|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4935 days) Posts: 215 From: Brookfield, Wisconsin Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Drugs are for Everyone | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Damouse writes:
I do not think drugs like coffee and cigarettes actually give any high after a couple of weeks. Take coffee, for an example. Most people drink coffee to "wake up." They cannot function in the morning, according to them, if they dont have their damn coffee. I wouldnt say coffee gives a high like other drugs, so it's only purpose seems to be to correct morning grogginess. We dont like being groggy in the morning, so we rely on an external substance to counteract it.What they offer instead is a way to get back to their 'normal' state. The reason people repeatedly take drugs like nicotine and caffeine is due to physical addiction and brainwashing.Very few people can accurately describe drinking caffeinated coffee or smoking nicotine as pleasurable, except when describing the relief they feel from the symptons caused by the absence of the drug. The reason most smokers enjoy their coffee/cigarette is because since their last coffee/cigarette they have been gradually feeling worse and worse as withdrawal takes effect.First thing in the morning, people are likely to have abstained from drug taking (as they were asleep). This makes the first coffee/cigarette of the day seem particularly nice as they are particularly far into withdrawal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
1.61803 writes:
Elephants, pentailed treeshrews, mountain gorillas, dogs, cows, snails, cats, horses, chinese deer, giraffes...and even politicians! I believe there are other animals who enjoy altering their perception with fementing fruits as well. Birds, monkeys etc.. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
In reverse order...
Damouse writes:
Yes. Not all drugs are physically addictive (but there is always the possiblility of brainwashing though). An example of drug use that is infrequent and fully utilitarian; use and abuse of adderall. Around exam time at my undergraduate university, illicit adderall sales go through the roof. A large group of people seek it out from those whom it was prescribed to to aid their productivity or to help them work through the night. The use isnt frequent enough to attribute its use to an addiction, and the majority of people who have used it (who dont have ADD) claim that it forces the person to be unnaturally productive.I smoked a lot of dope when at college. I decided to stop. So I stopped. Then I discovered I was addicted to nicotine. Damouse writes:
I realise I don't actually know if it is true about you, but that is the kind of thing addicts will say. Coffee i drink when i need it. If i wake up and i need to be productive, i drink coffee. If i take a midday nap, i wake up and drink coffee to get back into it. I, personally, drink coffee for the direct chemical effects and not because of a dependency issue. I drink it only a few times a week. "If i wake up and i need to be productive, i drink coffee." - why do people not then ask themselves: "Am I unwell that I wake up unable to be productive?"Some of the effects of caffeine withdrawal include tireness and the inability to concentrate. Reading back through this post it seems like it could look like an attack on you.It is more meant to show that normal people give normal reasons to avoid seeing an addiction. Cognitive dissonance is frequently responsible for the continued use of an addictive drug. Sincerely, this is not meant to be interogatory.If you think this is off-topic or too personal than just say and I will delete bits of this post and not mention it again.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes:
It was for me (and the others that quit with me).
