Legal Highs 'More Lethal Than Heroin' Warning

Kronos

Kronos

Kronos

Soldato
Joined
11 Nov 2009
Posts
4,784
Location
Edinburgh
This seems to be the lead story on Sky this morning but it is never far from media attention.

The number of deaths linked to so-called 'legal' highs could overtake those linked to heroin by 2016, a think tank has warned. Now as a person that often dabbled in 'illegal' highs in my youth my main choice of high was alcohol. I drank to get drunk there was no in between with me and I was certainly into a bit of speed at the same time as I drank.

Looking at the figures the latest for 2012 deaths from legal highs 97, alcohol related deaths 8,367 yet rarely does alcohol related deaths have the same condemnation that these legal highs seem to warrant.

Why is alcohol related issues so ignored? Of course any death is regrettable but we choose to drink, take drugs, fling ourselves off high buildings, cross roads and a million and one other things that might kill us. So is this constant publicity of what are a few deaths from legal highs really the right way to approach the issue?
 
Um...alcohol isn't ignored? It's age restricted. Comes with warnings on the bottle. Has warnings in every advert for it. Scientists, doctors and the police constantly tell us to moderate our intake.
 
Dis86 said:
Um...alcohol isn't ignored? It's age restricted. Comes with warnings on the bottle. Has warnings in every advert for it. Scientists, doctors and the police constantly tell us to moderate our intake.
Click to expand...

OK but we rarely see the news coverage that deaths from legal highs seems to receive. I had to look up the alcohol related deaths figures as I cannot remember the last time I heard them mentioned in a news item.
 
Ignored (not so much) and not reported perhaps because the government taxes them so much, if people really were aware of how bad alochol was them thered be an impact on demand, impact on sales, oh no there goies our tax... What else can we tax?

I hear they were also trying to kick off issues with vaping too, everyone knows the "health implications" they wanted to check simply meant so they could slap tax onto them too.

I'd expect a lot of these legal highs would be ignored if Marijuana was legalised and instead of going to some random back street shop with premixed packs of legal highs, which could contain anything, they could just goto local store and buy a chunk of weed.

Yes it means it would be taxable, yes it would likely be government control, it's been ok'd for medical use in many places, ok'd for general use in a few places... It's the way forwards. EDIT: Thread below this LOL http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=12

And rather than having a group of idiots stumbling around the city centre drunk they'd probably be sat at home with their mates having a chill. Impact on businesses? likely, impact on tax, yup. Impact on police? Well they're apparently struggling and having to mmake more cuts so if we need less of them wombling around the streets making sure these drunk ***tards don't create trouble then surely were good to go?
 
It is reported though. I saw an article just last week on BBC news about the massive increase in the number of under 11s submitted to hospital through alcohol abuse.
 
The thing is alcohol in moderation is good for you, so there's a tough balancing act to maintain between necessary restrictions to control the likes of binge drinking and other alcohol abuses and the positive affects of responsible use.
 
'Legal highs' (New Psychoactive Substances) are absolutely mental, utterly utterly ridiculous. Are far too accessible and as a result have become the drug of choice for the young and adolescent.

They are cheap to produce with very little know how in your mother's oven and baking trays.

It's bad now, give it a few more years and I think we are going to have an even bigger problem. They are either killing people directly or through the behaviour they induce on a person. I have watched someone absolutely blasted on NPS walk off a 7 foot wall without a care in the world, face plant, get up then walk off.
 
Last edited:
Sin_Chase said:
'Legal highs' (New Psychoactive Substances) are absolutely mental, utterly utterly ridiculous. Are far too accessible and as a result have become the drug of choice for the young and adolescent.

They are cheap to produce with very little know how in your mother's oven and baking trays.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
They're only legal because they're untested.
The law needs to change: Illegal until proven safe*, rather than the other way round.
Just commented on a cannabis thread- better the devil you know...


*of course, if it were proven safe, there's no way it would get legalised anyway...
 
I remember someone arguing with me cause I took ecstasy once. I researched it before I did it out of curiosity.

They basically said all drugs are bad should NEVER touch them how could I take drugs etc etc. I said alcohol is a drug you realise this? to which they replied "yeah but it's legal".

