Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9174 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,602 Year: 4,859/9,624 Month: 207/427 Week: 17/103 Day: 6/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   DRUGS!
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 136 of 180 (401266)
05-18-2007 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by nator
05-18-2007 9:26 PM


nator writes:
Can someone who is "at the pinncacle of human reasoning" tell if their friend has a slight selenium deficiency?
In America the odds are that their friend, no matter who they are will likely have at minimum, a slight deficiency, yes.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by nator, posted 05-18-2007 9:26 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by nator, posted 05-18-2007 10:56 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Vacate
Member (Idle past 4682 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 137 of 180 (401267)
05-18-2007 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Trump won
05-18-2007 9:48 PM


Re: Second post from a long time lurker, elementary school teacher, and naturelover :
lovesnature writes:
But you see that for one to insist that one must experience drugs before one knows that they are harmful or immoral is an irrational and outrageous claim!
Long term use of salt is harmful. Long term use of filtered water is harmful. He is yet to show why beer makes a person immoral - so as of yet you have not shown why experience is not a justified claim to use against him.
Jumping off cliffs is not bad, I have done it quite a few times myself. Personal experience may differ, but I found that ensuring there is ample water below made for a fun day of cliff diving.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Trump won, posted 05-18-2007 9:48 PM Trump won has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 138 of 180 (401269)
05-18-2007 10:03 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by ringo
05-18-2007 9:51 PM


Your point is well taken, Ringo, in that most morally decent folks, no matter how drunk will not likely have their morality "blockaded" totally. Ok, I'll modify my position to say it could be highly impaired. Some otherwise good folks have caused disastrous things to happen to hapless victums via auto/train/boat accidents, suicide, murder et al due to drunkenness, drugs and other mind altering agents.
King Solomon in the Proverbs said it not for kings (those in power) to drink wine because it could lead to them making decisions and proclamations devastating to the nations they rule over.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by ringo, posted 05-18-2007 9:51 PM ringo has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2252 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 139 of 180 (401270)
05-18-2007 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by crashfrog
05-18-2007 5:32 PM


Re: I have a different take on abusing prescription drugs
Because "boredom" is not a medical condition.
quote:
Neither is depression. Depression is a psychological condition, which is why psychiatrists are the ones who prescribe for it.
Excuse me, but that's wrong. Clinical Psychiatrists are, in fact, medical doctors. Psychiatry is a medical specialty just like Oncology or Dermatology.
That's why, in fact, they are allowed to write prescriptions for medications.
"Wanting to get high" isn't a disorder at all.
quote:
Says you. If it's an undesired state interfering with normal functioning - you know, like hunger can be: "OMG I'm so hungry I can't even think!" - then clearly it's a condition that reasonable adults should have the option to have "treated." Especially when we're talking about drugs that are completely natural and non-toxic, like cannabis.
"Natural" is irrelevant, and I would never consider the inhalation of burning leaves of any kind into one's lungs as "non-toxic".
THC is a drug that is effective for pain and nausea in cancer patients and I am all for legalizing.
I'm sorry, crash, but trying to sell boredome as some kind of medical condition is just silly. It doesn't pass the straight-face test.
"Wanting to bodily harm someone when they really piss you off" isn't a disorder either.
quote:
I'm sure your husband can tell you what thoughts of aggression, violence, and rage constitute.
Actually, I can tell you what they constitute better than he can.
I was the one who grew up in an abusive home, not him.
quote:
It's enough of a disorder that when a person has those feelings a lot, we mandate treatment for them.
Everyone has those feelings sometimes crash, both rage and boredom. They are normal. They only become disorders when they start becoming overwhelming or obsessive. Someone who is bored for an afternoon doesn't have a disorder.
Anxiety and restless leg syndrome, however, can interfere with all aspects of a person's life and can even shorten one's life.
quote:
C'mon. "Restless leg syndrome" shortens people's lives?
Yes. If you can't get much, if any, restful sleep for years or decades, your overall health suffers and resistance to pathogens and disease is reduced. Chronic lack of sleep is also associated with a highter incidence of motor vehicle accidents, Type 2 diabetes, depression, hypertension, and a bunch of other problems and conditions.
No one has ever literally been bored to death.
quote:
Nobody's literally ever been anxious to death, either.
So what? Being bored doesn't interfere with everyday life the way that anxiety does. Remember, we aren't talking about little bouts of butterflies before a job interview or feeling shy around new people at first. We are talking about anxiety that is debilitating.
People really choose to be bored, after all. What is boredome other than being too lazy to entertain oneself and so pampered that you don't have any work to do?
quote:
And the vast majority of people with depression don't kill themselves; clearly you're very accepting of medications to treat a number of quasi-conditions - yet, you're dubious of the idea of taking drugs for pleasure, unless it's a certain narrow list of "ok" drugs, like caffeine and alcohol - both of which are thousands of times more dangerous and deadly than, say, marijuana - upon which it is impossible to overdose.
Thousands of times? I'll alow that hyperbole becasue I don't really care what the real numbers are.
And I'm not sure where you've gotten the idea that I'm against the legalization of pot. I put it in the same class as alcohol.
I don't think they should hand out drugs like candy for emotional problems.
quote:
Why? Because you have a moral objection to pharmacology?
No, and I already told you why:
I think medication should be a last resort or a very short term leg-up. I think they are used as a cheap quick fix that the insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies encourage.
quote:
If a remedy is cheap, effective, and has limited side effects, from what basis would you deny someone "the easy way" to treat an undesirable condition?
The notion that drugs are a "quick and easy" fix for most emotional problems is a myth. Drugs are only part of the solution, and it is well-understood that they are more effective when combined with therapy and lifestyle changes.
The bottom line is there is no quick fix to be found in a bottle of pills for most emotional problems.
quote:
Your own moral belief that suffering makes us better people? Makes our lives meaningful?
Hardly. I'm just basing my arguments on facts.
quote:
Why do you let people medicate themselves with caffeine? Surely being tired from not getting enough sleep isn't a "disorder", either? But you don't have a problem with that use of psychoactive drugs, do you
No.
Caffeine is very mild in effect and doesn't result in impairment or intoxication.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by crashfrog, posted 05-18-2007 5:32 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by crashfrog, posted 05-18-2007 11:37 PM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2252 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 140 of 180 (401271)
05-18-2007 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Buzsaw
05-18-2007 9:19 PM


quote:
...WHEN IN FACT THERE ARE FAR CHEAPER, MORE EFFECTIVE AND SAFER ALTERNATIVES VIA THE WHOLISTIC NATUROPATH DRUGLESS REMEDIES.
Buz, you never addressed several facts and arguments in our discussion of the safety and efficacy of herbal drugs, specifically comfrey and it's association with hepatic veno-occlusive disease (liver failure) due to the plant's high levels of pyrrolizidine alkaloids, a known liver toxin.
This post from that thread referenced a number of case studies of people killed or maimed by ingesting comfrey.
What, did you think I would just forget that we ever had that conversation?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Buzsaw, posted 05-18-2007 9:19 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by Buzsaw, posted 05-18-2007 11:36 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2252 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 141 of 180 (401273)
05-18-2007 10:56 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Buzsaw
05-18-2007 9:52 PM


quote:
In America the odds are that their friend, no matter who they are will likely have at minimum, a slight deficiency, yes.
The only way to tell is to get a blood test, but we all know that evil conventional medicine will fraudulently doctor the results of the test just to make sure that no deficiency shows up, therby keeping people from taking much-needed vitamin supplements.
It's all part of the evil multibillion dollar supplement industry's plan to keep us all popping those pills.
Oops, did I say "multibillion dollar supplement industry"??
I meant to say "multibillion dollar parmeceutical industry!!
Hahaha, it is so hard to tell the difference between them anymore.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Buzsaw, posted 05-18-2007 9:52 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
tudwell
Member (Idle past 6060 days)
Posts: 172
From: KCMO
Joined: 08-20-2006


