Why you shouldn't "self-Medicate."

[MSimon]

The efforts we have made in the Drug War, which on the Federal level costs at least $25 bn a year, have led to the fact that it is easier for a kid to get an illegal drug than a legal beer. We could do at least as well as that by spending nothing.

[Diogenes]

I said nothing about China. Legalization might be very bad for China. Odds are that it will change very little in the US because our criminals supply just about every one who wants the stuff. And they avoid a lot of unnecessary paper work as well.

Divorce leads to drugs:

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... vorce.html

Maybe outlawing divorce would help with the drug problem.

===

But I do like your reasoning

1. Before prohibition 2% of the American population was involved with opiates
2. Since prohibition 2% of the American population has been involved with opiates
3. Thus if we stop prohibiting, in time everyone will become addicted.

QED

Will you just stop with the "four legs good, two legs baaaddd" style of arguing? Endless repetition of the same irrelevant assertion serves no useful purpose for anyone.

I don't know what anyone else thinks, but as far as i'm concerned the argument that only 2% of the population will ever become drug addicts is completely ridiculous. It is likewise contradicted by the REALITY of what happened to China. Your very own "Druglibrary" website says that over 50% of adult males were addicted in Manchuria province.


I am befuddled as to how you can keep repeating the same fallacy over and over again. (Like that Beer thing.)

[Diogenes]

Run to the hills, alcohol is about to be legalized again!

Who cares about China. It's apples and oranges as gun prohibition is in countries like France. Guns aren't part of their culture (no such things as second amendment and no such cultural compatibility) and legalized guns would never work without a fairly long and chaotic period of acclimatization. So what. France isn't the USA. Nevermind China.

It appears to me that you have a cognitive disconnect. You seem to think that Americans are some sort of different kind of human than the Chinese, and what happened to them couldn't possibly happen to us. How you can regard the largest real world experiment on Legalized drugs as irrelevant, probably has more to do with the fact that it COMPLETELY contradicts your theory than that you honestly regard it as irrelevant.


I suspect Ben Franklin sums up your real feelings:

"One of the greatest tragedies of life is the murder of a beautiful theory by a gang of brutal facts."

[Diogenes]

If yuo want to know more, this link is a good resource for what your government thinks.

http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs38/38661/movement.htm

This link will also point you at other data and info.

One of the interesting arguments that still goes on today is the actual estimate of current drug use (by type) and production levels. This is also then argued into what the current import and stockpile trends are.
The bottom line is that not even the traffickers are sure as to how much is produced, transported, stockpiled, and sold nationwide in the US. Mostly because they tend to talk to each other with bullets.

You will notice great disparity between many sources as to the actual demand volumes and consumption rates verses availability and production.

http://justf.org/blog/2011/03/03/fuzzy- ... ics-report

Another good resource pointer to start with for current trending is this link, pay particular attention to the stats and chart at the end.

http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/new ... 20910.html

It would seem that history has given us better hindsight into China's travails than we currently have for our own. However, in our current situation the last few years have been trending for the better vice worse (more or less) in regards to availability and user rates.

I've noticed that it's difficult to get great accuracy in numbers regarding Opium addiction in China. Most of what I can find is anecdotal, but the shipping records of the Brits are probably fairly accurate, and they demonstrate a continuous increase in the quantities of drugs being shipped into China.

One would have to argue, that either more people were being sucked into addiction, or the existing addicts were greatly increasing their use. The later theory is completely ridiculous in my opinion, and the only reasonable conclusion is that the addiction was spreading, not being confined to only 2% of the population.

I am beginning to believe that proponents of drug legalization have self hypnotized themselves into being unable to comprehend the fact of China's widespread and increasing drug addiction and how the exact same thing would happen anywhere in the world that drugs were permitted to be legal. If anyone were listening to them I would be concerned about their spreading their nonsensical theories.

[choff]

One problem being reported in my local newspaper is that the grow rippers are now targeting the legal medical marijuana users.

[Betruger]

You seem to think that Americans are some sort of different kind of human than the Chinese

I'm not the one confused here. You once again fail to counter argue the point I'm arguing. Talking to you really is a waste of time. Where did I say that Americans weren't the same kind of humans that Chinamen are? Where did I say that merely being human is all there is to whether something as complex as a country, culture, economy, political territory, etc, yields more or less addicts and better or worse prospects for acclimatization? I never said either yet here you are pretending I did and hastily concluding there's some disconnect.

There's no disconnect, so either you're ... not capable of adding the 2 and 2 given to you in plain simple sentences, or you're purposefully fumbling.

China is not America, Americans aren't Chinamen. When you base your rhetoric on AMERICAN data you'll have a foot to stand on for preaching on American issues. End of story. And end of my opening this thread or any thread with your name on it.