Amazing.

I don't drink fyi.

Legal highs are retarded though, a lot of them are research chemicals which have no prior history of use, so people have no idea about the damage they are doing to themselves. But then again i'm a firm supporter of Darwinism.
 
Last edited:
Dis86 said:
Um...alcohol isn't ignored? It's age restricted. Comes with warnings on the bottle. Has warnings in every advert for it. Scientists, doctors and the police constantly tell us to moderate our intake.
Click to expand...

I am not going to comment on the legal highs, as they are untested etc etc, however...

Um...alcohol isn't ignored- In the media, generally it is, they would far much rather report drug related problems when the odd one happens

It's age restricted- Doesnt stop 14 year old kids drinking it

Comes with warnings on the bottle - Really? who reads and pays attention to those

Has warnings in every advert for it - As above

Scientists, doctors and the police constantly tell us to moderate our intake.

- Scientists also tell people to moderate drug use, if you are going to do it, which in a lot of cases, works perfectly fine, just like drink, doctors will probably be more harsh in telling you not to do it, but again some may give you some more education as they know they cant stop you, but you can moderate it, and be educated, just like you are educated when drinking alcohol.

Police, well, police are too busy most of the time manning the streets across the weekend and some weekdays because of binge drinkers. Same for hospitals.

I am not going to comment on the legal highs, as you know they are untested, but I think you need to take a look at facts when it comes to drugs vs drink.

Just because drink has a few labels on the bottle and there is an age restriction, doesn't mean there is not a massive problem with it.

Britain is one of the highest % countries with a binge drinking problem.
 
Last edited:
CREATIVE!11 said:
I remember someone arguing with me cause I took ecstasy once. I researched it before I did it out of curiosity.

They basically said all drugs are bad should NEVER touch them. I said alcohol is a drug you realise this? to which they replied "yeah but it's legal".

Amazing.

I don't drink fyi.
Click to expand...

The problem with drugs is that they are uncontrolled. Who knows what is in them?
 
Drying out banana skins in the oven then smoking them... Roots and ganja bumberclot Rasta man.
 
~Divine~Wind~ said:
Ignored (not so much) and not reported perhaps because the government taxes them so much, if people really were aware of how bad alochol was them thered be an impact on demand, impact on sales, oh no there goies our tax...
Click to expand...

It's really not a difficult one to work out - people DO know how bad alcohol is for them yet they still drink it, it hasn't hugely impacted on demand.

The problem with alcohol is that the horse has bolted long ago - it's an ingrained part of culture, the economy, everything. You can't just ban all alcohol, it's only as simple as that on an internet forum. All the government can do is attempt to control peoples intake - they do this through various measures including duty on alcohol and licensing it's sale. It's the best that can be done.

Whereas 'legal highs' are not yet ingrained as part of our culture and society therefore it isn't too late to do something about them.

Nobody is 'ignoring' the problems alcohol cause to society.
 
cheesyboy said:
That is the problem. And, ironically, that problem is due to the prohibition laws which are, purportedly, for the good of the public health :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Do you not think that maybe, just maybe they're prohibited for a reason? No no, it's all just a government conspiracy.
 
Dis86 said:
Do you not think that maybe, just maybe they're prohibited for a reason? No no, it's all just a government conspiracy.
Click to expand...
Who said conspiracy?

In a world where people take drugs regardless of them being illegal, what good does it do to deny those hedonists access to safe and controlled narcotics?
 
cheesyboy said:
Who said conspiracy?

In a world where people take drugs regardless of them being illegal, what good does it do to deny those hedonists access to safe and controlled narcotics?
Click to expand...

Because of the effects people on narcotics can have upon themselves and others? Just look at the statistics for crimes related to alcohol.
 
Because of the effects people on narcotics can have upon themselves and others? Just look at the statistics for crimes related to alcohol.
Click to expand...
False equivalence. Just because alcohol misuse makes people act like spackers, doesn't mean other drugs do.

Every death from a 'legal high' should weigh heavily on the mind of people who are against reform of our drug policies.

Cameron and Osbourne are known cokefiends, why the pious act now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom