Drugs

[MrktMkr1986]

Poor implementation.

Do you have any ideas for implementation then?

Alaska decriminalized it but did nothing to regulate it and control the supply chains.

England did (with heroin) in the 1960s. Then they took steps towards criminalization.

In addition, those numbers would have rebounded back down after the people who tried it realized it wasn't for them. -- Not everyone enjoys marijuana or it's effects. About half of the people who try never try again because it doesn't suit them in one way or the other.

That may very well be true. However, that still doesn't explain the fact that 100,000-160,000 weak-minded individuals end up in rehab for marijuana addiction (in the US).

 

[emad]

That may very well be true. However, that still doesn't explain the fact that 100,000-160,000 weak-minded individuals end up in rehab for marijuana addiction (in the US).

The vast majority of whom are there under court order for their first or second offense.

Why? Why would the FDA refuse access to research grade marijuana? Why?

It's a tightly controlled substance. You have to go through several barriers to get access to it or any other tightly controlled substance.

Why is Marinol still being marketed to patients even though its a federal offense? Why?

Hypocricy in action. Marinol is a synthetic form of THC, which is a chemical found in Marijuana. Their entire marketing campaign is targeted to shoot down any and all claims that Marinol is Marijuana.

 

[ledhed]

* The best established medical use of smoked marijuana is as an
anti-nauseant for cancer chemotherapy. Marijuana's efficacy was
demonstrated in studies by half a dozen states, involving hundreds of
subjects. Most research has found smoked marijuana superior to oral THC
(Marinol). Many oncologists are currently recommending marijuana to their
patients.
* Marijuana is widely used to treat nausea and appetite loss
associated with AIDS, but the government has blocked research in this area.
Studies have shown that marijuana helps improve appetite, and Marinol has
been FDA approved for treatment of AIDS wasting syndrome. Nearly 10,000
PWA's were reported to be using marijuana through the San Francisco
Cannabis Buyers' Club. However, the government has blocked efforts by Dr.
Donald Abrams of the University of California at San Francisco to proceed
with an FDA-approved study of marijuana and AIDS wasting syndrome, by
refusing to grant him access to research marijuana. Research is badly
needed on the relative merits of smoked and oral marijuana versus Marinol.
* There is much evidence, largely anecdotal, that marijuana is
useful as an anti-convulsant for spinal injuries, multiple sclerosis,
epilepsy, and other diseases. Similar evidence suggests marijuana may be
useful as an analgesic for chronic pain from cancer and migraine as well as
for rheumatism and a variety of auto-immune diseases. There is a
conspicuous lack of controlled studies in this area; further research is
needed.
* Cannabidiol, a constituent of natural marijuana not found in
Marinol, appears to have distinctive therapeutic value as an
anti-convulsant and hypnotic, and to counteract acute anxiety reactions
caused by THC.
* It has been established that marijuana reduces intra-ocular
pressure, the primary object of glaucoma therapy. Due to its
psychoactivity, however, marijuana has not gained widespread acceptance in
this application.
* Many patients report using marijuana as a substitute for more
addictive and harmful psychoactive drugs, including prescription
painkillers, opiates, and alcohol. Marijuana and Marinol have also been
found useful as a treatment for depression and mood disorders in
Alzheimer's and other patients. More research is needed


Pot addiction is a load of bull...

Regular users of marijuana can develop a marked tolerance to the drug, but physical dependence characterized by significant withdrawal symptoms has not been well established in either human or animal studies. Marijuana remains a complex and poorly understood drug-- further research is needed to determine its precise physiological and psychological effects.

Show some medical proof of maryjuana addiction . aside from the 100,000 to 150,000 idiots that just must have it...especially if its hydro.. is snoop dog one of them ?

Q.) What is marijuana addiction?

A.) Marijuana addiction is a phenomenon experienced by more than 150,000 individuals each year who enter treatment for their proclaimed addiction to marijuana. Marijuana addiction is characterized as compulsive, often uncontrollable marijuana craving, seeking, and use, even when the individual knows that marijuana use is not in his best interest. Marijuana addiction could be defined as chronically making the firm decision not to use marijuana followed shortly by a relapse due to experiencing overwhelming compulsive urges to use marijuana despite the firm decision not to. This contradiction is characteristic of an addiction problem

So in other words , if I know a hot blonde thats not my wife and I keep going over to see her even though its not in my best interest ..but I just have to get me some..even though I told my wife I would stop..That makes me an blonde addict...