[Diogenes]

You seem to think that Americans are some sort of different kind of human than the Chinese

I'm not the one confused here. You once again fail to counter argue the point I'm arguing. Talking to you really is a waste of time. Where did I say that Americans weren't the same kind of humans that Chinamen are? Where did I say that merely being human is all there is to whether something as complex as a country, culture, economy, political territory, etc, yields more or less addicts and better or worse prospects for acclimatization? I never said either yet here you are pretending I did and hastily concluding there's some disconnect.

There's no disconnect, so either you're ... not capable of adding the 2 and 2 given to you in plain simple sentences, or you're purposefully fumbling.

China is not America, Americans aren't Chinamen. When you base your rhetoric on AMERICAN data you'll have a foot to stand on for preaching on American issues. End of story. And end of my opening this thread or any thread with your name on it.

That's fine with me. You contribute nothing useful. One less source of noise.

[ladajo]

Where does the 2% come from?

Current national tracking data indicates 8.7%

[ladajo]

Once involved in drug use it becomes hard to get off the bus.

Treatment completions by themselves are under 50%. When you consider treatment sustainment and staying clean over time, it makes the success rate smaller.

see figure 2.
http://oas.samhsa.gov/2k9/outptTX/outptTX.htm

As noted above, the current national use rate is tracked at 8.7%

"In 2009, an estimated 21.8 million Americans aged 12 or older were current (past month) illicit drug users, meaning they had used an illicit drug during the month prior to the survey interview. This estimate represents 8.7 percent of the population aged 12 or older. Illicit drugs include marijuana/hashish, cocaine (including crack), heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, or prescription-type psychotherapeutics used nonmedically.
The rate of current illicit drug use among persons aged 12 or older in 2009 (8.7 percent) was higher than the rate in 2008 (8.0 percent)."

http://oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k9NSDUH/2k9Results.htm

If you want to dig more for current data sets:
http://oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUHlatest.htm

An interesting comparison from overseas:

http://www.cedro-uva.org/stats/national.nlusa.html

Note rising trend in netherlands...

http://www.cedro-uva.org/stats/asd8701.pdf

There is a dip in 2001, and possibly corrleates to Opiate production impacts of post 9/11 war.

[rjaypeters]

"A Real Debate About Drug Policy"
George P. Shultz and Paul A. Volcker on why the 'war on drugs' has failed—and what to do.

Quote: "We do not support the simple legalization of all drugs. What we do advocate is an open and honest debate on the subject. We want to find our way to a less costly and more effective method of discouraging drug use, cutting down the power of organized crime, providing better treatment and minimizing negative societal effects.

Other countries that have tried different approaches include Britain, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Portugal and Australia. What can we learn from these varied experiences, some more successful than others? What can we learn from our own experience in reducing sharply the smoking of cigarettes or in the handling of alcohol after the end of Prohibition?

Simple legalization is by no means the only or safest approach. One possibility is to decriminalize the individual use of drugs while maintaining laws against supplying them, thus allowing law-enforcement efforts to focus on the drug peddlers. Some of the money that is saved can be spent on treatment centers, which drug users are more likely to seek out if doing so does not expose them to the risk of arrest."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... _lifeStyle

[Skipjack]

Simple legalization is by no means the only or safest approach. One possibility is to decriminalize the individual use of drugs while maintaining laws against supplying them, thus allowing law-enforcement efforts to focus on the drug peddlers. Some of the money that is saved can be spent on treatment centers, which drug users are more likely to seek out if doing so does not expose them to the risk of arrest."

Which is what I have been advocating.

[palladin9479]

What a joke. Can't even read others replies but selectively. I'm pretty sure it says black on white that there should be more comprehensive legalization of drugs. With my name next to that post.

Like alcohol is prohibited now.

Misses the point either way. Humans will become drug addicted if subjected to addictive drugs.

Yup.

Truism that misses the point.
Now I remember why I'd stopped reading anything by diogenes

Because he's a troll that has found a nice supply to feed his addiction to attention?

[Diogenes]

What a joke. Can't even read others replies but selectively. I'm pretty sure it says black on white that there should be more comprehensive legalization of drugs. With my name next to that post.

Like alcohol is prohibited now.

Yup.

Truism that misses the point.
Now I remember why I'd stopped reading anything by diogenes

Because he's a troll that has found a nice supply to feed his addiction to attention?

And your purpose in opening this closed can of worms is what?

[rjaypeters]

This vaccine might be useful:

"Scientists Create Vaccine Against Heroin High"

"ScienceDaily (July 21, 2011) — Researchers at The Scripps Research Institute have developed a highly successful vaccine against a heroin high and have proven its therapeutic potential in animal models."

SNIP

"The team also found that the heroin vaccine was highly specific, meaning that it only produced an antibody response to heroin and 6AM, and not to the other opioid-related drugs tested, such as oxycodone as well as drugs used for opioid dependence -- methadone, naltrexone, and naloxone. "The importance of this," said Janda, "is that it indicates these vaccines could be used in combination with other heroin rehabilitation therapies."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 103526.htm