Juno News - Adam Zivo & the latest from Canada’s drug crisis

00:00:00.000 Hi, Juno News. Alexander Brown here, host of Not Sorry. Great to be back with you. I'm the

00:00:08.060 director of the National Citizens Coalition. I'm a writer, campaigner, columnist, contributor.

00:00:15.260 You know, thrilled to be busy in this space. Thrilled to be here with you three days a week.

00:00:18.880 And while you're here, if you like these episodes, junownews.com slash not sorry for 20% off. Great

00:00:25.000 deal. There's so much great reporting on Juno News. So many talented folks. Please,

00:00:29.520 please check it out. Please support us. So slowly, surely, reluctantly, Canada's so-called harm

00:00:35.000 reduction and safe supply model of permissible and government supply drug use, it's collapsing.

00:00:41.300 And it must. The public doesn't want it. It's dangerous, antisocial, anti-civilizational.

00:00:47.180 It's an experiment that's destroyed our towns and cities. And that hasn't helped get our

00:00:51.840 troubled and addicted clean. We have these kinds of poverty pimps that claim it worked,

00:00:57.140 that make all kinds of excuses, but keeping these folks in a continued state of suffering

00:01:02.040 instead of getting them off the streets and into treatment, the data doesn't back up that

00:01:08.080 that's the right approach. Like you gotta, sometimes you need to have a firm hand with these things.

00:01:13.200 And on the safe supply file, we're even seeing an NDP premier, Wab Canoe, presenting what Adam

00:01:21.740 Zivo calls our guest today, a worthy plan to lock up meth addicts. What a change this represents over

00:01:27.780 the failures of the last few years. This is still the year where the federal liberals were quietly

00:01:31.660 forced to admit this wasn't working and walk back their disastrous support of this safe supply

00:01:37.860 and its permissible drug culture from coast to coast. BC has repealed its own disastrous public

00:01:43.340 drug use laws that had legalized consumption in parks where children play, even hospitals.

00:01:48.760 Police had just absolutely no powers. A large part of that is because of the work of our guests

00:01:54.800 today, of Adam Zivo, a columnist, a journalist, an advocate in the more responsible drug space.

00:02:03.200 He has an event coming up as well in Toronto that we're going to, we're going to talk about because

00:02:08.560 he's doing vitally important work that's in partnership with Project Ontario because there's

00:02:12.980 the role that the provinces can certainly play. If Wab Canoes can step up, Doug Ford can step up too.

00:02:18.980 Let's talk to Adam Zivo and thanks for joining us. Adam Zivo joins the show. He's a national

00:02:24.140 post columnist, a correspondent with the News Forum, founder and director of the Center for Responsible

00:02:29.760 Drug Policy and Break the Needle. Adam, thank you for joining us.

00:02:33.860 Thanks for having me.

00:02:35.220 It's a pleasure to talk to, you know, Canada's leading advocate for common sense on the drug

00:02:40.680 policy front. Now, your latest piece from this week and credit where it's due to Manitoba NDP

00:02:46.160 premier Wab Cano on clearly understanding the failures of harm reduction policy. You state that,

00:02:53.160 you know, it's a worthy plan that he has to lock up meth addicts. I believe a quote from the piece is

00:02:57.740 people who are suffering from meth addiction do not have the right to determine how the rest of us

00:03:01.860 are going to live in our society, declared the premier. Are you optimistic this kind of pushback

00:03:07.580 from, I say, often risk averse politicians that it'll catch on? And what's the sort of more work

00:03:15.260 to be done piece that you flesh out in your writing? Can we trust them to see this through

00:03:20.340 and see these next steps through?

00:03:22.920 Well, I think that his plan is, it indicates that there's a change to the national zeitgeist when it

00:03:28.800 comes to drugs and crime addiction. We've passed the main hump of peak harm reduction, and we've

00:03:35.740 begun to focus on recovery, abstinence, prevention, and ensuring that drug addicts are given free reign

00:03:43.980 to terrorize the people around them. But before I go into my assessments of Cano's proposal, I want to

00:03:50.000 give a quick overview of what it is. So essentially, before he changed the law, if you had someone who was

00:03:56.620 publicly intoxicated, they could be detained at a police officer's discretion for up to 24 hours. And that

00:04:02.740 system was oriented towards alcoholics, right? If you're publicly drunk, we put you in a drunk tank, which is

