Talk-Polywell.org

This has the potential to change everything:
http://www.gizmag.com/opioid-addiction- ... tem/23706/

Researchers have found a way to block addiction to various opioid drugs, including heroin and morphine, without negatively affecting the pain-relieving properties of these drugs

Skipjack wrote:This has the potential to change everything:
http://www.gizmag.com/opioid-addiction- ... tem/23706/

Researchers have found a way to block addiction to various opioid drugs, including heroin and morphine, without negatively affecting the pain-relieving properties of these drugs

Heroin was supposed to do that.

In 1895, the German drug company Bayer marketed diacetylmorphine as an over-the-counter drug under the trademark name Heroin.[51] The name was derived from the Greek word "Heros" because of its perceived "heroic" effects upon a user.[51] It was developed chiefly as a morphine substitute for cough suppressants that did not have morphine's addictive side-effects. Morphine at the time was a popular recreational drug, and Bayer wished to find a similar but non-addictive substitute to market.[52] However, contrary to Bayer's advertising as a "non-addictive morphine substitute," heroin would soon have one of the highest rates of dependence among its users.[53]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin

If it binds to a receptor it is likely to have the effects of binding to that receptor. Methedone was also supposed to do that.

And of course there is the problem of price. And maintaining bank profits.

Running The Laundry well some one has to profit from all that Drug Money - American and Brit banks.

Compared to tobacco pure opiates are not particularly harmful drugs.

http://classicalvalues.com/2012/08/opiu ... cket-1792/

Most of the heroin scare is pure misinformation. One of the strongest drugs known to man. And once tolerance develops you can never get enough.

Well if they only understood addiction they might be on to something.

About 70% of female heroin users were sexually abused in childhood.

Which says "addiction" is a response to PTSD.

MSimon wrote:Well if they only understood addiction they might be on to something.

About 70% of female heroin users were sexually abused in childhood.

Which says "addiction" is a response to PTSD.

And the implication here is that if you haven't been sexually abused, you have nothing to fear from Heroin?

Whatever he's proposing, seems obvious he's mistaking a correlation for causation. He's also equating being sexually abused with having PTSD. Huge numbers of abuse victims have no anxiety as result and PTSD is only anxiety related.

Bunch of useless oatmeal observations. . .

Diogenes wrote:

MSimon wrote:Well if they only understood addiction they might be on to something.

About 70% of female heroin users were sexually abused in childhood.

Which says "addiction" is a response to PTSD.

And the implication here is that if you haven't been sexually abused, you have nothing to fear from Heroin?

Well no. You have to have trauma and the genes for long term PTSD. About 20% of the population has those genes. About 10% get them activated.

BTW the PTSD rate for Iraq vets is running at about 20% to 25%.

GIThruster wrote:Whatever he's proposing, seems obvious he's mistaking a correlation for causation. He's also equating being sexually abused with having PTSD. Huge numbers of abuse victims have no anxiety as result and PTSD is only anxiety related.

Bunch of useless oatmeal observations. . .

True. PTSD is not just caused by trauma. You also have to have the genetics. I'm surprised you haven't studied the subject in depth.

Some people are in love with their ignorance.

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." - Max Planck

MSimon wrote:

Diogenes wrote:

MSimon wrote:Well if they only understood addiction they might be on to something.

About 70% of female heroin users were sexually abused in childhood.

Which says "addiction" is a response to PTSD.

And the implication here is that if you haven't been sexually abused, you have nothing to fear from Heroin?

Well no. You have to have trauma and the genes for long term PTSD. About 20% of the population has those genes. About 10% get them activated.

BTW the PTSD rate for Iraq vets is running at about 20% to 25%.

So if you don't have these genes you won't get addicted to Heroin? Is *THIS* the point you are attempting to make?

MSimon wrote: I'm surprised you haven't studied the subject in depth.

Some of us have to work for a living. It's only the parasites like you that can afford to google every last thing that pops into their consciousness.

Diogenes wrote:

MSimon wrote:

Diogenes wrote: And the implication here is that if you haven't been sexually abused, you have nothing to fear from Heroin?

Well no. You have to have trauma and the genes for long term PTSD. About 20% of the population has those genes. About 10% get them activated.

BTW the PTSD rate for Iraq vets is running at about 20% to 25%.

So if you don't have these genes you won't get addicted to Heroin? Is *THIS* the point you are attempting to make?

No. It is not. You also have to have sufficient trauma.

The first 10 people heroin was tried on did not get addicted. So the folks who invented it thought "AHA - nonaddictive morphine". Not an unreasonable conclusion given the understanding of the time. i.e. "some drugs have the power of 'addiction'." But we now know (some of us anyway) that drugs are not addictive.

People in chronic pain chronically take pain relievers.

PTSD pain is relieved by pain relievers.

I am getting through to the younger generation. It is just a matter of time until the whole idea of punishing people for desiring pain relief is permanently put to rest.

GIThruster wrote:

MSimon wrote: I'm surprised you haven't studied the subject in depth.

Some of us have to work for a living. It's only the parasites like you that can afford to google every last thing that pops into their consciousness.

Well OK. You have strong opinions on a subject of which you are ignorant.

Thank you for being so candid. You have that to your credit at least.

And these ideas of yours just pop into your consciousness. And your integrity is such that you do not feel it is worthwhile to check them. Anything else we should just take on faith in you that you would care to expound on?

I am amused that you have spent so much time arguing against me based on nothing but folklore and superstition.

You might find this of some additional amusement:

http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/30 ... goCult.pdf

Feynman.

The whole idea of "addiction" is based on a lack of knowledge.

The following does not explain everything about "addiction" but it explains a lot more than "drugs cause addiction".

People in chronic pain chronically take pain relievers.