Can I get treatment ?...in a week or two...maybe three ....be right back..gotta go..

 

[emad]

Q.) What is marijuana addiction?

A.) Marijuana addiction is a phenomenon experienced by more than 150,000 individuals each year who enter treatment for their proclaimed addiction to marijuana. Marijuana addiction is characterized as compulsive, often uncontrollable marijuana craving, seeking, and use, even when the individual knows that marijuana use is not in his best interest. Marijuana addiction could be defined as chronically making the firm decision not to use marijuana followed shortly by a relapse due to experiencing overwhelming compulsive urges to use marijuana despite the firm decision not to. This contradiction is characteristic of an addiction problem

Oh dear... it seems that I get that I'm VERY addicted to photography, gtplanet, and music...

brb, I'm draining all my bandwidth to get some Pink Floyd albums

 

[Famine]

The British have also tried liberalizing drug laws. England’s experience shows that use and addiction increase with "harm reduction" policy. They allowed doctors to prescribe heroin to addicts (hoping for a decrease in usage), resulting in an explosion of heroin use, and by the mid-1980s, known addiction rates were increasing at a very high rate. Am I wrong, Famine? By the way, these aren't the only examples I have of legalization failing. If you address the problems that caused the failure, then I'll change my arguments. If you can show me a country that has "liberal" drug laws (and it's been successful) I'll chance my arguments.

Broadly, yes.

The program instituted in the UK (and please don't interchange "England" with "Britain" - or even "the UK") in the 1960s wasn't legalisation but limited decriminalisation. Unregulated decriminalisation at that.

Doctors were allowed to prescribe heroin, with a view to weaning addicts off the drug. However at this point in time doctors were still thought of as gods and no systems for regulating the prescription amounts were in place as doctors could do no wrong. This allowed some doctors to prescribe massive doses - with no intent of curing addiction - and sell the surplus to supplement their incomes. What essentially happened was that the UK Government supplied free heroin and the doctors became drug dealers, selling, again, at any price they felt like and keeping addicts - or customers - hooked.


The system was then switched to supply methadone - essentially medical heroin. Methadone is to heroin what vinegar is to baby milk. It doesn't give the same effects at all and is intended to wean the addicts off heroin, then supplied in smaller and smaller doses until addiction is cured. No wonder heroin addicts then rejected the program in massive numbers, despite methadone being free on prescription, in favour of buying heroin - as they had always done from their doctors - on the streets.


Half-arsed measures like this do no-one any good. It doesn't support your argument on investigation and it certainly doesn't support mine on the face of it.


These days, doctors are subject - especially in the wake of Shipman - to more controls, more checks and more regulation to ensure they aren't prescribing excess and selling the surplus. In fact, doctors no longer dispense medicines at all - they prescribe it and the patient collects the prescription his/herself from a highly-regulated dispensing chemist/pharmacist. That's not to say it's not possible for the regulations to be bypassed by the determined individual, but since General Practitioners make £100,000+ ($185,000+) a year and are guaranteed a job from 25 through to retirement, it's a greedy and foolish individual indeed that tries it (and there no doubt will be a few).

Incidientally, the main 9 failings of the system were listed as:

1) The British approach has failed to attract a majority of addicts;
How many addicts WISH to be cured - the main intent of the programme?

2) Many registered addicts continue to turn to illicit sources of drugs;
They were buying medical-grade heroin at low prices from their doctors. If they don't want to be cured of COURSE they'll buy them from whoever is cheapest.

3) Many registered addicts do not decrease their dosage over time;
See point one. Also, why would the suppliers cut dosage? They want their customers to keep buying their product.

4) Many registered addicts continue to be involved in criminal activity;
To fund buying their drugs from the unregulated doctors...

5) Many registered addicts are chronically unemployed or do not earn enough to look after themselves;
And you'd want to employ someone registered as a heroin addict... why?

6) The death rate of registered addicts is much higher than that of the general population and may be higher than that of North American addicts;
Fancy that! People altering their blood chemistry by injecting narcotics have a shorter lifespan than average. Second point is speculation with no information to back it up. The author MAY be talking out of his arse.

7) Since 1960, there has been a dramatic increase in the English addict population;
Since 1960 there has been a dramatic increase in the English population. Not to mention the dramatic increase in the supply of heroin and other drugs.

