external review on this and they acknowledged it in the document. This is a policy options piece that actually me and my two panelists got to write and if you see the title, it's the expertise people use drugs must be essential to the design of safe supply and there was a couple of comments kind of like, yeah, wouldn't that be great? And I think we're getting there, takes a long time to change policy and we're trying to give free drugs to people but we will be there and we will get there. I took the picture in the background. Those are the drugs we're fighting for right now. Deloaded eight, the brand name. But if people who use drugs were not mainly involved, the quality of the research and its impact on policy and service delivery is likely to suffer. And Matt really did work his magic and made this to the piece that it was meant to be. And this is another piece that I worked with Sheila Allen and I was in jail in 2018. I just got out of jail in March 15, 2018. Time flies, but it also feels like I don't know how much, I don't know how I got all this done in a short period of time that I'm somebody that's on methadone and been on and off methadone my whole life.  It doesn't matter if you meet all the criteria for opioid use disorder, you just do not get started. And so I was on methadone, luckily, but every day I had to get stripped, strip-circ. So I had to strip down my bare skin.  And you know, I always think back and I think about how many of those inmates told me that they were at Shelburne, that they were at Waterville and that they did get sexually abused. So they're reliving their trauma every day, but they need it. They need this drug to feel comfortable in their own skin and yet they have to be re-traumatized every time they have to do it. So some knowledge translation products that came from, you know, a lot of the work that we have done lately. This was one, so the policy options piece was a knowledge translation product that came from our CIJ grant. We needed drug users need us doctors to step up with safe supply. That was another knowledge translation product. Safe supply doesn't just have to be opioids. We need stimulants as well. One of our national CSSDP board members wrote that. I wrote this piece on meth adults and it's called, you know, if you listen to crackdown and if you don't, you should because it's like the best podcast ever. But essentially they uncovered wrongdoing and from the BC government, the BC College of Pharmacists and Malmuff Pharmaceutical that they did a switch change where they said, you know, we'll give you meth dose, but we want everybody that's on the provincial framework here, that's on methadone. We want every single one of those clients. And this was back in like 2015, 2014, 2015 and it's spread across Canada, of course. And I remember like 2016, 2017. Now we're struggling. You know, I ended up in jail on 2017. You know, it was because my methadone wasn't working. You know, I couldn't, it didn't last me a whole none. And now I'm starting to realize, you know, some of the things I did were my fault. You know, that should never happen. I overdosed last July. I think the pandemic affected me a lot more than I thought it did. I think I held a lot in for a while. And you finally wrote about it and made me feel a lot better. And you know, ironically, I don't know, a month later, I responded to an overdose. And I'll stop touching my most. I responded to an overdose. And if anybody knows me and you see me in my book bag, I always have naloxone dangling from my bag. And this, this evening, this guy never had access to a kit ever. We have no social take home naloxone program. He had no idea what that is. You know, like, why is that, you know, what's the no social health authority doing? Like, you know, we have somebody who uses drugs daily and they have no idea what to take home naloxone program. It's a, it's a joke. I gave him my last kit and I walked up to score some notes. And I was like, I don't know what to do with that. And all with my friend. And I gave him a little bit of extra and he overdosed in seconds. I never seen someone go down so fast. I didn't have an ox on kit. I, you know, remembering all my harm reduction methods. I put them down on his back. It was kind of surreal. Somebody is probably about seven us there. I'd say four people left for you away. The owner of the host was looking for naloxone. Some guys, they do me. And, you know, like, it was, I didn't think he was going to make it. You know, I really didn't think he was going to make it. I don't know what to do with naloxone. I just, I don't know what he would have done if he didn't make it. But, you know, luckily we don't need to test compressions. That's a last resort. When you drive from an opioid overdose.  Not.  The test compressions could be the very, very, very last resort. So if you don't have naloxone, you just do rescue breathing, you know, you put the neck back.  And you can even kind of hear them breathe a little bit more each time. And I say to life doing that. I was a little bit surprised by the publication. I'm probably over time, so I'll try to speed it up. A little bit of background. Information. It was just supposed to be an editor to the editor or an editor, a letter to the editor. Got turned down at the Lancet. Got a dream big. journal of drug policy led us down really smoothly. And I wrote this other piece for the conversation just a little bit before. And I remember the journal of studies on alcohol and drugs. They retweeted it and said how much they liked it. And I kind of said, oh, I'd love to publish in your journal or whatever. I didn't even know what kind of journal it was at the time.  We'll reach out. We'd love to have you. And I thought it might have been like a predatory journal, but it turns out it's through Rutgers. Rutgers University. It's the oldest. Academic journal and focused on alcohol and drugs. The editor in chief said, can you take this letter to the editor, which was focused on safe supply and combine it with your decolonization. Article and expanded into 2000 words. And I said, we sure can. And so it really happened very organically. We got Dr. Mark Tindall as our senior author, which is really cool. And we also put a land acknowledgement in there, which you don't always see every day. So I won't get into too much of, you know, the piece I will share it. But you know, essentially we argued that. We're in a, we're in a syndemic. We're not in an overdose crisis. And we need decriminalization and safe supply, or this is continued. It's going to get worse, you know, 81,000 people in the States died in 2020. They're projecting a hundred thousand and like, one is enough enough, right? Decriminalization is always possible. If there's political will. And we just need to push for it. And a safe supply of drugs, you know, the landscape in the States is a little different where the, the DEA actually controls all what doctors can prescribe and things like that. They're kind of like our health Canada in a way, which is absolutely insane. I think we should sue the DEA. Maybe Matt, Sheila, I want to take that on, but, you know, like I really think they probably played more role in this overdose crisis than anybody else. I don't know. Did I take out? I must. Oh, so we had, we had three. Commentaries written on our piece. One was from Stanford. One was from. Brown low. In the University of California. And one was from Yale and Kathleen Carroll. Rest in peace. She passed away suddenly this. This year. And she did a lot, you know, like, they didn't all agree with what we were saying, but I looked at her body and she did a lot of work through this field, you know, and. I respect that regardless if they're. Thinking what I'm thinking, you know, I think change happens when. You know, people have different perspectives. And have an open mind. And they're willing to listen to each other. So the journal let us write another piece. They had all these crazy names like unsafe supply. Why I say so why won't help. One was called. Use without consequence. And then there was another one like. Let's put the. The unicorn before the horse or something or. So we use a famous Bob Dylan quote. The times are a change in. Addressing misconceptions. North America's. Over those crisis. Over those crisis. And. Yeah. That was kind of like my. I stole this from Mark Tindall. I've seen him do it. I didn't do. But it is like one of my, my favorite. Banksy photos. So keep your coins. I want change. I'd argue we need change. And thank you for listening. Thank you so much, Matt, for sharing all of that with us. And thank you for the work that you are doing. And you continue to do. To trigger change. Thank you. We're now going to turn it to, to Matt. To hear more about the work that. That the three of you are doing. And thank you so much for your time. Thank you so much. Thank you. And thanks Matt for. Really setting the conversation up. I'll be brief just to give more time for discussion. For folks after Sheila has a turn as well. So just. Just a couple of points I wanted to share with the group. The first thing is. That. You know, this was a, so we started working together. Matt and I had met. A lot of my work's been in drug policy, but I've tended to focus on drugs that have been approved for prescription purposes. And, you know, how well the regulatory system is working. Do we really know if they're safe or not. And raising questions about, you know, some of the drugs that contributed to the overdose crisis, like oxycodone. And the way the poor decisions that I think health Canada, the U.S. regulator has made in licensing those drugs. And so to sort of come at this differently, to think where are we now. And what is actually the safest thing to do and actually think about making some of these drugs that. At least in earlier work that I've done. I have great raised questions about why they were let on the marketplace, but to shift and think through, well, you know, there's a serious harm and a lot of that harm. If you really understand what's happening on the ground through talking to people like Matt and Natasha Kaput and many others. You see that if you don't know what's in the drug or the conditions in which you consume it are so deeply unsafe that making sure that you can at least remove one of those risks from the equation, right? Knowing the contents or composition of the drug, what its dosage really is that it's not laced with something that you're not anticipating is so critical, or at least one piece of the puzzle and reducing the overall incidence of harm. But for me, it was a shift in my work because, because of what I had done before and being critical about how some of these drugs had entered the market in the first place. So it was a really incredibly important opportunity for me to learn if I can just put it in those selfish terms from experts like Matt, you know, and so it's been an incredible journey to be on. So I just wanted to say a tiny bit more about the research that Matt highlighted there when he sort of talked about us getting crafty. So we got one of these, you know, COVID grants, thinking about people who use drugs and how to reduce harm. And this idea of trying to pull together all of the research that's out there around safe supply, which is this kind of emerging concept you saw in that document that Matt had up in his slides around safe supply that could put the Canadian Association of People Who Use Drugs, you know, they created this sort of groundbreaking document to sort of articulate what that means from a perspective of people who use drugs in its full scope, right? And it's a concept that physicians or people like me, who have been studying the regulatory system in certain ways struggle to understand the way because we're thinking about risks without necessarily attention to what's happening on the ground at times. And so we got one of these grants to sort of say, well, what's the state of the knowledge? We're in COVID. It's harder to see physicians. It's harder to source drugs that you may need to use. And so, you know, what could we learn from previous disasters or public health emergencies when people need medicines, need drugs, but there are all these barriers for public health reasons, natural disasters. Those kinds of real world events that can shape things up. And so we pulled