00:04:09.440 basically just a jail cell. And then with alcohol, you sober up quite quickly. So within 24 hours at the

00:04:14.400 most, you're left, you're let out. The problem though, is that the system is not designed for

00:04:20.140 people who are using harder substances that have longer lasting effects. And it's a particular problem

00:04:26.420 for someone who is using meth. The effects of meth, the main effects last up to 12 hours, which falls

00:04:31.640 within that 24 hour timeline. But when you come off of that drug, you go through a crash, which can last

00:04:38.020 for up to three days. And during the crash period, people can be deeply aggressive, violent, and their

00:04:43.920 behavior can be borderline psychotic. And this is especially true if they're coming off of a binge

00:04:48.680 where they haven't slept for several days. So obviously, if you detain someone who was publicly

00:04:53.120 intoxicated for meth use, and you let them out within 24 hours, and they're still violent, and they're

00:04:58.220 still crashing, that's not ideal. This person is still a danger to the rest of society. And you're not

00:05:04.040 segregating them from society in the way that you should. And so what Canu did is he changed the law

00:05:09.920 to allow for detentions of up to 72 hours, which, of course, that encapsulates that period. And he's

00:05:16.980 building a set of new facilities that are specifically earmarked for these longer stays.

00:05:24.340 And what that means is that you'll still have their traditional drunk tanks, which are for people who are 1.00

00:05:29.700 drunk on alcohol. But if you do stay for longer than 24 hours, they'll send you to a special protective

00:05:35.080 custody location. And there, you will be assessed by a healthcare professional every 24 hours for up

00:05:43.140 to two visits, depending on the length of your stay. And there will be other compassionate supports

00:05:47.900 available to you, including some addiction services. So on my end, I think that this is clearly a step in

00:05:54.780 the right direction. Because when you have meth addicts who are in the middle of the streets and

00:05:59.880 making everyone uncomfortable, that's bad for society as a whole. And that's also bad for the

00:06:04.420 addict himself, right? Because he's not getting the level of support that he needs. And he's not going

00:06:08.920 to get that support in a traditional drunk tank. So if you segregate them from society for a longer

00:06:13.560 period of time, you're keeping everyone else safe, and you're increasing contact with the healthcare

00:06:18.280 system and giving some level of support, which gives this person some option of recovery. Now,

00:06:26.340 where I think that this doesn't go far enough is that it doesn't actually provide really substantial

00:06:31.240 recovery-oriented supports, right? So there's this big debate about involuntary care, and Canoe's plan

00:06:38.520 has been characterized as a form of involuntary care, and that's true. But it's only the most basic

00:06:43.540 minimum level of involuntary care. Involuntary care, in order for it to work, requires a longer

00:06:49.880 stay. And that's why in the United States, involuntary care systems, you know, often mandate

00:06:54.520 stays that last for weeks, if not months. Because addiction is a very difficult thing to break. So if

00:07:00.140 you're in a detention center for only three days, you're probably not going to get better, right?

00:07:05.580 And even if you are repeatedly detained, again and again and again and again, you're getting very

00:07:10.460 fragmented care that is a poor substitute for a structured, longer-term stay. So I think that the

00:07:19.460 better alternative to Canoe's plan would be to further criminalize public intoxication. So that

00:07:25.980 way, people who are a danger to themselves and others can be more stably segregated from society

00:07:31.540 for longer periods of time, rather than having a rolling, a revolving door of detentions.

00:07:36.720 And then to give people the option to seek mandatory treatments, or sorry, I guess, well,

00:07:43.220 quasi-voluntary treatments in lieu of jail, because that kind of structured, longer-term stay would be

00:07:50.320 more effective than having someone stay and get some addiction care for one or two days every once in a

00:07:57.240 while. Yeah. That's one of the... I'm in Vancouver. And so I see so much of, you know,

00:08:02.160 your great writing and news breaking on this file firsthand, which is that even if they do receive

00:08:09.840 care, you know, they're heading right back to East Hastings. And how are you supposed to stay clean,

00:08:15.380 you know, when those are, you know, you're returning to those conditions after 24, 48 hours,

00:08:19.820 after some hold? It's seemingly one of the cardinal sins out here, and I'm still getting used to the

00:08:24.640 ecosystem. I'm an Ontario boy originally, is closing down some of these facilities where you would be,

00:08:30.040 you know, kept for longer than just a cup of coffee, where some people's addiction journeys,

00:08:36.500 you know, they last their entire lives. And you can't just expect them to dry out and sober up.

00:08:42.220 And, you know, that's it. No more, no more meth for me.

00:08:46.120 Well, so what I'll say is that Canu's messaging around this reform has very much been focused

00:08:50.900 on public safety. And he said last week that we're going to take Manitoba back and make the

00:08:56.640 province safe again. And I think that this system of longer detentions will certainly achieve that,

00:09:03.200 right? Because at the most basic level, you're segregating people from society for a longer

00:09:08.340 period of time. And police officers might be more willing to detain people this way,

00:09:14.220 if they believe they have to re-detain them less frequently compared to what was happening earlier.

00:09:19.240 And so from a public safety standpoint, I think this works. Sometimes it feels like the recovery

00:09:25.740 oriented elements was tacked on later to give it a more compassionate face, to give the impression

00:09:33.800 that this is about really like about providing healthcare, when it seems more about finding a

00:09:39.380 workaround for getting drug addicts off the streets. Because if you were to use the traditional

00:09:43.680 criminal justice system, I mean, with our current bail system, you really wouldn't, you got to get

00:09:49.240 anywhere. No, the cup of coffee in their back. Yeah. You talk to cops and they're just going like,

00:09:53.780 I, you know, the frequent flyers drive them nuts. Like our cities are downtowns. They have these super

00:09:59.620 offenders that we all know about, like this percentage of, you know, it's maybe only a couple dozen

00:10:04.420 people per central business district, where if they were kept in care for longer, and we'll use care

00:10:11.340 there in quotation marks, I suppose. But if they were kept in some sort of extended stay,

00:10:16.080 if they were better looked at and not just immediately kicked back out, our legal system

00:10:20.380 has its problems and its, its leniency issues increasingly, but that would make a major difference

00:10:26.520 in these, in these metropolitan areas almost overnight. Like if it's just, if you just stop

00:10:30.700 letting the same group of people continue to maybe have this 72 hour meth binge and come down

00:10:38.040 that, you know, Vancouver, downtown Vancouver might be a place that people actually want to

00:10:42.740 spend time. That's, that's the thing. And so actually there was a letter that was published,

00:10:47.460 I think back in 2022, 2023 by a series of BC municipalities. And they, in that letter included

00:10:55.400 data showing that just a small number of people, I think maybe a few dozen. Yeah. It's really small.

00:11:01.140 Yeah. We're responsible for thousands of police interactions. And I think last year, the city of

00:11:08.080 Kelowna published a report that indicated that I think maybe 15, 16 people were responsible for

00:11:13.860 hundreds of police interactions. So you have a very tiny number of people who are causing this wildly

00:11:20.080 disproportionate amount of public disorder and crime. And we just let them get away with it and

00:11:26.280 prioritize their interests over the interests of society as a whole, which is a problem.

00:11:32.380 Yeah. It's got to end. And, and on the maybe misplaced priorities here, CBC just dropped a 40

00:11:40.540 minute documentary that, that seemingly seeks to undo some of these words from the Manitoba premier

00:11:46.920 that, that seems to go in the other direction, you know, from your terrific work. I, you know,

00:11:51.840 when you hopped on this call, I know it was bothering you. Let's talk about what the CBC

00:11:56.600 just published here and what your thoughts are. Yeah. So I want to clarify that the CBC

00:12:00.600 documentary is not in response to Canoes stuff. It's actually, it's the government,

00:12:04.120 the federal government defunding get safer supply programs. So for people who aren't aware,

00:12:08.200 safer supplies is a program where we prescribe addicts, pharmaceutical grade drugs with this idea

00:12:14.640 that it dissuades them from using the illicit supplies. So Alex, let's say you were addicted to

00:12:18.820 fentanyl. You're buying it off the street. It could be contaminated.

00:12:21.500 I am in Vancouver. Yeah. You know, you're, you're, you're respecting local culture.

00:12:26.760 Yeah. And, uh, so the idea is that we would give you bottles and bottles and bottles of

00:12:31.000 hydromorphone, which is an opioid as powerful as heroin, uh, with this, this belief that it will

00:12:36.440 dissuade you from using the street supply. Oh, and there's no supervision in consumption because

00:12:41.600 that would be stigmatizing and would be a barrier. So anyways, you do the rational thing, uh, in this

00:12:47.500 situation, fentanyl is 50 times stronger than hydromorphone or heroin. So you sell your free

00:12:52.380 government opioids to make money to buy illicit fentanyl. So we're not actually mitigating the

00:12:57.320 use of the illicit market. We're subsidizing it and we're flooding our communities with pharmaceutical

00:13:00.620 opioids. Um, I wrote a lot about this. My first report came out in 2023 and, uh, I thought at the

00:13:08.200 time that it would change things, but essentially the, the federal liberals and the BC NDP, they ran

00:13:14.660 with the narrative that this was disinformation, that it was unscientific. Uh, even though, you know,

00:13:21.880 I have a very large pool of addiction physicians who support my claims. Um, and so then I ended up

00:13:29.800 publishing over 50 follow-up articles and op-eds about this very concretely illustrating the safe

00:13:35.180 supply diversion is a major issue. Uh, the London police in Ontario indicated the hydromorphone

00:13:40.840 seizures exploded by 3000% after safe supply access was expanded and that organized crime at the highest

00:13:46.900 level was involved in the traffic of these drugs. In BC, they, uh, mandated witness consumption after

00:13:53.960 a leaked ministerial report showed that the government was aware of widespread diversion.

00:13:57.980 So eventually the federal government defunded the program this year. Thank God, quietly. Uh, but of

00:14:04.820 course, all the harm reduction activists are really mad about that because they don't want to accept

00:14:08.620 the fact that their experiment failed and harmed people. And the CDC is not really journalism. They

00:14:14.560 call themselves like the fifth state called itself investigative journalism. They released a documentary

00:14:18.760 that was essentially a PR puff piece for safe supply. And so what they did is they interviewed all the

00:14:24.240 harm reduction activists. Like literally the documentary consists of just interviews with drug addicts

00:14:30.660 and harm reduction advocates and completely ignores all the medical experts who oppose safer supply and

00:14:36.700 who think that is a terrible idea. Yeah. Right. And then it presents this narrative that opposition to

00:14:41.900 safer supply is unscientific and that it is rooted in fear, stigma, politics, all this stuff. And they're

00:14:49.140 very clearly trying to say that the conservatives by opposing safer supply are killing people and they're

00:14:54.480 unscientific. Um, now if you're going to make that argument, okay, fine. You need to also include the

00:15:01.480 people who the medical experts who are against safer supply, but they didn't. So they're strategically

00:15:06.820 withholding this information from their viewers to avoid addressing the fact that no opposition to

00:15:13.640 safer supply is not a political thing. Well, it is political in a certain sense that health policy is

00:15:18.200 always political, but it's not, you know, some irrational thing. It's rooted in people's clinical

00:15:23.080 observations about diversion and its impact on, on, on, on drug addicts. And so it's the CBC, once again,

00:15:29.360 engaging in activism and calling it journalism. And the polling, like the, I don't think polls should

00:15:35.560 always be used to, to dictate policy. We can, we can get all kinds of things wrong as a general public,

00:15:40.000 but like overwhelmingly so Canadians don't believe in these programs anymore. They were, they were sold one

00:15:46.500 thing and now see another, you know, their kids can't play at the local park because there's a guy passed out

00:15:51.360 on the bench with needles around them. It's like, we all have eyes and we can all tell what's happened

00:15:56.580 to, to once great towns and cities. Adam, you've been an outspoken critic, a great piece recently

00:16:04.360 in the city journal, I believe, of portions of the LGBTQ movement that have seemingly become

00:16:10.180 radicalized or lost their way. And, and some of the, the impacts that's had on harm reduction policy,

00:16:15.640 or even the highly contentious topic of, of pediatric gender care. Has, has this been to

00:16:20.920 the detriment to what that movement is, is supposed to be all about to, to what extent have some of

00:16:26.420 these organizations and organizers lost their way? Well, so the point of that article is to illustrate

00:16:32.160 how these two different policy areas, which on the surface seem completely unrelated, actually stem

00:16:37.480 from shared sensibilities and a shared history. Yeah. So the harm reduction movement, you know,

00:16:43.700 began in the late eighties, early nineties, really got its traction then in response to the HIV AIDS

00:16:48.960 epidemic. And the idea is that if you gave people clean needles, that you could reduce HIV transmissions.