8) The black market for heroin continues to thrive;
Because the government was giving FREE HEROIN to doctors to distribute as they felt fit. GO back to point 3.

9) Law enforcement appears to remain a necessary, costly and complex control measure.
See points 4 & 5.


Nevertheless, the only difference between smoking (nicotine addicition) and heroin addiction is that the former is legal and the latter is not. This is an astonishing incogruity, only in place because people (including royalty and those in power) have been enjoying the narcotic effects of tobacco long before the laws governing narcotics came into force and coke/weed/heroin/LSD are recent additions to the stimulant folio. Ban smoking and you've got 15 million rioters in the UK. Legalise heroin and they'll be amongst the protestors. Yet remove nicotine from a nicotine addict and you'll have exactly the same effects as if you remove heroin from a heroin addict.

It seems idiotic that people think they can cope with nicotine and alcohol, distributed through licensed, regulated outlets, yet heroin, crack, LSD, marijuana and Uncle Tom Cobbleigh and all are evils of society which must be crushed under the iron boots of oppression. And yet we do think that...

 

[ledhed]

Here we use stainless steel boots with spikes .

 

[Danoff]

boing.

 

[ledhed]

??? What did I miss ?

 

[213101]

there shouldnt be such a big deal around Marijuana its like its almost legal where i live because i cant think of any one that doesnt do it apart from 60+ people. i also got caught with friends with bud and i only got a mere warning.i dont think it matters much anymore.

 

[TheCracker]

......ooopsss

 

[ledhed]

Bump .

 

[MrktMkr1986]

Why would anyone want to try hallucinogenic mushrooms? I have a friend who said he tried (approx. 1.6-1.7 grams) the stuff and the effect lasted 6 hours etc. One of his friends mistakenly took 4 grams of the stuff at once and was "gone" for nearly 1/2 a day.

Why? Are they aware of what they are doing to themselves? Am I a prude for not wasting my money on drugs? How can "not being in control of your own body" be fun? I don't get it... maybe I wasn't meant to "get it"? And PCP? No thanks... I'll stick to MSFT. [/rant]

 

[ledhed]

Actually mushrooms are an aquired taste . If you are with people you trust and dont mind the whole trippy thing...like hearing trees breathing and seeing colors strobe and such , you just have to get past the stomache upset. Shrooms are mild when it come sto tripping .
It wont kill you .

 

[emad]

Why would anyone want to try hallucinogenic mushrooms? I have a friend who said he tried (approx. 1.6-1.7 grams) the stuff and the effect lasted 6 hours etc. One of his friends mistakenly took 4 grams of the stuff at once and was "gone" for nearly 1/2 a day.

but they didn't die, nor did they suffer brain damage or failure of any part of their body. Sure, the high lasted a while. But being drunk still has more powerful and longer lasting effects than the half day high can.

Marijuana usually lasts anywhere from 1 to 5 hours depending on your body's tolerance and how much you took.

I've never taken them myself, but my personal view on shrooms is that 1) they're not chemical, 2) non-addictive (chemically), 3) no long term side effects 4) the effects are strong so it should be done in a safe environment for the first few times.

Why? Are they aware of what they are doing to themselves? Am I a prude for not wasting my money on drugs? How can "not being in control of your own body" be fun? I don't get it... maybe I wasn't meant to "get it"?

It's not the "not being in control of your body" that's fun, it's the experience. You look at the world in a light that you've never looked at it before. It's definately not for everyone and it definately shouldn't be forced down your gullet. If a person gets a kick out of it, fine - as long as it's in the privacy of their own homes.

And PCP? No thanks... I'll stick to MSFT. [/rant]

As will I, but some people like that and they'll stop at nothing to get it. I know it's sad, but that's how it is. As long as there's a market for it, someone will make it and sell it at profit.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

Actually mushrooms are an aquired taste . If you are with people you trust and dont mind the whole trippy thing...like hearing trees breathing and seeing colors strobe and such , you just have to get past the stomache upset. Shrooms are mild when it comes to tripping .
It wont kill you .

but they didn't die, nor did they suffer brain damage or failure of any part of their body. Sure, the high lasted a while. But being drunk still has more powerful and longer lasting effects than the half day high can.

Well, I'm glad that no permanent damage was done -- and I'm especially relieved to hear that it's not lethal. Besides, I don't want my friend to die -- but I still don't "get it".

