Facts, not fear: Inside Mexico's pioneering drug harm reduction programs
The initiative, known as 'Checa tu Sustancia' (Check Your Substance), is one of several recent efforts by Mexican civil society to reduce risk among people taking drugs. Spearheaded by the Instituto RIA, a Mexico-based drug policy research and advocacy organization, it aims to address drug use from a public health and social justice perspective, rather than a security one.
In a well-lit corner of the festival, members of the Instituto RIA used reagents and laboratory porcelain plates to test substances that some of the partygoers planned to use and recorded the data. Their analysis uses color changes to indicate what's in the drug: It can reveal the presence of adulterants but not their exact proportion.
They also offered test strips that can detect the presence of fentanyl and nasal sprays of naloxone, a medication designed to rapidly reverse opioid overdose.
Also available were informational flyers detailing the effects of various psychoactive substances and what to do to reduce the risks associated with using them, including simple but critical measures like staying hydrated and eating well.
While some partygoers seemed wary of the initiative, others approached it with curiosity.
'(There is) amazement, but also a little bit of fear, because there is a whole context of criminalization,' said social psychology student Jessica Reyes Moreno, 27, a volunteer with Checa tu Sustancia.
When unexpected substances are detected, users receive detailed information on what they are, about their risks, potential interactions with other substances and dosage adjustments, empowering them to make informed choices.
Harm reduction vs. abstinence
When people understand that the focus is not on prohibiting but on offering information and safe, non-judgmental spaces where they can be heard, trust is built, said Reyes Moreno.
'I think it's information we should have. Because (drug use) is taboo, and if we're uninformed, we can overdose,' said a 34-year-old Mexican partygoer, who requested anonymity due to his use of illicit substances.
He said he feels there isn't enough information about illegal drugs in Mexico, and when there is, it's either confusing or all stigma. 'It's just 'Don't do it,' but there's no such thing as 'If you do it, take this precaution.''
The 'don't do it' approach sees abstinence as the solution. In contrast, harm reduction, as defined by Harm Reduction International, aims to minimize the negative health, social and legal effects of substance use by working with people without judgment or requiring them to stop using drugs.
The approach focuses more on people — and their communities— than on the substance.
'We never say, 'you shouldn't consume this,'' said Zara Snapp, a political scientist and director of the Instituto RIA. 'The best way to reduce your risks is not to consume at all. But if you have made the decision to consume, we want you to have as much information as possible so you can take care of yourself.'
'Choose to be happy'
The prohibitionist, hardline approach of the war on drugs in Mexico has led to the perception of the user as someone who is necessarily associated with drug trafficking or criminal activities.
Earlier this year, Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum unveiled her government's latest anti-drug campaign, 'Stay away from drugs. Fentanyl kills,' which centers on the synthetic opioid responsible in its deadliest year for more than 70,000 overdose deaths each year in the U.S. — now down to an estimated 52,000 deaths a year.
Aimed at young Mexicans, the campaign frames drug use as a public health issue, but some of the videos and glowing neon billboards show scenarios in which death and loneliness (drug use) are contrasted with life and family (not using drugs). They read, 'Choose to be happy.'
'It's not that if I use drugs I won't be happy, or if I stop using drugs I'll be happy,' said Lilia Pacheco, operational director of PrevenCasa A.C., a Tijuana-based organization that runs harm-reduction initiatives for opioid users, mostly deportees from the United States who report that they started using in that country.
'How can we say that to someone who is using because they are cold, hungry or in withdrawal?' she said.
Mexico's health department did not immediately respond to inquiries regarding concerns that its latest campaign stigmatizes drug use.
Dr. Carlos Magis, a professor at Mexico's National Autonomous University's medical school and member of a working group on opioids, said that stigma poses serious challenges. He cited examples of health workers refusing treatment without abstinence, limited access to naloxone or the scarcity of public methadone clinics.
Breaking down fear and social isolation
A recent report by the Mexican Observatory of Mental Health and Drug Use, found that between 2013 and 2024, 5,901 people in Mexico were treated for emergencies related to opioid use, with it trending up.
PrevenCasa reduces harm not by asking users to stop using, but by showing that their lives matter by providing them with safe injection equipment, showers, toiletries and social events like Friday movie nights.
'These interventions improve quality of life, unlike a sign that says 'fentanyl kills you,'' said Pacheco. 'The right to health should be universal.'
Both Pacheco and Snapp emphasized that collective care is at the heart of harm reduction efforts. Whether practiced in the facilities of organizations working on the border or at electronic music festivals, the goal is to break down social isolation and fear in concrete ways.
'This is a service that will save lives...it's very forward-thinking,' said a 43-year-old man, who requested anonymity because he is a user of illicit substances, after members of Instituto RIA tested his ecstasy at a recent festival.
