text: Of central interest for this paper is the third row which shows numbers of individuals testing 
  positive for opiates only or were positive-for-both for the first time. All the previous caveats 
  about DIP trends need to be borne in mind when looking at those figures. Clearly the rise in new 
  positive testers in the early period will be affected by the changes to DIP coverage through 
  those years, as possibly will the sharp fall in positive testers in the latter period. However, 
  graphing the data (see the red line in Figure 7 below) shows that the fall from 14,750 new 
  positive testers in 2006 to 4,281 in 2013, is not only large (the drop is around 70 per cent even if 
  we use the adjusted figure for 2013) but also more or less linear. This means that there is no 
  immediate reason to suggest that the 2013 figures are artificially low due to changes in DIP 
  coverage (i.e. the fact that DIP ceased to be a centrally funded programme in April of that year). 
  Taken together, the data from the period post-2006 (when DIP had achieved a high level of 
  coverage) certainly appear to show that the number of new crime-involved OCUs is unlikely to 
  be rising and may be falling markedly, see Figure 7. 