Marijuana usually lasts anywhere from 1 to 5 hours depending on your body's tolerance and how much you took.

Interesting fact...

Speaking of which, while living in the dorm, my friend did a lot of this as well.

I've never taken them myself, but my personal view on shrooms is that 1) they're not chemical,

True.

2) non-addictive (chemically),

Agreed.

3) no long term side effects

Ah, well, that depends... If they consume the "wrong" type of mushroom (Death Cap?), or one that has been contaminated/laced with PCP/LSD... then they'd be in trouble.

4) the effects are strong so it should be done in a safe environment for the first few times.

As far as I am aware, they (my friend and one of their friends) were doing this whilst living in their dorms.

It's not the "not being in control of your body" that's fun, it's the experience.

I figured as much. I was only repeating what I was told.

You look at the world in a light that you've never looked at it before. It's definately not for everyone and it definately shouldn't be forced down your gullet.

It's definitely not for me, and at no time was I ever forced to try drugs, but I just can't see why some people would "need" to use a mind-altering substance in order to look at the world in a different light.

If a person gets a kick out of it, fine - as long as it's in the privacy of their own homes.

Or dorms for that matter... I digress...

Personally, I just don't want this kind of behavior to become a habit for my friend (though, after not seeing/talking to him for almost a year, it probably already has). The consequences of which could be catastrophic...

As will I, but some people like that and they'll stop at nothing to get it.

That's what scares me most.

I know it's sad, but that's how it is.

I guess you're right.

As long as there's a market for it, someone will make it and sell it at profit.

Speaking of which, there is even a stock called PCP...

 

[VT]

Speaking of which, there is even a stock called PCP...

You had to do it didn't you? Just had to bring stocks into a conversation about drugs. You're such a jerk.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

You had to do it didn't you? Just had to bring stocks into a conversation about drugs. You're such a jerk.

That's why I'm called the Market Maker.

 

[VT]

That's why I'm called the Market Maker.

Very true my friend, very true.

 

[Danoff]

It's definitely not for me, and at no time was I ever forced to try drugs, but I just can't see why some people would "need" to use a mind-altering substance in order to look at the world in a different light.

Brian,

I understand I'm taking this out of context a bit, but the issue here is not whether it is necessary, but whether it violates the rights of others.

 

[PS]

Does anyone here agree with me that shrooms are basically harmless as long as you're in a safe environment?

 

[PS]

It's definitely not for me, and at no time was I ever forced to try drugs, but I just can't see why some people would "need" to use a mind-altering substance in order to look at the world in a different light.

Why do you go on a rollercoaster ride? Why does one watch an action movie?

That's why.

 

[Swift]

Does anyone here agree with me that shrooms are basically harmless as long as you're in a safe environment?

What would you consider a safe environment?

 

[JacktheHat]

What would you consider a safe environment?

Moses was rather fond of going up a hill to take his...

 

[Swift]

Moses was rather fond of going up a hill to take his...

Immature response.

Answer the question or don't respond.

 

[JacktheHat]

Immature response.

Answer the question or don't respond.

Put your handbag down lil' lady

 

[Young_Warrior]

Isnt it funny that most drug dealers dont take what their pushing and that they talk down to their customers. Hell even if you only smoke marijuana I'll still refer to you as a crackhead.

I also dont see the whole point of drugsto alter your state of mind and to compare it to a rollercoaster ride is stupid.

We all know that drugs are bad so why try them in the first place its a downward slope if your hitting the hard stuff.

 

[Swift]

Put your handbag down lil' lady

Wow jack, all you can do is insult me? Not even come up with a reasonable non sarcastic response to a logical question? Ok, if that's all you're capable of.

 

[JacktheHat]

Wow jack, all you can do is insult me? Not even come up with a reasonable non sarcastic response to a logical question? Ok, if that's all you're capable of.

Swift it was a stupid question in the first place. A safe environment is any that the subject feels secure in, it's self explanatory...

 

[Swift]

Swift it was a stupid question in the first place. A safe environment is any that the subject feels secure in, it's self explanatory...

Some people consider a club a safe environment. Or a party at a friends house. Those are quite arguably NOT safe. So it's not a self explanatory question.

 

[skip0110]

Isnt it funny that most drug dealers dont take what their pushing and that they talk down to their customers.

Upon what experience do you make this statement? Movies? Government funded literature? It certainly contradicts my experiences.