He said that drug testing kits are available in the United States, where he's from, but that in his experience so far, it's something people mostly do on their own or behind closed doors.
The visibility and organization of Checa tu Sustancia was a surprise to him.
'I feel good that I'm not doing anything wrong. I'm just here to have fun, but now with peace of mind,' he said with a smile. He then rejoined his friends and disappeared into the dancing crowd.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Another Royal Caribbean cruise outbreak hits 140+ passengers. Are outbreaks getting worse?
2025 has already seen as many cruise ship outbreaks as all of last year. Is this the new normal? More than 140 passengers and crew members aboard Royal Caribbean's Navigator of the Seas fell ill with gastrointestinal symptoms during a week-long cruise that ended July 11, marking yet another outbreak in what's shaping up to be a particularly challenging year for the cruise industry. The outbreak affected 134 of the ship's 3,914 passengers — roughly 3.4% of those aboard — along with seven crew members out of 1,266 total crew. Passengers experienced the familiar trio of cruise ship illness symptoms: vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal cramps. The Navigator of the Seas had departed Los Angeles on July 4 for a round-trip voyage to Mexico, making three stops before returning to port, where the outbreak was officially reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. What makes this outbreak particularly concerning isn't just the numbers — it's the broader trend. We're only halfway through 2025, and this incident brings the year's total cruise ship gastrointestinal outbreaks to 18, already matching the entire total for 2024. That's a significant jump from the 14 outbreaks recorded in 2023. Is this the future of cruising? A troubling pattern in the U.S. The CDC tracks these incidents carefully, but only reports outbreaks that meet specific criteria: the ship must be under Vessel Sanitation Program jurisdiction (operating voyages that include both U.S. and foreign ports) and at least 3% of passengers or crew must report gastrointestinal symptoms to the ship's medical staff. This means the Navigator of the Seas outbreak, at 3.4% of passengers affected, just barely crossed the threshold for public notification. Most of these outbreaks stem from norovirus, the highly contagious stomach bug that spreads rapidly in enclosed environments. The CDC noted in April that "a newly dominant strain is currently associated with reported norovirus outbreaks on land," and ships typically mirror land-based outbreak patterns. This suggests the current surge may reflect broader public health trends rather than cruise-specific problems. But that's not great news, either. For the record, Royal Caribbean implemented enhanced sanitation protocols and isolated sick passengers and crew members during the voyage. The company emphasized that "the health and safety of our guests, crew, and the communities we visit are our top priority," noting their cleaning procedures exceed public health guidelines. However, the CDC has yet to identify the causative agent behind this latest outbreak. The streak continues — across all cruise lines This isn't Royal Caribbean's first outbreak rodeo this year. The cruise line has been dealing with multiple outbreaks across its fleet, joining other major operators like Holland America Line, Princess Cruises, and Cunard in facing similar challenges. Earlier this year, a Cunard luxury liner experienced an outbreak affecting more than 240 passengers and crew during a monthlong international voyage, while Princess Cruises saw over 80 people fall ill during a 16-night cruise in February. The timing of these outbreaks raises questions about whether cruise lines are adequately prepared for what appears to be a particularly virulent norovirus season. While companies have implemented enhanced cleaning protocols and isolation procedures, the close quarters and shared facilities aboard cruise ships create ideal conditions for rapid transmission of gastrointestinal illnesses. Are cruises... actually safe? Despite the alarming headlines, perspective matters. The Navigator of the Seas carried nearly 4,000 passengers, and while 134 falling ill sounds significant, it represents a relatively small percentage of the total. For comparison, norovirus outbreaks occur regularly on land — in schools, nursing homes, and restaurants — but cruise ships draw more attention because they're self-contained environments where outbreaks can be easily tracked and reported. The CDC emphasizes that cruise ship outbreaks represent only 1% of all reported gastrointestinal outbreaks. However, the concentrated nature of cruise ship populations means that when outbreaks do occur, they can affect a substantial number of people in a short timeframe. For prospective cruisers, the key is understanding that while these outbreaks are concerning, they remain relatively rare events. The cruise industry serves millions of passengers annually, and the vast majority complete their voyages without incident. That said, the uptick in reported outbreaks suggests passengers should be particularly vigilant about hand hygiene and other preventive measures, especially during peak norovirus seasons. The real question isn't whether cruises are safe — they generally are, all things considered. Instead, we should be asking whether the industry is doing enough to adapt to evolving public health challenges (never mind sustainability) and whether current protocols are sufficient to handle increasingly virulent strains of common illnesses. Because in 2025, there's work to be done. Solve the daily Crossword


San Francisco Chronicle
3 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Judge allows the National Science Foundation to withhold hundreds of millions of research dollars
NEW YORK (AP) — The National Science Foundation can continue to withhold hundreds of millions of dollars from researchers in several states until litigation aimed at restoring it plays out, a federal court ruled Friday. U.S. District Judge John Cronan in New York declined to force the NSF to restart payments immediately, while the case is still being decided, as requested by the sixteen Democrat-led states who brought the suit, including New York, Hawaii, California, Colorado and Connecticut. In his ruling, Cronan said he would not grant the preliminary injunction in part because it may be that another court, the Court of Federal Claims, has jurisdiction over what is essentially a case about money. He also said the states failed to show that NSF's actions were counter to the agency's mandate. The lawsuit filed in May alleges that the National Science Foundation's new grant-funding priorities as well as a cap on what's known as indirect research expenses 'violate the law and jeopardize America's longstanding global leadership in STEM.' Another district court had already blocked the the cap on indirect costs — administrative expenses that allow research to get done like paying support staff and maintaining equipment. This injunction had been requested to restore funding to the grants that were cut. In April, the NSF announced a new set of priorities and began axing hundreds of grants for research focused on things like misinformation and diversity, equity and inclusion. Researchers who lost funding also were studying artificial intelligence, post-traumatic stress disorder in veterans, STEM education for K-12 students and more. Researchers were not given a specific explanation for why their grants were canceled, attorney Colleen Faherty, representing the state of New York, said during last month's hearing. Instead, they received boilerplate language stating that their work 'no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities." NSF has long been directed by Congress to encourage underrepresented groups like women and people with disabilities to participate in STEM. According to the lawsuit, the science foundation's funding cuts already halted efforts to train the next generation of scientists in fields like computer science, math and environmental science. A lawyer for the NSF said at the hearing that the agency has the authority to fund whatever research it deems necessary — and has since its inception in 1950. In the court filing, the government also argued that its current priorities were to 'create opportunities for all Americans everywhere' and 'not preference some groups at the expense of others, or directly/indirectly exclude individuals or groups.' The plaintiff states are trying to 'substitute their own judgement for the judgement of the agency," Adam Gitlin, an attorney for the NSF, said during the hearing. The science foundation is still funding some projects related to expanding representation in STEM, Cronan wrote in his ruling. Per the lawsuit filed in May, for example, the University of Northern Colorado lost funding for only one of its nine programs focused on increasing participation of underrepresented groups in STEM fields. ___


Hamilton Spectator
3 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Judge allows the National Science Foundation to withhold hundreds of millions of research dollars
NEW YORK (AP) — The National Science Foundation can continue to withhold hundreds of millions of dollars from researchers in several states until litigation aimed at restoring it plays out, a federal court ruled Friday. U.S. District Judge John Cronan in New York declined to force the NSF to restart payments immediately, while the case is still being decided, as requested by the sixteen Democrat-led states who brought the suit, including New York, Hawaii, California, Colorado and Connecticut. In his ruling, Cronan said he would not grant the preliminary injunction in part because it may be that another court, the Court of Federal Claims, has jurisdiction over what is essentially a case about money. He also said the states failed to show that NSF's actions were counter to the agency's mandate. The lawsuit filed in May alleges that the National Science Foundation's new grant-funding priorities as well as a cap on what's known as indirect research expenses 'violate the law and jeopardize America's longstanding global leadership in STEM.' Another district court had already blocked the the cap on indirect costs — administrative expenses that allow research to get done like paying support staff and maintaining equipment. This injunction had been requested to restore funding to the grants that were cut. In April, the NSF announced a new set of priorities and began axing hundreds of grants for research focused on things like misinformation and diversity, equity and inclusion. Researchers who lost funding also were studying artificial intelligence, post-traumatic stress disorder in veterans, STEM education for K-12 students and more. Researchers were not given a specific explanation for why their grants were canceled, attorney Colleen Faherty, representing the state of New York, said during last month's hearing. Instead, they received boilerplate language stating that their work 'no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities.' NSF has long been directed by Congress to encourage underrepresented groups like women and people with disabilities to participate in STEM. According to the lawsuit, the science foundation's funding cuts already halted efforts to train the next generation of scientists in fields like computer science, math and environmental science. A lawyer for the NSF said at the hearing that the agency has the authority to fund whatever research it deems necessary — and has since its inception in 1950. In the court filing, the government also argued that its current priorities were to 'create opportunities for all Americans everywhere' and 'not preference some groups at the expense of others, or directly/indirectly exclude individuals or groups.' The plaintiff states are trying to 'substitute their own judgement for the judgement of the agency,' Adam Gitlin, an attorney for the NSF, said during the hearing. The science foundation is still funding some projects related to expanding representation in STEM, Cronan wrote in his ruling. Per the lawsuit filed in May, for example, the University of Northern Colorado lost funding for only one of its nine programs focused on increasing participation of underrepresented groups in STEM fields. The states are reviewing the decision, according to spokespeople from the New York and Hawaii attorney general offices. The National Science Foundation declined to comment. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .