From this moment to about 2 hours from now, 3 fathers or mothers, brothers or sisters,

sons or daughters will lose their lives as a result of an opioid overdose. The opioid crisis is a
significant issue that harm reduction is simply not going to solve in the near future. Allow me to
explain.
First, I’m pretty sure everyone in this room has heard something along the lines of
“Addressing issues is not easy but important.” but this seems to be the case only when treating
opioid addiction with abstinence. While harm reduction has its benefits, it does not fulfill the
main need of curing an opioid addiction, addressing the main issue. The goal of harm reduction
is to reduce the danger of using opioids instead of treating the primary issue harm reduction is
being used for, stopping opioid addiction. Studies have consistently shown that people who
achieve abstinence from opioids have better outcomes in terms of reduced drug use, improved
physical and mental health, and increased social and vocational functioning, compared to those
who continue to use opioids. Abstinence has been proven to be far more effective than harm
reduction in curing addiction and should be encouraged before we begin to lose more than 3
brothers and sisters in 2 hours.
Secondly, it is basic common sense that you must have money to be able to spend
money on anything. But the majority of addicts don't have the money to spend on harm
reduction programs and everything that comes equipped with harm reduction. Over 420,000
addicts are unemployed, therefore, do not have sufficient money to accommodate the
money-consuming harm reduction process. A study by the National Institutes of Health found
that abstinence-based programs typically cost less than harm-reduction programs while
achieving better outcomes in terms of reducing opioid use and improving overall health.
Abstinence has been shown to be substantially better than harm reduction at actually solving
opioid addiction and much cheaper. So before we lose more than 3 aunts or uncles within 120
minutes, let's encourage abstinence. Thank you.
Red Wave One

Season 8 of Game of Thrones, Super Bowl 48, and Floyd Mayweather vs Manny
Pacquiao are all events that were just all hype. These events all have a striking relationship with
the Red Wave, they were all anticipated and hyped up but did not live up to it. So, the answer to
the question “What Happened to the Red Wave?” is it was simply all hype. Allow me to explain.
First, it is a widely known fact that voting and elections are mainly dominated by people
over the age of 50 and many are republican but this midterm was not the case. Gen-Z, the
same generation who thought eating Tide Pods and putting coins into electrical outlets was a
good idea, found out what voting was this past election. Just in 2016, only 4% of Gen-Z voted in
total for both parties, and in this midterm, 27% of Gen-Z went out and voted. Nowadays, most
people who are in Gen-Z, are mainly democratic due to the recent widespread of democratic
ideologies on the internet. In the midterm, 63% of Gen-Z voted democrat which is
astronomically larger than the only 35% that voted republican. So, love them or hate them,
Gen-Z is what suppressed the hype of the supposed Red Wave.
Secondly, no student debt, climate control, and gun control. These are 3 things that the
nightmares of Republicans’ constantly use to haunt them. But, these same 3 things are
numerous more that are incorporated into the dreams of democrats. These things have been on
the rise in America in recent years and are the topic of many debates on Capitol Hill. The
democratic party is the main party in support of the 3 topics and the Republican Party is mostly
not in support. In recent years, America went from a moderately liberal and conservative nation
to a majority-liberal nation rather than conservative. While it is true that most of the poll
predictions were in favor of the Red Wave it was all hype and no action. Thank you.