Well, this is what we're told to think. But can it really be true? Dr Adequate writes:
I do not recall anyone enjoying their first few cigarettes. "You genuinely enjoyed you first few cigarettes, I'll admit that. But you don't enjoy them any more, even though you think that you do. That's just your addiction talking."Mostly people spend their time trying not to cough up a lung, during their first. Can you really imagine a first-timer inhaling a big breath and exhaling gently with a look of pleasure on their face? Really?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Damouse writes:
If we are only talking about non-addictive mood-enhancing drugs, then I would posit that they are just an 'emergent property of technology'. Can one drink coffee without being addicted to it? If so, can we let this person be our subject? This person, who drinks coffee only so she can stay up late or be awake early, seems to be dissatisfied with her biological functions. The use of drugs for this purpose is prevalent in all classes of society, and is my issue. The body is designed to respond positively to feeling good - it is our 'carrot' (and pain is our 'stick').Would you really go through all the hassle of dating if sex didn't feel good? But as a species with a brain (which is big enough to get us into trouble) we discovered would could 'cheat' and get pleasure for little investment.I think it is probably just another symptom of our culture/society being out-paced by technology. -We suffer from weight-gain because technology reduced the amount of exercise we had to do, and also increased the amount of food available. -We over-populate due to curing diseases but not restricting reproduction. -We by-pass the natural causes of pleasure by using man-made drugs. Culture/society/psychology seems to continually be two steps behind technology. Edited by Panda, : tyop
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes:
So ... according to you ... no-one enjoys cigarettes when they first try them ... and then they continue not to enjoy them when they become hooked on them?Panda writes:
As you see from what I said: people feel relief from withdrawal. Very few people can accurately describe drinking caffeinated coffee or smoking nicotine as pleasurable, except when describing the relief they feel from the symptons caused by the absence of the drug.Relief from discomfort is often felt as pleasurable. Have you never had to delay having a piss until it was painful and then felt the 'pleasure' from finally having a piss? Dr Adequate writes:
You would have to be stupid to choose marketing over addiction and cigarette manufacturers are far from stupid: so they use both. Wow, their marketing must be really good. Ask a smoker to describe what they are feeling as they smoke. Ask them to pinpoint what exactly is pleasurable.Is it the taste? - ask them to describe the taste. Is it the smell? - ask them to describe the smell. Is it the feeling? - ask them what it feels like. Or is it the relief? Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Onifre writes:
But my argument is that those particular drugs offer no relief from any drudgery in our lives. The real reason people take "drugs" like nicotine and caffeine is because they work long hours, at boring jobs, are stressed out, and need a momentary outlet from the grind their in. Alcohol? Cannabis? Cocaine?Yes - these drugs do have an effect other than withdrawal. These do help people 'break away' from their day-to-day existence. But caffeine and nicotine* offer little more than addiction.Yes, there are a few coffee connoisseurs, but they are the exception. I doubt if there are any cigarette connoisseurs. Anyway, this seems off-topic.I'll have a think about requesting a new topic...Maybe I can think of something controversial enough to be interesting. *This refers to western doses/strains. IIRC: American Indians used to smoke a tobacco that got them completely off their face. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
crashfrog writes:
...and it offers fecal incontinence. Completely wrong. Caffeine offers improved alertness, improved recollection, improved cognition, and improved sensation. These effects are from single use. Tolerence to caffeine is rapid. crashfrog writes:
Are you saying that people enjoy smoking because of the weight loss? (Nicotine offers weight loss, which I guess isn't exactly worth it.)Weight loss would be a reason to smoke, not a reason to enjoy smoking. crashfrog writes:
This seems to be a rant aimed at me, but unconnected to anything I have said. It's often posed to ethics students: "if you could take a drug with no side effects that would make you smarter, would you do it?" A certain kind of person always answers "no" as he takes a sip from a beverage that does exactly that. Our brains run on drugs, Panda. None of these drugs could have any effect on your whatsoever if there weren't already receptors for them in your brain cells. Why are those receptors present? For your body's own natural drugs. The drugs it's using to make you do some things and not do others. The drugs it uses to make you want to eat. To make you want to have sex.I can't even see what the point is you're trying to make. crashfrog writes:
Do I really need to explain that cigarettes are not cigars?
Panda writes:
I doubt if there are any cigarette connoisseurs.quote: They are not made the same; they don't contain the same ingredients and they are not even smoked the same. crashfrog writes:
I don't understand how someone could fail to read what was a fairly short and clear post. Please try again.
