   Give a drunk a drink
Study toasts free drinks for homeless alcoholicsHow much for a ticket to Ottawa?   
  1/5th of the study-group died before the end of the experiment. It seems odd that a person who had lived for ~50 years would have such a high chance of death over a 2-year period. Other than that, if giving them booze reduces crime, and improves their life, why not?   ;  I don't find it odd that someone who had been drinking 46 drinks a day for 35 years dies around 51.  Especially when you consider that drink includes mouthwash , Lysol, or rubbing alcohol.  Also considering the winters here can be particularly brutal if you don't have shelter, I'm surprised we don't lose more homeless people than we do.;  Seems sort of like giving up to me.   ;  They probably died because they were too drunk to find themselves a shelter during the winter.   ;Quote:Original post by The Frugal GourmetSeems sort of like giving up to me.That's an implied value judgment. What if the quality of life of those treated is higher than it would be from a life of rehab?   ;  15 people isn't exactly a definitive study.   ;Quote:Original post by capn_midnight15 people isn't exactly a definitive study.It would seem so, but I've looked at cancer treatment studies that didn't have a lot of participants and yet were still highly regarded. It seems to me that these researchers are looking into harm reduction approaches. The key snippets:The related savings per person for these services was 445 Canadian dollars (387 US) per month. The average cost to administer the program per person was 771 Canadian dollars (670 US) per month.That's a net cost of 326 Canadian (283 US). That's 3912 (3396) per year. Is it worth it? Imo, the study was worth it, but to apply it's finding on a larger scale - I don't know. The costs would have to be reduced a lot more. If those programs could get a break on the cost of the booze - assuming that effects the bottom line - it might be worth it. ... but 11 others reported "a markedly decreased consumption of beverage and non-beverage alcohol, and most reported improved sleep, hygiene, nutrition and health," according to the authors of the study.;Quote:Original post by SneftelQuote:Original post by The Frugal GourmetSeems sort of like giving up to me.That's an implied value judgment. What if the quality of life of those treated is higher than it would be from a life of rehab?So?  Value judgments are not all right here?   ;  EDIT: Well, sure they are, but it's important to make them explicit. "Giving up" sounds negative even when it isn't. In this case, what in particular are the costs of this approach that are not worth the benefits?   