together none of us had ever worked before. And it's really a credit to Matt and Natasha Caput and other people who through the research process we involved in the research that really brought us together, I think, and pulled together because we saw the importance of the issues. But we were worried about this. So I know there's at least a few academics in the participants list, but others might be quite interested in this as well, at least I hope you will be. We did something called a scoping review. And for a legal academic like myself, a scoping review, if I'm being honest, is kind of a fancy way of saying I'm doing a lit review. You just sort of make exactly what you did in the process of doing the research more transparent. You say, I looked at this many papers. Here are the terms I used to search the literature. But to me, it seemed like a bit of a game, right? You're sort of making a big deal about your methodology, but it's actually about doing a really good literature review at the end of the day. So that was the method we adopted because we figured we could pull together and see if there's important insights in the literature. But of course, we were worried about that too. We were worried about what the literature didn't show for a very specific reason, which is if we're trying to pull together the knowledge about how do you make drugs available to people who need them in the context of a public health emergency like COVID, well, if there actually isn't very much relevant literature, even drawing analogies to natural disasters or other kinds of medicines, then there's a real risk that we sort of reproduce the status quo, right? We generate this scoping review, this fancy literature review, which essentially says there isn't very much evidence about how to do this well. And that could feed into folks who have a hesitation or aren't yet persuaded that safe supply is the way to reduce harm. They might say, conservatively, there's not enough evidence for us to act, so we need to study it rather than act. And so we actually messed with the methodology in our process because of anticipating that problem that a scoping review might actually just kind of feed into those conservative perspectives from our point of view. And so we structured our research process to try and account for that, to account for the fact that the literature might be really thin and not help us that much.  But we also built in an advisory committee that acted like a consultant. So when we developed search strategies or we started to find relevant literature or things that we thought might be relevant, we would consult through Matt and Natasha in particular a group of people with living experience or lived experience, people who use drugs, about what we were seeing in the literature, what was missing, what was not there. Because if we didn't write, the kind of things that rise to the level of a publication in a medical journal may not actually match the insights, knowledge and expertise of people who know what's happening on the ground. And so we were kind of messing with the method with a very clear understanding that the methodology might end up producing a document that doesn't tell us really much about what to do, given the scope of the syndemic that Matt talked about. So one of the things that I think we hope to do in the future is actually write about our process, that we didn't just do a scoping review or lit review as such, but we did it in this more inclusive way. And that was one of the central things for us, like there's lots of research that happens in the university where people who have insights and expertise but they're not part of the university are sort of tokenistically engaged rather than meaningfully engaged. And so it was really critical for us to try and counter that in our process and in the knowledge we actually produced and we have to keep attending to that, right? We're sort of in the middle of this in some ways. And so that's really important for us moving forward. So I just wanted to highlight that kind of process piece, but I'll turn it over to Sheila to say some more. Thanks. Thanks, Matt. Both Matt. That was wonderful. And I'm just so pleased to have been able to be part of the research project that Matt Herter has just described in that bond before him. And also a little bit of other writing that the three of us did in a policy options piece and that Matt, I'm going to turn it over to you now in a piece published in the conversation, which I want to talk a little bit about because for the few minutes that I'm going to take, I'd like to talk about some of the learnings or the insights that have come out of the work that we've done together. So across lines and in that, I mean the lines between conventional learnings and the work that we've done together and the work that Matt Herters and folks with lived experience or street level expertise in the way that we've worked in the projects that were just described. So that kind of work, that kind of working across lines really affects the kinds of questions that you ask. The kinds of insights that Herters just described and also thereby the kinds of policy solutions that you're likely to work toward. So we all come to research with bases of experiences and of values that affect the questions that we ask and the kind of learnings that we have toward interpretation of the data that we see but as was just described this was a very intentional way of bringing together different perspectives and experiences in order to arrive at something that we hoped would shake up in some sense the sorts of policy stasis that we've seen for so long. So two things that I want to talk about briefly. One goes to the harms of criminalization and incarceration. So I think we all recognize that there are many ways to criminalization and incarceration of people who use drugs and we're living in a time right now Bill C 22 is something that was in the background here. We're living in a time where decriminalization of at least simple possession of drugs is very close at hand at least a form of decriminalization but it's so important to keep our eye on those things that we can't really develop this tonight but I'd go further in light of the research we've done together and also recommend that we think very carefully about the harms of controlling forms of treatment so controlling forms of putative alternatives to criminalization and incarceration of people who use drugs. That's very central learning for people with both mats. The first insight comes out of the piece that Matt one of the pieces that Matt Bond showed and it was written about a year ago as I said it was published in the conversation it was called fueling a crisis and was a comment on the opioid syndemic as Matt has described and there were three things that came out of that that were really memorable to me and this was the first thing that we started with a physician in Ontario so first thing that we started with was a statistic in fact a few statistics right as one often does in research and so we pointed out that opioid related deaths were increasing among incarcerated people so inside prisons and jails but also we pointed out a very disturbing statistic around post-release so we know and we're drawing on other research here that in the two weeks after release a prisoner's risk of overdose is more than 50 times higher than in the general population that's in the two weeks after release and that one in ten of all overdose deaths is a prisoner released in the last year so pretty massive indictment of the way that our system of criminalizing and incarcerating people who use drugs harms those people and in this case we're talking about mortality and then second we made a point and this is now at the policy level just to kind of focus in a little bit more we highlighted a policy at one of our local jails here in Nova Scotia Central Correctional Central Nova Scotia Correctional Facility which has a policy that's actually developed by our health authority which looks after the health of folks incarcerated there and one of their policy states that opioid agonist therapy shall not be provided to those who were not in treatment in the community so prior to their incarceration meaning that unless you've been in treatment prior you're not going to get OAT which means you have to withdraw which is a pretty harsh thing and it also means that folks are incentivized to use illicitly inside which is itself harmful it's very risky and the other side of this is that if you're not using inside your tolerance is going down and this contributes to the risk of overdose when you're out so that was kind of a second point that policy is something that has sat kind of a target of lots of criticism for many years and it continues to sit there and then third and this comes out of Matt's contribution to that piece some qualitative development and details about the policy just described and other policies relating to receipt of opioid agonist therapy in jails so Matt wrote a paragraph that was very personal much like he just earlier relate to you about the experience of strip searching the humiliation and the potential triggering of past traumas and he went further and described some of the systems people use to divert medication and so on and just to read it we ended up translating it to third person but we kept those insights and he says I'm just reading from the piece others who want the medication to prevent their own withdrawal symptoms target prisoners receiving OAT people soon start diverting their medication for instance by vomiting it up and straining it through a sock for someone else to use if someone says no to a demand to divert their OAT they may be subject to violence so this piece this insight that's written in the third person it's a piece of research originated in a personal experience that we linked up right through our co-creation of knowledge in that piece that we linked up with the statistics with the policy but that qualitative development is central to the effectiveness of this piece and I guess I'm going to have to stop there but that's meant to be just one illustration of the ways that the connections can be made between you know kind of statistical another relation based or policy based research and the really fine grained insights of street level or in this case is institution level knowledge okay I'm going to stop so that we have a little bit of time for questions thank you so much Eli thank you so much to the two meds for this incredible talk I don't even know where to start with the comments I'd have a lot of questions to ask you but I do we only have about minutes left so I do want to invite the people in the audience to ask if to see if they want to come on and ask questions or type them in the Q&A and maybe in the meanwhile while we wait for a question or two maybe I'm curious how the three of you ended up working together on this like in particular how come that you Sheila and Matt ended up working together with Matt Vaughn do you want me to answer this or do you want them to answer this why don't you answer it um that's a good question so Matt and I met at ATV some I think April 15th and 2019 that Martha Painter put on and I spoke and Dr. Lisa Barrett was there and and we kind of just really clicked and at that time the overdose prevention site was really kind of had a lot of momentum going so Matt agreed to help with that as well so ever since then we kind of been looking at something to work on and Sheila and correct me if I'm wrong but I think um Claire reached out and asked if anybody wanted to write and I think we knew each other just from you know the community but to work together I think Claire reached out and asked if if anybody wanted to write an op-ed on the issue about OAT and JL and Martha connected us all yeah which goes to kind of like this living in Halifax in a small community where there are so many interconnections really among like lots of different work being done by a few people but all really good people so I don't see any question here but I do have one that is more my curiosity from your perspective as people who are not necessarily practicing in criminal law oh we do have a question here actually no it was just a thank you um so the big criminal justice bill that's coming up and Sheila you have mentioned you had mentioned it in passing and there are lots of discussion regarding increasing the police discretion in terms of arresting drug users and making arrests for possession in particular and it has been hailed as being particularly transformative as important as a piece of legislation and I think that a lot of people agree that it is a step forward but then again others might argue that it's just thinking that the margins with the much broader problem right so I'm wondering if you have any thoughts about if you're familiar with and if you have any thoughts regarding the changes that are being proposed and that are going to go before the party I think we have about one minute left I don't know about the other folks but the two things that I would say about that because it removes mandatory minimums for drug offenses and it it doesn't eliminate the potential for prosecution of low level possession as I understand it but it does as you say it mandates consideration of alternatives both on the part of police and prosecutors so one of my questions goes to what those alternatives are likely to be conditional sentence potentially you know one of the critiques that's been raised around that is that the kinds of conditions that are imposed tend to be most likely breached by those who are already most marginalized so you're talking about you know folks in poverty folks who are you know indigenous folks who are racialized most likely to breach those sentences and be back in jail so there is a potential kind of intensification of you know disproportionate representation through that and the other thing that I'd say that's potentially a problem goes to treatment alternatives and I just raised that as a thought so far but I think that it's something we need to think about coercive treatment alternatives are something to be wary of great study 2020 where Vancouver and both mats relied on it in their work that showed no statistical significance to difference in substance use among those who are in coercive treatment versus those who are in non-coercive treatment versus those who are not in treatment at all and that's enough I think for us to really worry about of this kind of widening of the tentacles of whether it be criminal justice or it be health systems to sort of controlling people's lives on the basis of drug use just to piggyback off that you know the only alternative for criminalization is not criminalizing people for using drugs right like it's as simple as that I know it's not as simple as that but you know we don't have to put it into a health system we don't have to wrap it with a bow and put it into like a rehabilitation system we just have to stop criminalizing people you know we're not trying to fix the healthcare system while we're trying to fix the criminal justice system at the same time and if we are then you know that's a whole different you know mandate right you know there is a group that was announced an expert working group task force that's looking at alternatives to criminalization but they're talking a lot about well what are we going to do with them where we got to put them into treatment and you know we continuously hear from people who use drugs no we don't you know but if somebody does want treatment then it should be available Matt can I piggyback on your thought there and just Eileen if we just have another minute or two I know people might file out but so I take your point right like criminalization is such a harm right that to decriminalize is so critical but when we think about access and what a safe supply look like the question becomes how right how are we going to make it available and so I guess I want to just we've had this conversation internally before where I researched and so on but I'm like I know you have lots of thoughts on like well so to decriminalize and making safe supply what is that like taking the model of cannabis and doing that and we've talked about that before or is it like or what's happening with psychedelics you know because they are going very commercial in a different way I don't know if you want to expand and talk about the ways in which people use drugs are actually sidelined from those things yeah so you know I think the cannabis act is a prime example of excluding people who use drugs from their expertise right you know if I want to buy weed from somebody I want to buy weed from somebody who's been selling it forever and they know what they're doing but we can't now because if you have a criminal record I can see safe supply as kind of like a mixture you know because we went we didn't decriminalize marijuana or cannabis we went right to regulation right I could see some kind of like hybrid model of legalized like a regulation or sorry a decriminalization with compassion clubs that are not criminalized or you know the government giving certain drugs pharmacies and you know doing training and you know social enterprises where you could go and buy a drug you know and I think really we should put safe drugs in the hands of drug dealers right I like to call them drug service providers but you know they have probably the most access to people who need some of the most services out there and I guarantee you if someone had an abscess and they're injecting somewhere and all they want to do is get high they're gonna call their drug dealer before they're gonna call Mosh but if there's a drug dealer coming with Mosh maybe there was you know there's an intervention to happen right that answers your question but you know I think yeah I think through community based organizations needle and syringe programs overdose prevention sites like those are places where we could have drug service providers thank you so much I think we're going to have to conclude we're a few minutes after the the announced closing time but we I really appreciate you taking the time to talk to us Matt and thank you Matt and Sheila for your contributions tonight and thank you everyone for attending as I mentioned this is the last event of the criminal justice speaker series if you want to watch some of the other talks feel free to check them out on YouTube on the Shulik School of Law YouTube channel and with that we are going to stop here have a good night everyone thank you


Sound off, sorry. Yeah, you need sound. Bullying.  Horsesick on masculinity. Is this the best a man can get? Is it? We can't hide from it. Sexual harassment is taking over. It's been going on far too long.  What I actually think she's trying to say. Making the same old excuses. Boys will be boys. Boys will be boys. But something finally changed.  But she says she's the best in the world. And there will be no going back. Because we, we believe in the best in men. Men need to hold other men accountable. Well, sweetie, come on. To say the right thing. To act the right way. Bro, not cool, not cool. Some already are. In ways big.  And small. I'm strong. I'm strong. But some is not enough. Some will treat each other with men. Because the boys watching today will be the men of tomorrow. You know, I don't like it. I don't like if a lot of reasons. One is they're a shaving company. Give me a break. I mean, who cares what you think Gillette. Well, but their slogan forever was the best a man can get. OK, so you could do something about the best a man could get without implying that most men are all men are, you know, bad people that, you know, and you're equating rapists, you know, like Weinstein, real creeps, the Me Too kind of really. But the real bad stuff in the Me Too, not the everyday stuff with a couple of boys, you know, wrestling on the ground. I mean, give me a break. Boys will be boys in some cases. And a couple of kids wrestling on the ground is not going to hurt anybody. And as a. OK, so maybe that example where you say, OK, you know, boys, they are going to kind of get into physical scuffles. And as long as it's not out of control, that that's normal. OK, that's bullying. And, you know, do I regret pulling girls here when I was 12 when I was how old was I I was in how old I in sixth grade? Yeah, I guess 10, 10, 11. Yeah. Oh, no, really. I mean, the girl kind of got her brother to beat me up.    You so I would take children out of this completely. I think most kids I take out the bullying. I think most kids you experiment with stuff. You you do things that are inappropriate. It's part of why I, you know, I was so even even when it came to Kavanaugh. You know, I was like, this was it was 17. Leave, you know, leave me alone. We do stuff when we were young and not that I'm justifying what if what really happened happened, you know, who knows. But if it really happened happened, I'm not I wouldn't justify it. But it wouldn't be relevant. But leave kids out of this.  But that has nothing to do with with tuffling around. You know, the only the only one I kind of respected was in the board room. We put a hand on there. Yeah, of course.  But you could do an ad like that. What about the one, the guy on the street where he stops the leery, the leery guy? OK, that's not cool. I like that. Yeah. OK. I mean. I mean, it's all fine. But what what is Gillette trying to say about this? Well, they're just trying to say you could be a better example, I guess, for the boys, right? So you could you could do it in a much better way than this. It's way too generalized. It's way broader than it needs to be. And again, it equivocates between looking at a woman. We talked about beauty.  We talk we talk about beauty. I'm objectified Rahaf Muhammad, right? So, you know, we're all we I mean, I don't think it's objectifying to look at something beautiful. And so you're between living and looking and raping and me, too. And boys tumbling. You're making this whole equivocation between all these things, which I don't think is just. I mean, you should have one on me, too, and talk about if you if you really wanted to real issues. Yeah, real harassment.  And you could talk about not objectifying people, right? And not objectifying women, but we also objectifying men. Men objectifying men, right?    Stupid jock was what they used to think. We objectify, we use good looks to objectify people on every side of this. So, you know, I think there's a way to do that, add or to make this statement in a positive way rather than a negative way. And this is what men should be. It's not a bad statement that they want to make, right? They're saying our slogan has always been the best a man can get. And it's this dual meaning, you know, our razor is the best you can get.  But also, you know, what is the best that a man can get? Make himself in effect. And they're saying, yeah, we have learned something, but then they haven't given you a clear statement of exactly what it is that you've learned and what you're supposed to take away from it. Yeah, and put it properly in perspective.  I mean, you could do something about how you how men should treat women without, you know, going all out. And now, you know, sure. And not just men who treat women, but the issue of bullying, right? But bullying is not only about men. It's also about girls.  And there's girls who've committed suicide because of bullying with other girls in the bullying. The boys are boys. It's my primary physical goals, do it psychologically, which is which is often much worse. So I think it's a much too complex issue. To kind of try to wrap it all up in one, what is it? A minute and a half. So maybe have a series and do a better job with the real issues. But I don't think they're capable of figuring out, you know, men are men. Boys are boys. Now, what does that mean? What does masculinity mean? What does it mean to be a man? What does it mean to be a boy? And I think these are far too complex issues for Gillette to get involved in. I think it's a mistake. You know, and it's. Are you are you being like, is there a similar word for chauvinistic against like corporations that sell goods or what if Gillette says, hey, we want to use our clout and our commercial dollars to make a decent statement? You I mean, yeah, I'm not saying that they're not comparable. No, they're not capable in the intellectual environment in which we live. I think very few people on the planet are capable of making an intelligent statement, so they hire somebody who is female relationships. I think who are they going to hire? They're going to hire some feminists. You I don't know. I'm going to hire me. You know, they're going to hire me. And I'm not sure I know how to make the statement, right? Because because there is a delicate balance here between what it means to be masculine and feminine. And, you know, and then what, when does that spill over into being harassment? And what is what is, you know, wrestling in the in the backyard mean?  