The Relative Dangers of Drugs

[Quintus Curtius]

Governments have always tried to ban things they view as socially corrosive.

The Roman emperors were quick to regulate foods and substances from the East which they viewed as pernicious, rare, or tending to corrupt morals.
(Of course, the bans didn't apply to themselves).

One of the Turkish sultans even tried to ban coffee with the death penalty. He was not successful.

And in England several hundred years ago, gin consumption was a big problem...much like the crack epidemic in American cities in the 1980s. Cheap, powerful, and "addictive" for the impoverished, women were seen as especially susceptible to drunkenness by gin drinking. Check out Hogarth's famous print, "Gin Lane" (below).

So, it's just a matter of where you draw the line. It's impossible to ban everything. Wise leadership will have to weigh allocations of resources, degree of public harm, and the benefits of taxation and revenue collection.

I'd like to know more about Somali "khat", though...

 

[Cr33pin]

Drugs were great when I was young and carefree. A lot of my best memories and stories revolve around MDMA and Acid... even weed and beer. I'm older now and couldn't go back to that life if I wanted to. I will be forever grateful tho that I got to enjoy and experience them in my younger years.

 

[Mage]

or Steve Jobs have to use drugs to be rich, famous and good with women? Maybe they use drugs or maybe they don't, but they sure don't need drugs to be rich and famous a

Steve Jobs on LSD:

'It was a positive life changing experience for me and I am glad I went through that experience'.

Steve Jobs on ganja:

The best way I would describe the effect of the marijuana and the hashish is that it would make me relaxed and creative,'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...bs-told-Pentagon-LSD-marijuana-use-1970s.html

Mage you are not speaking from direct user experience here, you are grouping all 'drugs' together as if they all have the same psychological effects which isn't true. The same drug from the same batch can have different effects on different people, which is why most people who have take coke or ganga don't become destitute addicts living on the streets.

So ok one of the many dudes I dropped from my head did drugs, but my point was that his fame does not depend on it. The link you posted says he did it 15 times over a period of few years decades ago. That hardly characterizes him as a drug user. As for his statements of experience - that is all western people babble about all the time - how that and that was a good expriance. I filter out such shit.

I understand why you defend drugs. You take pride in your ability to play with fire and use them for a rare controled pleasure trip without the negative side effects that come from overuse when addiction forces you to overuse. You feel superior to those who slip and fall into addiction. You take pride into the fact that the negative "different effects" don't seem to apply to you but they apply to others. You even feel superior to guys like me who don't try out drugs, you think that I am prudish and passing on life, while you are the master of getting pleasure. But that is how drugs get people - trough ego.

All drugs leave different but negative effects on all the people. These effects on you are so small that you don't notice them. But every time you you use drugs the effects get bigger. There will be a critical point when you start noticing these effects, but your prideful stance of superiority will have you lulled in denial by the time it happens. So don't try to show me how cool you are with your deep and intimate personal experience of drugs. You are playing a game where there are risks, but where there are no gains. Not smart at all.

 

[_DC_]

Mage, its amazing you have such strong beliefs that drugs (im assuming you're not including alcohol, even though the published metastudy has it more addictive and physically harmful than many others) have zero positives and always lead to some form of addiction, without having an iota of personal experience.

Ive always felt if you are genuinely happy sober, then you are safe to use drugs recreationally. Its people who have messed up lives usually, mental illness, poverty, etc. who abuse drugs (take too much too often). Alcohol is famous in this respect. There are some exceptions, for example celebrities who have endless money and no semblance of a normal life to uphold who can get addicted. Feeble minded people tend to ignore proper causation, and rather assume that the homeless got that way through drugs, rather than having such a shit life and nothing to lose makes them want to be high all the time.

Heroin and meth have destructiveness not found in the others. Coke has a tendency to inspire addiction because of its short effects and wanting more, however I know plenty of people who use it occasionally on weekends with no ill effects. When I say ill effects I mean job, money, social life etc. Everyone knows about "chemical karma" which is generally the better you feel the night before, the worse you will feel the day after. Still, alcohol has the worst hangover IMO after a night of excess.

 

[I'mWaitingForTheMan]

or Steve Jobs have to use drugs to be rich, famous and good with women? Maybe they use drugs or maybe they don't, but they sure don't need drugs to be rich and famous a

Steve Jobs on LSD:

'It was a positive life changing experience for me and I am glad I went through that experience'.

Steve Jobs on ganja:

The best way I would describe the effect of the marijuana and the hashish is that it would make me relaxed and creative,'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...bs-told-Pentagon-LSD-marijuana-use-1970s.html

Mage you are not speaking from direct user experience here, you are grouping all 'drugs' together as if they all have the same psychological effects which isn't true. The same drug from the same batch can have different effects on different people, which is why most people who have take coke or ganga don't become destitute addicts living on the streets.