00:16:55.700 And so many radical queer activists, I think quite understandably ended up running these illicit needle 1.00

00:17:01.920 exchange programs that were illegal, right. At that time. And in doing so, they ended up connecting with

00:17:08.860 many nascent drug reform activists and addicts. And so from the very beginning, you had this alliance

00:17:14.480 between LGBTQ activism and harm reductionism. And then that only strengthened over time because they 0.93

00:17:21.800 both shared a hostility towards capitalism, towards the moralizing norms of society.

00:17:28.120 Uh, and their radical ethos really built this like persistence relationship. Now the harm reductionists

00:17:36.220 ended up actually learning a lot from the LGBTQ activists, which is why in the 1990s, many drug 1.00

00:17:41.740 reform activists sent a lot of effort into rebranding drug addicts as a persecuted group, akin to gays 0.97

00:17:48.140 and lesbians or racial minorities. And they were fairly effective in doing that. Now, this relationship

00:17:54.460 between these two groups ends up solidifying in the 2000s, because after the HIV AIDS crisis was mostly

00:18:01.840 managed, many of these organizations, HIV AIDS organizations didn't really know what to do,

00:18:06.960 right, they had to find a way to continue justifying their funding and their existence. And so they

00:18:12.000 pivoted to addictions on the basis that they were really good at working with addicts in the context

00:18:17.520 of infectious diseases. But these people didn't have a background in addiction medicine. And so these

00:18:24.960 HIV AIDS organizations, which had a lot of radical LGBTQ activists, ended up pushing for really radical

00:18:31.280 forms of harm reduction, like drug legalization, and supervised consumption sites. And that's why

00:18:36.800 when you look at the harm reduction space, many of the people were in there are coming from HIV

00:18:40.560 or AIDS backgrounds, right? And so you see this continuing relationship. And then in the 2010s,

00:18:47.600 both of these movements end up gaining a lot of political and social traction. And you can see

00:18:53.680 commonalities with how they bring people on side. So what they would do is they would often produce

00:19:00.240 a lot of bad research and rely on the public scientific illiteracy to give the impression

00:19:06.240 that certain interventions were evidence-based when they were not. And we saw that with pediatric

00:19:10.160 gender medicine, where the evidence-based support of sex changes for kids was really, really, really

00:19:16.080 weak. Yeah. And the studies behind it were really weak as well, and not representative, you know,

00:19:21.680 a mile wide and an inch deep. Like you'd see all this commentary and flowery words,

00:19:25.920 and then you actually look at the graphs and the data and you're going like, what the heck is this?

00:19:29.520 Yeah. I mean, you know, you're looking at people mass producing low quality evidence,

00:19:33.280 and then using it to create the impression of scientific consensus where none exists.

00:19:37.360 And the same thing happened on the harm reduction side, where you had a large number of studies which

00:19:42.080 claimed that safer supply, for example, worked. But when you read the studies, they were really,

00:19:47.920 really terrible. Like you would have, most of them essentially were, yeah, we interviewed about

00:19:52.320 20 to 30 drug addicts. We asked Guy Felicia in Vancouver if this works.

00:19:58.560 It's like, yeah, we interviewed the drug addicts. The addicts told us they liked the program where

00:20:02.000 they get free drugs and they told us that they're not selling the drugs. And if they do, it's only

00:20:06.800 mutual aid. So I guess this is the thing we should do. That's a really reliable audience there to be

00:20:11.680 sampling inside of. Yeah. And then what they would do is they would give a sense of moral urgency

00:20:16.880 and they would say, if you don't support safe supply, you're killing drug addicts. If you don't

00:20:20.560 support pediatric gender care, you're killing trans kids. And they would use this sense of moral

00:20:26.000 urgency, this hysteria to silence their critics who said, well, actually, the evidence base here is

00:20:32.400 not very solid. And so by the early to mid 2020s, people started to notice that there was a problem

00:20:38.240 here. And now you have a backlash against both movements. So the point now where the activists who

00:20:44.640 are working in these spaces are actually saying, oh yeah, well, the, the, the future of harm reduction

00:20:51.520 and LGBTQ rights are tied hand in hand and we have to defend them together. So, you know, when you look

00:20:57.440 at the things that have gone wrong in society with these two big policy areas that everyone cares about,