Message 142 of 180 (401274)
05-18-2007 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by Trump won
05-18-2007 9:17 PM


What about spray paint and glue and other legal substances which can be abused? Is it immoral to use those?
And what about prescription drugs?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by Trump won, posted 05-18-2007 9:17 PM Trump won has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 143 of 180 (401275)
05-18-2007 11:36 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by nator
05-18-2007 10:45 PM


Nator, I have a sizeable comfrey patch in one of my three gardens and drink the tea regularly with nothing but good effects. The tests the FDA used were via highly concentrated extracts of the root. The leaf tea has nothing but good effects.
The FDA and the powerful pharmaceutical conglomerates are in bed together for the $$$, for power/control and for undermining the real remedies for disease. Unless they can patent a remedy there's no $$ in it and they can't patent comphrey. It's as simple as that.
Yes you should not take root product internally in high concentrates. I've drank comfrey tea from my leaves for decades, not that I drink it daily, but usually mix it in with mint or something somewhat more flavorful. Here's a link which has the evidence for all to check out. Note that there's numbers at the top of the page of different things to read regarding this controversy.
http://www.herballegacy.com/contentions_m.htm
Btw, you miss my point that overall it's the natural relatively cheap food/herbal products that really do the most good without the side effects and scores of thousands die each year from prescription drugs in America alone. The MDs bury their mistakes, literally.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by nator, posted 05-18-2007 10:45 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by nator, posted 05-19-2007 8:10 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 150 by berberry, posted 05-19-2007 9:15 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 158 by Vacate, posted 05-20-2007 5:03 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1549 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 144 of 180 (401276)
05-18-2007 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by nator
05-18-2007 10:18 PM


Re: I have a different take on abusing prescription drugs
I'm sorry, crash, but trying to sell boredome as some kind of medical condition is just silly.
That's not what I'm doing. I'm telling you that you accept medication for a whole host of non-medical conditions already, and pointing out that it's just puritanism to disallow people to take drugs for entertainment when you're already letting them take drugs for slight headaches, bumps and bruises, and "restless leg syndrome".
Boredom is just an example, and it's not inherently less of a legitimate problem than feeling blue.
I was the one who grew up in an abusive home, not him.
I appreciate that, and I don't mean to write stuff that may be triggers. Surely you recognize that there's a whole host of negative feelings that the psychiatric community recognizes as worthy of concern; there's no reason "wanting to get high" or whatever motivation you'd like to put behind the reason people take drugs for pleasure, and I'm including alcohol and caffeine use in that.
If you can't get much, if any, restful sleep for years or decades, your overall health suffers and resistance to pathogens and disease is reduced. Chronic lack of sleep is also associated with a highter incidence of motor vehicle accidents, Type 2 diabetes, depression, hypertension, and a bunch of other problems and conditions.
The only people having a hard time sleeping with "restless leg syndrome" are the people on TV.
Look, you've got no problem with people taking drugs to relax, because you see the importance of sleep. So why the problem with people taking drugs to stimulate themselves? Surely you recognize stimulation as equally important as sleep, right? We can't be asleep all our lives.
Remember, we aren't talking about little bouts of butterflies before a job interview or feeling shy around new people at first. We are talking about anxiety that is debilitating.
Maybe we're talking about debilitating boredom, too. Don't people have a right to experience pleasure without being set on the same level as murderers, abusers, and rapists? When I described people who want to get high, you countered with people who want to hurt other people. But isn't it obvious that's a false comparison? People don't hurt other people on pot, they sit around and giggle and listen to Fleetwood Mac. It's a fun communal activity - at worst, it's a "victimless crime." Those people are guilty of nothing but experiencing pleasure. Why is pleasure an inherently suspect goal?
Thousands of times?
Based on the LD50, yeah. Marijuana's LD50 is so high - meaning it takes so high a dosage to be toxic - that it's nearly impossible to measure. It approaches the LD50 of most foodstuffs.
Another way to measure drug toxicity is by comparing the effective dose versus the lethal dose. For alcohol, the lethal dose is about ten times the effective dose. For THC, the lethal dose is more than a thousand times the effective dose - just a little safer than LSD.
There are zero known cases of death from marijuana toxicity; of course, hundreds die annually from acute alcohol poisoning.
And I'm not sure where you've gotten the idea that I'm against the legalization of pot. I put it in the same class as alcohol.
It's far, far safer than alcohol. I don't think it should just be legalized; I think it should be embraced. I think we should get over our collective scorn of people who smoke a little pot - especially since nearly everyone has done it at one time - and recognize how many people are drugging themselves every morning with coffee and drugging themselves every night with their dinner wine.
They're all drugs, taken for pleasure. I don't see why we need to harsh on people.
The bottom line is there is no quick fix to be found in a bottle of pills for most emotional problems.
Sometimes there is a quick fix. I'm not saying that drugs are the answer, or that they're that quick fix. But sometimes there's a direct solution to a problem that we're taught by society to eschew.
This isn't meant as a refutation, I'm just sharing my philosophy as you shared yours. Obviously, a lot of quick fixes just cause more problems. But sometimes a philosophy of self-denial is its own problem, too.
Caffeine is very mild in effect and doesn't result in impairment or intoxication.
I think that's a little iffy. Symptoms of caffeine withdrawal are known to include grogginess and lagging concentration, but I'd agree that the symptoms are mild compared to, say, heavy alcohol intoxication. I couldn't tell you about pot but I didn't have any trouble driving home under it's influence (at 3 am in the nearly-deserted streets of my hometown.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by nator, posted 05-18-2007 10:18 PM nator has not replied

  
-messenjah of one2 
Inactive Member


Message 145 of 180 (401280)
05-19-2007 12:38 AM


NOT MESSENJAH OF ONE
I did not write message 132 in which Vacate replied to. I repeat: I did not write that.

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2252 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 146 of 180 (401333)
05-19-2007 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by Buzsaw
05-18-2007 11:36 PM


quote:
Nator, I have a sizeable comfrey patch in one of my three gardens and drink the tea regularly with nothing but good effects. The tests the FDA used were via highly concentrated extracts of the root. The leaf tea has nothing but good effects.
I am not talking about "FDA tests", buz.
As you can view in the link to that old thread I provided, I am talking about people who were prescribed comfrey by naturopaths or who ingested comfrey leaves in the belief that they were theraputic who subsequently suffered liver failure due to the known liver toxins present in comfrey.
People died, Buz. They died from ingesting comfrey which lead to liver failure.
Do you accept the factual basis of each of the following statements?
A yes or no answer will suffice:
1) Comfrey contains high levels of pyrrolizidine alkaloids
2) Ingesting sufficient ammounts of pyrrolizidine alkaloids has been documented to contribute to hepatic veno-occlusive disease (liver failure)
3) There are cases of people who have ingested comfrey in sufficient quantities which has lead to them developing hepatic veno-occlusive disease (liver failure), and even death.
quote:
The FDA and the powerful pharmaceutical conglomerates are in bed together for the $$$, for power/control and for undermining the real remedies for disease. Unless they can patent a remedy there's no $$ in it and they can't patent comphrey. It's as simple as that.
Buzsaw, what is the annual earnings of the "herbal supplement" industry?
quote:
Yes you should not take root product internally in high concentrates.
None of the case studies I cited involved the ingestion of comfrey root.
All of the cases of liver failure occurred after people drank comfrey tea, ingested whiole comfrey leaves, or took comfrey leaves in pill form.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Buzsaw, posted 05-18-2007 11:36 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by Buzsaw, posted 05-19-2007 4:19 PM nator has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 498 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 147 of 180 (401334)
05-19-2007 8:11 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by Trump won
05-18-2007 4:13 PM


None of those activities involve critical thinking.
When did you say critical thinking? I must have mmissed it.
You said lower than the state of an animal.
Show me being, lower than the state of an animal that can bowl over a 600 series, and I'll let you win.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Trump won, posted 05-18-2007 4:13 PM Trump won has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 498 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 148 of 180 (401336)
05-19-2007 8:15 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Trump won
05-18-2007 5:17 PM


drunkenness is immoral.
Why, because the bible says so?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Trump won, posted 05-18-2007 5:17 PM Trump won has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Phat, posted 05-19-2007 8:47 AM riVeRraT has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18388
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 149 of 180 (401344)
05-19-2007 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 148 by riVeRraT
05-19-2007 8:15 AM


quick question
As you know, I am becoming somewhat learned in the science of addictions, and may go to school to become a Drug and Alcohol counselor.
Do you think that religion is a potential addiction for some people?
Is the opiate of the masses still simply that?
If it is an addiction, it seems like a relatively harmless one for me..I dunno..

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by riVeRraT, posted 05-19-2007 8:15 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by crashfrog, posted 05-19-2007 10:22 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 153 by riVeRraT, posted 05-19-2007 3:05 PM Phat has not replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 150 of 180 (401345)
05-19-2007 9:15 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by Buzsaw
05-18-2007 11:36 PM


Buzsaw writes:
quote:
Btw, you miss my point that overall it's the natural relatively cheap food/herbal products that really do the most good without the side effects and scores of thousands die each year from prescription drugs in America alone. The MDs bury their mistakes, literally.
Here is one of those rare occassions in which I find some moderate degree of agreement with you. Although I think most people who take medicines genuinely need them, some people are too easily led to believe they need them when they really don't. I think most of us are better off avoiding drugs as much as possible.
All through my teens and twenties and halfway through my thirties I played around with illegal drugs. Plus, as I had been trained to do growing up, at the first sign of illness I would go to the doctor and get a prescription for something, usually antibiotics; in those days I came down with strept throat and flu a lot. I never gave a thought to my diet. At age 34 I became extremely sick with something the doctors never figured out. I went to 3 different clinics, plus the emergency room of a large hospital with no luck. It lasted about a month and a half, during most of which time I was barely able to get out of bed and was in constant nauseous pain. I was tested for AIDS and every type of hepatitis, plus all sorts of other things I don't recall and nothing ever came back positive. Whatever it was, it VERY SLOWLY went away.
Then about a year later I broke out in an extremely painful rash that baffled a couple of doctors. They thought I had a skin condition and prescribed a few things that didn't work. Then I went back to that same ER I had visited the year before and one of the doctors and/or interns correctly identified it as poison sumac (related to poison ivy but a couple orders of magnitude stronger). The cream he prescribed cleared up the rash within about three days.
Those two experiences left me wary of some doctors, particularly older ones. The one who correctly identified the rash was only about 30.
I'm 46 now and I haven't been sick since that rash. I haven't missed a single day of work that wasn't planned ahead. I still drink and, once in a fairly long while, smoke marijuana, but I pay a lot more attention to what I eat than I ever did before. Although I've never had a weight problem, I started making a strong effort to eat more fruits and vegetables. Nowadays I crave red grapes much more often than I crave a Snickers bar. I drink a fair amount of coffee, but I also drink a lot of herbal teas, especially green tea.
There is absolutely no question that I am much healthier today than I was at age 34, when my drug use was at its heaviest and my diet at its worst.

W.W.E.D.?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Buzsaw, posted 05-18-2007 11:36 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Buzsaw, posted 05-19-2007 4:34 PM berberry has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024