So ok one of the many dudes I dropped from my head did drugs, but my point was that his fame does not depend on it. The link you posted says he did it 15 times over a period of few years decades ago. That hardly characterizes him as a drug user. As for his statements of experience - that is all western people babble about all the time - how that and that was a good expriance. I filter out such shit.

I understand why you defend drugs. You take pride in your ability to play with fire and use them for a rare controled pleasure trip without the negative side effects that come from overuse when addiction forces you to overuse. You feel superior to those who slip and fall into addiction. You take pride into the fact that the negative "different effects" don't seem to apply to you but they apply to others. You even feel superior to guys like me who don't try out drugs, you think that I am prudish and passing on life, while you are the master of getting pleasure. But that is how drugs get people - trough ego.

All drugs leave different but negative effects on all the people. These effects on you are so small that you don't notice them. But every time you you use drugs the effects get bigger. There will be a critical point when you start noticing these effects, but your prideful stance of superiority will have you lulled in denial by the time it happens. So don't try to show me how cool you are with your deep and intimate personal experience of drugs. You are playing a game where there are risks, but where there are no gains. Not smart at all.

This is absolutely nonsensical. All drugs leave negative effects on people? You clearly have never thought this out. Are you talking about illegal drugs? Governments define what is illegal, not medical practitioners. Are you talking about psychoactive drugs? Or is aspirin bad?

Almost anything can have negative effects when used in a chemically destructive way. I'm going to make an attempt to make sense of what you're saying, so I'll assume you're talking about psychoactive drug effects on the human brain. You're making absurd reductionist statements as if there is some clearing house in the brain that records "negative" effects each time a drug is used. There are myriad different pathways that drugs operate on in the brain.

Have you ever heard of the term homeostasis? The brain generally operates on chemical receptors on cell surfaces. Assuming these systems aren't irreparably damaged by overdoses or toxic reactions, they are elastic and will return to their original states over time.

Drug addiction doesn't happen in a box. Plenty of other factors play into whether someone will become addicted to a substance than just ingesting that substance, as _DC_ highlighted.

 

[Sp5]

I'd like to know more about Somali "khat", though...

Khat is mostly grown in highlands in Kenya and Ethiopia and flown to Somalia on planes. Time is of the essence in distribution, because it loses potency quickly.

You can buy it in Kenya, where it's known as miraa. Just look for a grocery "kiosk" with some banana leaves hanging in front, it's a sign.

It's a bunch of stems with leaves sold bundled up and wrapped in newspaper. They offer it with bubble gum - take some, because it keeps the vegetable mass together when you're chewing it and cuts the bitter taste.

It's a pretty good drug, because it's nothing that big. You can stay up all night partying with it, or go to bed and lie in a dreamy state staring at the ceiling. It's a good sex drug, and it generally enhances concentration and attention. Long distance drivers in East Africa love it.

 

[_DC_]

Hotwheels, you'll notice that cocaine isn't split into powder and crack as it should be. Im guessing the crack embodiment is giving blow an extra bad name.

 

[_DC_]

Here is another chart from the same metastudy. Educate thine selves. From a personal standpoint, alcohol is the 4th most harmful after the three I won't touch: heroin, meth, and crack. With the crime, duis, and domestic abuse, its an easy #1.

 

[Billy Chubbs]

Mushrooms in last place for all harm categories. :icon_biggrin:

 

[Simple Man]

All these charts convinced me is that I need to try LSD or Shrooms one time. I've only touched weed up until this point. I've got a pretty addicting personality so I don't think I'll give anything else a try.

 

[_DC_]

SWIM, did shrooms 3x, mescaline (peyote) once, and lsd once. Set and setting is very impotant, I would imagine camping in Montana or something would take the cake.

 

[dirtypurist]

All drugs leave different but negative effects on all the people. These effects on you are so small that you don't notice them. But every time you you use drugs the effects get bigger. There will be a critical point when you start noticing these effects, but your prideful stance of superiority will have you lulled in denial by the time it happens. So don't try to show me how cool you are with your deep and intimate personal experience of drugs. You are playing a game where there are risks, but where there are no gains. Not smart at all.

This is a content-free negative hypnotic suggestion. Content-free because you can replace the word drugs with anything else, like reading RVF or playing soccer and still keep the paragraph intact. "All forums leave different but negative effects on all the people", etc. Negative because you plant a seed of future risks in the unconscious mind of the reader.

This style of writing can be dangerous for people who don't immediately see the structure of your hypnotic logic-free suggestion.