I don't understand how someone could survey the vast world of coffees, wines, cigars, even the underground culture of cannabis varieties, and conclude that every person who uses a drug for any purpose is just a strung-out junkie after nothing but a fix. That's like saying that everyone who has ever had sex is a slut.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
onifre writes:
Do I have to explain to you that cigars and cigarettes are not the same? Really? But caffeine and nicotine are not the only things one gets from coffee and cigar products. Just like alcohol is not the only thing you get from wine. If you were talking about cigarettes then you would be correct. They also contain/produce 599 other ingredients including:
quote: Could you please be specific about which 'things' you are referring to?
onifre writes:
So, businesses offers a coffee 'experience' with different flavours! Starbucks, just to name one giant in the coffee business, is all about the coffee experience. They don't sell coffee to a few connoisseurs, they sell to the majority of coffee drinkers. And they're NOT selling the caffeine to them, they're selling the taste of the brews and variety of different blends from all over the world. You can have a negetaive opinion of caffeine as an addictive chemical, but not of the coffee. Marketing and addiction, eh? They are as clever as BAT. onifre writes:
Better tasting brands? Not 'nice tasting', but 'better' tasting? Connoisseurs for cigs? No. But most smokers smoke a prefered brand and blend because of the taste. Some cigarettes, depending on how much you want to spend, taste very nice, esp. with some nice after dinner Scotch, as I like it. I also know plenty of people that have a cigarette of one of the better tasting brands just once or twice a day after a meal or with a drink. Preferred brand? Yes, based on which cigarettes taste the least offensive and/or have the best advertising. onifre writes:
(Answered by Omnivorous) They laced the tobacco with other things, it wasn't the tobacco itself. Edited by Panda, : tpyo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes:
As a drinker of lemonade I'll give it a go...
But a habitual drinker of pink lemonade would find such questions equally difficult to answer. Is it the taste?Yes. I like the sharp taste of lemons, slightly tempered by the sweet taste of sugar. Is it the smell? Not particularly. The smell is ok, but I tend to ignore it. Is it the feeling?Yes. I like the clean feeling that my mouth experiences. I find the drink very refreshing, especially on a hot day.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes:
Are you having an 'off' day? But your challenge was to describe the taste and smell. Now you've shifted the goalposts. By the new rules, it is easy for a smoker to meet your new challenge: all he has to say is "I like the taste and the smell". Or not. Apparently he doesn't even have to like the smell. All he has to say is: "I like the sharp taste of tobacco", and he's done.I have seen you displaying better comprehension. 'Sharp' and 'sweet' are both descriptions of taste.'Clean' and 'refreshing' are both descriptions of feelings. If you think I want some scientifically measured quantity of taste then you are wrong.All I asked for (and all I gave as an example) were very every-day descriptions of taste, smell, etc.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes:
I did not mean to imply that the questions were impossible to answer. What that would prove about smoking is becoming ever more obscure, but certainly any smoker could describe the taste of cigarette smoke to that degree of accuracy.The questions weren't rhetorical. Maybe a smoker will answer those questions and then it will all become clearer... For an extra point: get a smoker to not smoke for a couple of days and then describe what is enjoyable about their next cigarette.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
onifre writes:
If they experience difficulty stopping, then yes. Can you be specific as to how it's addiction? Are you saying that anyone who has coffee a few times a week because they enjoy the taste and the experience in a coffee shop is addicted? Would you say the same thing about someone who has a glass of wine in a wine-bar a few times a week for the taste and the experience in the wine-bar?It is all releated to the definition of addiction. Strange that. The bar scenario could be Social Alcoholism. onifre writes:
Better tasting brands? Not 'nice tasting', but 'better' tasting?
Panda writes:
No, I meant better. If you smoke you know what's better and what's shit. There are some very well blended cigarettes these days that are better than the very cheap brands as far as taste goes. Better tasting brands? Not 'nice tasting', but 'better' tasting? onifre writes:
I would not say that same about scotch, as I have little knowledge of scotch.
Least offensive? Would you say the same about scotch? If not, why not? onifre writes:
You probably haven't changed your brand in a long while either. Advertising? I don't think I have seen a cigarette advertisment in a long while. (In 2006 they spent $12 billion on advertising. I can't find out how much they are currently spending.)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024