00:21:01.840 they are way more connected than you would assume. Yeah. And what to the detriment of both of them,

00:21:07.040 like, why can't we just walk and chew gum at the same time? Why can't, why can't we stay on equity

00:21:13.840 and inclusion and stay on responsible drug policy? Why does it have to turn into some radical shared

00:21:19.760 log rolling exercise and some extended excuse for, for further harm in the community? I mean,

00:21:26.320 Adam, you're involved with Project Ontario. I'm a contributor as well. You have a great piece with

00:21:31.120 Josh DeHaz where the two of you talked about four ways to solve our growing crime crisis. That's,

00:21:36.880 that's been an interesting assembly of, uh, uh, Ontario conservatives, principled folks who,

00:21:42.640 who don't love what they're seeing from Queens park. And, you know, you're not just writing about

00:21:47.200 it. You're holding an event you have, uh, I believe it's coming up on November 26th in Toronto

00:21:52.960 in, in partnership with Project Ontario. Can, can our viewers today secure tickets and, uh,

00:21:58.000 tell us a little bit more about it? Yeah, they can. It's only 50 bucks. It's at the national

00:22:01.680 club, which is a really nice space. And we're going to have the, uh, my short documentary,

00:22:06.720 which is 30 minutes long, got to, which features basically crying kids talking about how diverted,

00:22:12.640 safe supply destroyed their lives. Uh, so bring, bring a tissue. It's going to be hard to watch.

00:22:17.680 Yeah. Uh, and then we have a fireside chat between myself and an addiction doctor and a fireside

00:22:21.440 chat between myself and, uh, someone who was harmed by using diverted, safer supply. Uh,

00:22:27.520 now the reason why this event is relevant is that although the federal government defunded

00:22:32.720 its safer supply programs, safer supply primarily exists at the provincial level. And what I mean

00:22:37.600 by that is that when someone gives save a safer supply prescription, they're basically just

00:22:41.520 prescribing a drug off label, like they would in any other case. Um, and because healthcare falls

00:22:47.600 under provincial jurisdiction, if you want to stop that practice, you need the province to step in.

00:22:53.600 Alberta has stepped in and has prevented like banned all safe supply prescribing.

00:23:00.000 BC nominally requires witness consumption to stop diversion. But in Ontario, it is the wild west.

00:23:07.440 And in Ontario, safe supply is actually the worst and any, any other jurisdiction.

00:23:12.640 You think it'd be BC. That's surprising to hear.

00:23:15.280 Yeah. You think it'd be BC? No, it's Ontario.

00:23:17.120 Conservative, uh, three-term majority premier.

00:23:19.600 Yeah. And the thing is that Ford has said that he opposes safe supply. And last year he wrote a

00:23:24.640 letter where, and that was directed towards Trudeau. And he said, uh, we want you to stop funding these

00:23:30.480 programs. We don't, we have no clue how much hydromorphone is getting into our communities

00:23:35.760 through this program. And it's like, well, first of all, you could stop it yourself at the provincial

00:23:39.600 level, like Alberta did. But of course they just want to blame Trudeau, uh, rather than take responsibility.

00:23:45.760 And second of all, of course, you know how much hydromorphone is going into your communities

00:23:49.040 because it's all paid for by OHIP. It's all paid for by the provincial, uh, insurance plan.

00:23:55.360 So we have the Ford government not making any moves here. And as a result, there are so many opioids,

00:24:02.480 like just millions of tablets that are flooding into our streets and Ford isn't doing anything

00:24:06.960 about it. So this event helps raise some awareness about that and calls for a provincial reform

00:24:13.520 to fix this problem. Because just because the federal government is no longer supporting safe

00:24:17.760 supply doesn't mean we're out of the woods yet. We need the province to take action.

00:24:21.520 Yeah. And you don't sound like a radical, uh, a radical right or a yahoo to me for saying that as

00:24:27.440 he's, as he's sort of flippantly described folks who are chipping in on project Ontario. That sounds

00:24:33.120 like a great event. I'm going to put the link, uh, in the, in the, uh, the episode notes for,

00:24:38.080 for Juno supporters to, to check out Adam Zeebo. Thank you for joining us. Thanks for having me.

Juno News - November 15, 2025

Adam Zivo & the latest from Canada’s drug crisis

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript