I seriously doubt that any medical professional worth his money condones self medication.BTW the medical profession in America is on my page re: drugs and self medication.
Addiction Is A Brain Disease
Simon,
So to understand your argument better, you are saying that if I take 10 random folks off the street in each major city around the country, and then I start giving them all coke or heroin regularly for say 1 year, that I will only see 1or or 2 in each group develop an addiction. And this addiction will be the result of a pre-existing health related "condition" (Genetics + PTSD + etc).
I would also understand that you disagree with all the smoking bans and lawsuits regarding marketing, as well as Big Tobacco sponsered studies the determined nicotine is an addictive substance which came out during various said lawsuits, and was a basis of Big Tobacco's marketing successful marketing strategies.
On that idea, you would also seem to disagree with the entire marketing strategy of Narcotics Producers, which entails "getting people hooked".
Or would you only argue that they are trying to do this to capture the "10-20% predisposed.
I would counter argue to say that there would seem to be a much higher percentage of users given free access than restricted access when compared to total population than 10-20%. I have been in Colombia and other South/Central american states where entire community groups/areas have essentially been addicts. How does this fit into the 10-20% model?
You also did not really answer my question on how to provide health care to someone who denies there is a problem? Can I force them to treatment by using legal means? What are your thoughts on the social dimension in this regard?
So to understand your argument better, you are saying that if I take 10 random folks off the street in each major city around the country, and then I start giving them all coke or heroin regularly for say 1 year, that I will only see 1or or 2 in each group develop an addiction. And this addiction will be the result of a pre-existing health related "condition" (Genetics + PTSD + etc).
I would also understand that you disagree with all the smoking bans and lawsuits regarding marketing, as well as Big Tobacco sponsered studies the determined nicotine is an addictive substance which came out during various said lawsuits, and was a basis of Big Tobacco's marketing successful marketing strategies.
On that idea, you would also seem to disagree with the entire marketing strategy of Narcotics Producers, which entails "getting people hooked".
Or would you only argue that they are trying to do this to capture the "10-20% predisposed.
I would counter argue to say that there would seem to be a much higher percentage of users given free access than restricted access when compared to total population than 10-20%. I have been in Colombia and other South/Central american states where entire community groups/areas have essentially been addicts. How does this fit into the 10-20% model?
You also did not really answer my question on how to provide health care to someone who denies there is a problem? Can I force them to treatment by using legal means? What are your thoughts on the social dimension in this regard?
MSimon wrote:Just mentioning the word "drugs" seems to make people get VERY irrational.
Alcohol is a bigger problem by a factor of 10 or 20. I have yet to hear anyone anywhere in the last 40 years suggest prohibition is the answer.
Why?
Perhaps prohibition IS the answer? I'm waiting to see if the incremental prohibition of Cigarettes eventually bears fruit. If it does, then the same sort of incremental approach may very well be effective in banning alcohol.
Your continuous contention that "Prohibition doesn't work" presumes that the idea is altogether impossible, and never bothers to address the possibility that it IS possible, but failed the first time it was tried because of the sudden shock to the system coupled with American's inherent tendency to rebel at being told what to do. (At least that USED to be America's tendency.)
I very much suspect that if the taxes keep getting raised on Alcohol, and the restrictions slowly made more onerous (as they've been doing with cigarettes) then over time, the usage would drop, and eventually the support for alcohol usage would wither away. Even if it doesn't reduce to zero (meaning there are people willing to put up with the high taxes and annoying regulations) It certainly ought to reduce the incidence of drunk driving fatalities, and other alcoholism related problems.
Whether this theory is correct or not can be foretold by what eventually happens to cigarettes.
I'm in the wait and see mode.
MSimon wrote:Skipjack,
I fail to see why people who self medicate for real problems are in any way a problem.
You fix the cause of drug taking and the drug taking goes away.
Unfortunately we have nothing for PTSD. Nothing. Compassionate medicine would then say - let us do what we can to ease the pain. i.e. pain relievers.
I'm no Nietzsche fan but he had this one right:
"Distrust anyone in whom the desire to punish is powerful" Friedrich Nietzsche
The flaw in this argument is the presumption that attempts at prevention are to be equated to a desire to punish.
Keeping dynamite away from children is not an attempt to punish the children, it is an attempt to prevent highly probable disaster.
MSimon wrote: BTW the medical profession in America is on my page re: drugs and self medication. Pity their protocols are not common knowledge.
Argumentum ad verecundiam.
And not even a very good one. SOME people in the Medical community are on your page. I daresay it's that same group of people that likely believes in man caused global warming.
Well, I know two things:
One the massive increase in cigarette prices here has led to a massive decrease in smokers.
That said, I still stand by my earlier post that proposes a compromise solution. Other than the part with the doctors administering the drugs (and the reason for that is disputable), Msimon has failed to bring any arguments against my proposal. I dont quite see why he would be against it. It should fit us both, no?
One the massive increase in cigarette prices here has led to a massive decrease in smokers.
That said, I still stand by my earlier post that proposes a compromise solution. Other than the part with the doctors administering the drugs (and the reason for that is disputable), Msimon has failed to bring any arguments against my proposal. I dont quite see why he would be against it. It should fit us both, no?
MSimon wrote:Skipjack,
The error in your thinking is fundamental. The corrective:
Drugs Do NOT Cause Addiction.
If drugs do not case addiction making them freely available will change nothing except the criminal status of users.
WATER DOES NOT CAUSE WET!
Objects cause wet, because if objects weren't exposed to water, they couldn't get wet!
Skipjack wrote:Well, I know two things:
One the massive increase in cigarette prices here has led to a massive decrease in smokers.
That said, I still stand by my earlier post that proposes a compromise solution. Other than the part with the doctors administering the drugs (and the reason for that is disputable), Msimon has failed to bring any arguments against my proposal. I dont quite see why he would be against it. It should fit us both, no?
He is against the principle of Government control. Any solution that includes that as part of the equation is anathema to him. Even if it produces a good or better result.
How about people self medicating with alcohol? Many, many more deaths a year.Because this self medication causes many deaths every year?
The answer would be to move them to less dangerous drugs like marijuana. Which was done in the pre marijuana prohibition era.
http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... rooms.html
BTW pure heroin is less harmful to the body than alcohol. You can die from either. So why are you all over illegal drugs and giving alcohol a pass?
As I said "drugs make people crazy - especially those who do not use them"
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
So far what we get from government control is a crime wave similar to alcohol prohibition and illegal drugs easier for kids to get than legal beer.Diogenes wrote:Skipjack wrote:Well, I know two things:
One the massive increase in cigarette prices here has led to a massive decrease in smokers.
That said, I still stand by my earlier post that proposes a compromise solution. Other than the part with the doctors administering the drugs (and the reason for that is disputable), Msimon has failed to bring any arguments against my proposal. I dont quite see why he would be against it. It should fit us both, no?
He is against the principle of Government control. Any solution that includes that as part of the equation is anathema to him. Even if it produces a good or better result.
I'm sure that this is a much better result than we got when drugs were legal. And that is no joke. It is sarcasm.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Most people that consume alcohol are NOT selfmedicating on it. If you drink alcohol because you have problems, you have another problem more. This is how people here are raised to look at drinking alcohol. You drink alcohol when you are happy and want to celebrate. This is definitely not self medicating in any way.How about people self medicating with alcohol?
Those that do self medicate using alcohol are indeed going to be alcoholics.
Again measured onthe percentage of users, there are much less alcohol addicts than heroin addicts.
Marijuana does not get you addicted, but it does affect the brain and until we know all the effects of it on the brain and have long term studies, we should be careful with it.
Again you fail to compare the harm per dosage. Your studies that compare the harm of alcohol per gram to the harm of heroin per gram fail to adress that the dosage of alcohol is usually wayyyy lower and you usually do not inject it directly into your veins either.BTW pure heroin is less harmful to the body than alcohol. You can die from either.
Overdosing on alcohol does happen, but it is not as easy as you may think. Usually you start to womit long before you are getting into danger of dieing.
Again, you have not answered my question from earlier and you have not adressed my suggestion for a compromise. Why?
"I actually did the math on this board and showed my work. What have you got?"
The same thing I had when rejecting the 1/3 claim and global warming--common sense.
The people who say human released CO2 is warming the globe did math and showed their work--and it is still horseshit. The people who claimed 1/3rd of all women in the US are victims of rape did their homework, and their work was also horseshit.
I'll go with the trend and publicly and confidently state your grotesque and counter-intutive work in this case is also horseshit.
You are making an extraordinary claim, please provide extraordinary proof.
Which, BTW, where is the proof you are offering?
The same thing I had when rejecting the 1/3 claim and global warming--common sense.
The people who say human released CO2 is warming the globe did math and showed their work--and it is still horseshit. The people who claimed 1/3rd of all women in the US are victims of rape did their homework, and their work was also horseshit.
I'll go with the trend and publicly and confidently state your grotesque and counter-intutive work in this case is also horseshit.
You are making an extraordinary claim, please provide extraordinary proof.
Which, BTW, where is the proof you are offering?
Last edited by TDPerk on Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
Ok, so the reason why you are against my solution is because it involves the government? To be quite honest with you, when it comes to my health, I do trust the government more than Philip Morris, who have been prooven to be liers and IMHO murderers.So far what we get from government control is a crime wave similar to alcohol prohibition and illegal drugs easier for kids to get than legal beer.
Anyway, the "it involves the government" part is a silly argument. The government involvement will not do anything to make it less effective as a means to stop the drug war. So you should still get what you want.
TD,
Well I concede your point. The rate of child abuse in the current generation may not be as high as I estimated. What would explain the discrepancy?
Epigenetics
Well I concede your point. The rate of child abuse in the current generation may not be as high as I estimated. What would explain the discrepancy?
Epigenetics
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
While I used to use tabacco and I quit using it and I am not a schizophrenic, nor are 99.99% of the tabacco users out there. If they all were then half of my homecountry was schizophrenic...
On the other hand, if I look at the phantasy world that my politicians live in...
Seriously though, you still dont bring any points why my proposed compromise solution would not work. All you have been complaining about was my choice of words and the involvement of the government. You have not shown why either of these would prevent this solution from doing what you want (ruin the drug crime by making it unprofitable) and doing what I want (protect the victims and help them getting of their addiction).
Another thing in regards to tabacco abuse: A lot of people here got off their tabacco addiction with the help of new drugs available that prevent the nicotine from docking the appropriate receptors in the brain. So it does not work anymore. I did not need that. My willpower and support from my dear wife were enough.
On the other hand, if I look at the phantasy world that my politicians live in...
Seriously though, you still dont bring any points why my proposed compromise solution would not work. All you have been complaining about was my choice of words and the involvement of the government. You have not shown why either of these would prevent this solution from doing what you want (ruin the drug crime by making it unprofitable) and doing what I want (protect the victims and help them getting of their addiction).
Another thing in regards to tabacco abuse: A lot of people here got off their tabacco addiction with the help of new drugs available that prevent the nicotine from docking the appropriate receptors in the brain. So it does not work anymore. I did not need that. My willpower and support from my dear wife were enough.