Soldato
*some* people.
Khat to be banned
- Thread starter Gilly
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,590
Yes not everyone of course i'm painting very broad stokes, but the point still stands.
I remember trying to kick my sugar addiction.
It was a freaking NIGHTMARE. You sit at home eating a plate of green veg and you see ice cream advertised on TV. I joke with my friend at how painful it is.
I've tried MDMA once before after I did actually research it, and after that point I did sit and think yeah I now know why this is illegal.
This too.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,590
You are right there. People love to use him to try to rationalise their drug use (Not saying he is entirely wrong however i've read quite a few things by him and he does make some good points). This is what I do not like, in my opinion it takes incredible self awareness to remain as objective as possible
http://www.businessinsider.com/cognitive-biases-2013-8?op=1
I posted a thread about these biases and nobody responded to my thread interestingly enough. But we suffer from a range of very bad biases and it's hard to remain neutral.
"Backfire effect
When you reject evidence that contradicts your point of view or statement, even if you know it's true."
"Confirmation bias
A tendency people have to believe certain information that confirms what they think or believe in."
That was my problem when reading reddit subforums, there is a TONNE of backlash if you post any opinion that disagrees with the belief that drugs are totally safe (because a habitual drug user naturally wants to defend his use). Now i'm on the fence about this myself, I think yeah probably some risks are overblown but i'm also in favor of prohibition.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Soldato
Same, and I can understand why it's illegal. I know this contradicts my earlier statement, but I don't think a complete ban is necessary or appropriate, I think the best solution lies somewhere in the middle ground.
My first experience was the equivalent of trying alcohol for the first time in the form of a couple of pints of John Smiths.
My second experience was the equivalent of trying alcohol for the first time in the form of half a bottle of whisky.
My point is it's extremely inconsistent and incredibly easy to get it wrong. Using the alcohol example, you have a much greater appreciation of how much you're having due to the volume/taste. Remember when alcopops become a bad 'thing' because it was argued that kids simply weren't aware of how much alcohol they were consuming? Well, things like ecstasy are the extreme end of that because it's so easy to ingest. I can totally understand why it's illegal. However, with regulation and controlled sales from licensed places I'm sure people could use them safely and responsibly. I think it would increase the number of abuse cases, but it turn it would reduce the number of alcohol abuse cases.
If interested, the LD50 (the level at which half of the test subjects expired (died)) of MDMA is 80mg per KG of body weight. So if you weigh 70KG you would need to take 5600mg to be in serious danger. Decent pills range between 140-220mg. Not even close by a country mile.
Soldato
Never heard of LD50 before. I assume this is testing on rats?
Off topic but if I ever start a death metal band, I think LD50 would be a great name.
Off topic but if I ever start a death metal band, I think LD50 would be a great name.
Caporegime
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,590
Legalisation and regulation is an interesting point, one I've thought about but it's such a grey area. I agree it's hard to judge what dose you are in taking and that can be part of the problem.
It is a very hard one to call. Legalising drugs could end the black market/mafia drug trade etc etc overnight for example. Which I think would be a huge step forward but then it brings in other problems as Tefal said because people most likely would all just do it and not regulate their intake. You can get ahold of drugs but there is at least some level of an entrance barrier (hard to find sometimes, legal risk, it's a bit shady etc) which puts people off so probably stops the vast majority of people using regularly. But if you could walk into a shop and buy MDMA even I admit i'd probably do it again if it was that easy to get ahold of. I would never abuse something because i'm just not like that, I don't even drink regularly but i'm in the minority.
Imagine amount of money it would save though if they did legalise drugs and put all the cartels out of business.
Last edited:
Soldato
@CREATIVE!11 Some very good points there - I agree it's a difficult one to call.
As a minimum, I think it would be refreshing for the government to take an open, "let's debate these issues" approach rather than an absolutist "drugs are bad m'kay" attitude that we had when I was at school.
As a minimum, I think it would be refreshing for the government to take an open, "let's debate these issues" approach rather than an absolutist "drugs are bad m'kay" attitude that we had when I was at school.
I don't see it as a difficult one to call considering that people do what they do anyway, they are sourcing these things and doing (the last figures I saw) millions of pills a weekend in the UK. For something that is being done anyway, people are dieing anyway, cartels are earning their money anyway... surely the government earning money back for the infrastructure it is using to support overdoses and general health issues of users is more beneficial than losing even more money trying to fight a losing battle?
Maybe my earlier suggestion should be brought in then. Use the finance from a sale to employ the people to give them out as paid prescriptions. That way you could see usage and get some metrics back to tie in with everything else to identify the problems that arise. You would probably make a lot more than you would have to shell out and you would also retain some control over the process.
No,but it's safe to say that most Drugs are far less Toxic than Alcohol and can be consumed safely in appropriately measured doses.
good Idea.
Soldato
Indeed, for some drugs such as MDMA it would be very hard to justify the risk, but I don't see why a legal, taxed and regulated (in a similar manner to tobacco and alcohol) wouldn't work for Khat, Cannabis and other non-lethal drugs.
And how the hell did that relate to my comment which was: one can not work out mg/kg LD50 doses on rats and mice and then apply that onto humans and then say a human LD50 dose will be X mg for someone of Y kg. (especially in this case where the results vary from say 100-300mg/kg depending on whether you use mice or rats.
Caporegime
Well even if you were to divide that LD50 by 6, you are still looking at a single dose far greater than any person would normally take.
It's unlikely that the LD50 difference between mice and humans would be any greater than /6 as if it were, there would have been significantly more deaths and hospitalizations as a direct result of MDMA usage over the past few decades.
Boy oh boy,are we in a good mood today,eh? Chill,take a pill
Oh,and I do not believe that health concerns should really play into this debate,quite simply because it's people's responsibility to treat their Mind and Body right...
We need to have a say because public money is used to treat those individuals that encounter problems through substance abuse.