And I mean, and I at least that's what I'm told by my brother. But no, but yeah, I mean, I used to be very physical as a kid, very physical. And I used to wrestle with boys. I used to wrestle with girls. I used to pull girls hair.  Was I, you know, a bad woman or whatever? I this is really hard stuff to define and articulate and what kind of culture do you grow up in? And I do think there is an issue with with men being I mean, the war against boys. I mean, of men being emasculated of of of of trying to trying to take the masculinity out of boys. But what does masculinity mean? And how does it express itself? These are deep, interesting, complicated, psychological questions that I don't think we're at a point in our culture where we can clearly define them without spilling over into an agenda of modern feminism, which is tied up in a lot of garbage. It has some good. I'm not saying it's all bad, but there's some good, but it's all tied up in some in some really bad stuff as well. It's complicated. So in terms of, you know, is Gillette horrible for trying to do this? Is Gillette horrible for trying to do this? I mean, there's been all the reactions all over the map. I don't like it. I think it's pretentious. And I think it's I think they're getting themselves in trouble. And I think they're more likely to piss people off than to make people happy, particularly men who they're trying to sell a razor to. So you could you could easily make a video on treat women with respect, treat women as intellectual equals and not get into the masculinity issue.  Again, they generalized too much. They they, you know, there's a whole line of men saying, boys will be boys, boys will be boys. And there's one guy who steps out and does the right thing. It's just too much of a bashing man in in in a way that.  It would be more believable, right? Because that's that's the scale. It happens, but it's not on that scale. The way to do it, I think that respect, ban and respect women and make the argument sexual harassment is is unacceptable.  But clear sexual harassment is unacceptable.  And if you ended there, fine, nobody would have nobody would object. That would be cool. But they went a lot further than that. And there's there's a lot more in the video than that in my. The headline that they had, I think it's PJ Media is just so funny. Gillette tells men they're repulsive creeps.  That's that look good when you abuse the women, the women around you. I mean, that's terrible. Yeah, so that's a bit far. And if that's how you interpret it, yeah, but like I said, as a woman who's had some issues with some less than ethical guys. I by their attempt, I was I was touched to some of it, but no, you're right. It's it's overbroad and it is payment. So as I said, at the end of the program notes, we have Jezebel's. Yeah, kind of a dark song, but Hailey Mary, if she did an interview on this song comes out, you're not anti man, but and you're also celebrating the fact that it is getting better in most places in the world for women, generation after generation. It's getting a little bit better and a little bit better. I would never tell a daughter the same things that my mom told me. It's like, no, you know, no. And I wouldn't never tell I I would never tell my daughter. And and I'm trying to think of my mother told that kind of stuff to my sisters, I don't really know. But but yeah, I think it gets better every generation. You're seeing more women engineers. You're seeing more women scientists. You're seeing more women in fields that nobody would have conceived that women would enter in the past and where intelligence matters. You're seeing more and more women enter those fields that the biases in math and in science are not completely going away. But but, you know, life for women is much better today than what's 50 years ago. So I think it's getting better. And the problem is that they that if anybody is going to undercut the progress made, it's these third wave kind of feminists who hate men and therefore are going to turn people off of of the progress women have made in the name of of man hatred. So and that's what I worry about when I see ads like this.


This is stock number 10549. We are here at Summit Automotive in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. You're new and used heavy-duty truck headquarters. Today we are checking out this super clean 2015 GMC Sierra 2500 Crew Cab Short Box Denali. This vehicle has a 6-liter V8 motor. It has been fully safety and inspected by our service shop. It has a fresh oil and filter change. All the fluids have been checked and topped off. This truck has been gone through mechanically 100% and is 100% ready to go. Summit white is the color. We shoot all of our videos in 1080p 60 frames per second so if you have HD capabilities on your computer tablet or smartphone device turn them on right now because it is definitely your best way to ensure the quality and condition of the vehicle before seeing it in person. Factory chrome step bars. If you want to check out all the photos on this truck in the upper right hand part of the screen as they link right to our website click that and check us out there. It comes with the factory chromed alloy rims. These are 20-inch rims and it has newer Goodyear Wrangler SRA LT265 60R20 tires. I'd say they probably have about 80 to 90% of the tread left maybe even a little bit more. Driver side front fender is in nice shape. It does come with the projector lamp headlamps, LED running lights and factory fog lights. Has the front bumper parking sensors on here. Lower valence looks really good. Don't think it's ever had a plow on it or anything. And the hood is in really nice shape. I didn't see any dents or dings on that. Passenger side front fender. Nice condition as well. And the passenger side rim is in excellent shape as well. No scuffs or scrapes on there. As you go down this side of the truck you can see just how clean the body is. How reflective and mirror like that paint is. We take these HD videos so if you are far away or even if you're close by just cannot make the trip down you can still see the vehicle hear the vehicle and have confidence in what you're looking at before you even get here so that when you do get here there's absolutely no surprises. That's why we offer the Summit Auto Fastpass option in the upper right hand part of your screen. A link right to our website where you can apply for financing. Get pre-approved. See a payment quote. Even appraise the trade off from the comfort of your own home. So when you get here all you got to do is drive the truck and love it and you'll be all set to go. Back rim is an excellent shape.  Very little to almost no corrosion. Lower rockers all look really good. I didn't see any corrosion on them and it has all the remaining factory exhausts. Those step bars are in really nice shape as well. Bed rail covers and as we come around to the back of the vehicle rear bumper is in great shape. No dents or dings on that. It does have the rear bumper parking sensors. Full towing package which includes a receiver hitch four pin and seven pin wiring. Tailgate is in really nice shape as well. I didn't see any dents or dings on that. It does have the shock down assist tailgate as well as a spraying bed liner and you do get LED bed lighting in there. You can see the side box tie downs on each of the corners of the truck and very nice and clean back here. I'm guessing that's probably a factory spraying bed liner because you got the Denali on the back of the bed there or the front of the bed I guess you could say. Passengers side fender. Box side is in great shape. No dents or dings on that and for full disclosure this back rim is in excellent shape as well. You can see it does have those Rancho Z71 shocks on there and down the rest of the side of the truck very very clean. No dents, dings, scuffs, scrapes. Very nice. Has the telescopic tow mirrors with built-in directional signals. It also has LED side lights. You get directional signals on the side as well and these mirrors do fold in and they also telescope out and in like so. In fact they actually power fold in which is a really nice feature. Power windows, power locks, power mirrors, memory driver seat, passenger seat is in excellent shape as well. No rips or tears on there and both of these seats are heated and cooled. Factory floor mats, factory brake controller, turn dial four-wheel drive, auto headlamps and as we hop inside the truck here you can see that this one has 44,988 miles. You get a digital speedometer as well as a digital instrument cluster. Comes with the heated leather wrap steering wheel. Bluetooth and information center controls on the right. Cruise controls and heated steering wheel control on the left and audio controls on the back of the steering wheel. Comes with these six speed automatic transmission. The GMC and telelink system. You can see it does have the factory navigation system there as well as AM, FM and Sirius XM radio capabilities. Backup camera is right there as well.  You also get power pedals, stability control. These are your cargo lamps so that's what you use to turn on the LED bed lighting as well as these side lights on the mirrors and we'll check those out so I'm just gonna leave those on. You also have your downhill assist control and you can turn those parking sensors on and off as well. You can see you get three USBs. You got two power points and then you have a hundred ten volt, 150 watt plug-in right there. Cell phone holder and the passenger side floor mat and seat are in excellent condition as well. You get the Denali stitch to the backrest or headrest I should say and the headliner is in excellent shape. Map lights and home link buttons for your garage door security systems and lighting systems and you do get on-star capabilities in that rearview mirror. We'll take a quick look at the back seats and then we will check out under the hood. Back seats are just as clean as the front seats. No rips or tears back here. It does have that latch child safety system for all your child car seat needs. Power sliding rear window. No rips no tears in the seats. This truck smells very clean inside. I don't think it's ever been smoked in and the carpeting and floor mats back here are in excellent shape as well. Get the woodgrain trim on those back doors as well. It's got a nice kind of two-tone appearance to it. So there are your LED side lights in the mirrors and you can kind of see them on the box there. So that's a nice feature as well. And we'll take a quick look under the hood. I would personally like to thank you for checking out the video today. Hopefully from this HD video you will be able to tell just how clean this truck is all the way around inside and out. Under the hood we have the 6-liter VA motor engine base very clean runs very smooth. This truck has been fully safety and inspected by our service shop. Has a fresh oil and filter change. All the fluids have been checked and topped off. The truck has been gone through mechanically 100% and is 100% ready to go. See more pictures of this truck or one of our other 450 new and used cars, trucks, SUVs, minivans, Wranglers, halftones, recoder tons, one tons. You name it we got it go to our website www.summitauto.com. Full pictures and descriptions of every single vehicle from two locations all at www.summitauto.com. If you'd like to check out more HD videos you can go to www.youtube.com slash www.summitauto.com. Remember to like, subscribe, and share on this video and all the videos that you see there. In fact in a second you will see link to subscribe to our YouTube channel on your left. A link to more GMC Sierra 2500 truck videos like this one on your right. If you have not been to our website on the bottom link to this vehicle on our website. Click those check us out and we really look forward to helping you with this super clean 2015 GMC Sierra 2500 crew cab short box Denali. Thanks again.