Drug debate; What is the best course to follow

the_flying_pig

abaxas wrote: »

Alcohol (a drug) - "In 2010/11 there were 198,900 admissions where the primary diagnosis was attributable to the consumption of alcohol (the narrow measure). This is a 2.1% increase since 2009/10 when there were 194,800 admissions of this type and a 40% increase since 2002/03 when there were around 142,000 such admissions."

Other drugs - "There were 12,300 admissions in 2011/12, a two per cent fall on the previous year (12,600), but a 58 per cent increase on 2000/01 (7,800) "

More scary bit on alcohol - "In 2010/11, there were 1,168,300 alcohol related admissions to hospital based on the broad measure (primary and secondary diagnoses). This is an increase of 11% on the 2009/10 figure (1,056,900) and more than twice as many as in 2002/03 (510,700). Comparisons over time in the broad measure are complicated by changes in recording practices over the period. In order to estimate the trend once changes in recording practices are accounted for, a method to adjust the national figures has been devised which is presented in Appendix G. Adjusted figures show a 49% increase from an estimated 783,300 in 2002/03 but a 3% decrease from 1,208,100 in 2009/10."

Not an argument for, but and argument against those who cant see where the real problem is.

The scale of the problem with alcohol is only bigger becauseit’s so much more popular. Something like heroin is vastly more serious for theindividual. In my life I’ve only seriously got to know a handful of people who triedHeroin even once, and of those one was dead in his early twenties & anothercouple got into a right old state for a time. Whilst alcohol can very seriouslyscrew people up, the proportion of users who go on to use it so much that itcauses damage is very small. I consider myself typical as a light to medium user who can hand on heart say that alcohol didn't ever have a negative effect, even a tiny one, on my school, university, work, or personal life.

At a minimum I’d say that heroin & crack were, user for user, incomparably more damaging than alcohol. Although I know nothing aboutit, by all accounts crystal meth is similarly damaging.

Some of the popular illegal drugs are genuinely fairly benign.Probably the best examples are the hallucinogens, i.e. LSD & mushrooms. I doubtthat use of those would cause the country a serious problem even if they were being given away for free in every chemist’s. Although one can’t consider them in isolation… alcohol is legal & here to stay & ‘cocktails’ of alcohol + hallucinogens are not, IMO, a good idea.

I’m not really sure about cannabis & whatnot. I’d probably put most the old class B’s maybe somewhere roughly on a par withalcohol in terms of how damaging they can be, some a bit worse, others maybe a bit less bad.

paddyrg

One more dimension to consider about what seems an easy choice (legalise and tax) - you make yourself a destination for every junkie in Europe to come and live. Not sure I want to increase the smackhead count so much.

Carl31

Its a no brainer, anyone that is against legalisation is an ill informed fool. The negative effects of drugs are fairly minimal, especially compared to other, legal, things that are far more life threatening.

I cant smoke a few leaves, yet i can jump out of a plane at a few thousand feet? I cant pop a pill and have a few hours fun, yet I can gorge myself to death on alcohol and junk food, and even have any resultant medical treatment paid for?

For a minority, there are negative consequences, but thats the same in all walks of life

Generali

Please don't think I'm picking on you the_flying_pig but this is a great example for me to use:

the_flying_pig wrote: »

I’d ....Although I know nothing about it...I doubt.........I’m not really sure

In a few short phrases we have the problem with the debate about drugs.

Lots of people who don't have a clue deciding that drugs should be illegal and voting accordingly.

Radiantsoul

Generali wrote: »

In a few short phrases we have the problem with the debate about drugs.
QUOTE]

To be fair he is just admitting what he doesn't know. It is more common on the internet to pretend to be an expert in every area!

A._Badger

Generali wrote: »

Please don't think I'm picking on you the_flying_pig but this is a great example for me to use:



In a few short phrases we have the problem with the debate about drugs.

Lots of people who don't have a clue deciding that drugs should be illegal and voting accordingly.

Or the other way around. I can't see much more convincing evidence from the other side of the argument.

I'm still waiting to be convinced by either side.

N1AK

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

Its a drug - it impares drivng and the ability to work and think clearly. Cannabis has been proven to be a cause of paranoia and other mental health problems.

We should make sentences MORE tough for both dealers, and users IMO. Getting slack will lead to more health issues, and further addiction to other controlled substances.

Sugar causes more health problems in the UK than illegal drug use. Salt almost certainly does as well. Being tired impairs driving getting tough on the sleep deprived isn't going to solve that issue either.

There is no evidence that 'getting slack' aka getting your nose out of other people's business would lead to greater harm. In fact given the % of ecstasy deaths caused by impurity and/or over/under-hydration it seems extremely naive to think the issue is remotely clear cut.

But then that's exactly the point. If the anti-legalisation lobby were motivated by anything more than a dislike of change and self-righteousness then they'd be happy to see evidence collected on the most effective policies.

the_flying_pig

Generali wrote: »

Please don't think I'm picking on you the_flying_pig but this is a great example for me to use:



In a few short phrases we have the problem with the debate about drugs.

Lots of people who don't have a clue deciding that drugs should be illegal and voting accordingly.

the comment, "I know nothing about it" was only in relation to crystal meth, which barely existed [in the UK at least] when i was a teenager, in the 90s. i don't feel that a lack of first or second-hand experience of crystal meth invalidates my entire contribution to a drugs debate.

the comment "i'm not really sure" was about how, on balance, class B drugs compare with alcohol. I've got plenty of first & second hand experience of class Bs, more than I want to have really, but it's normal not to be "sure" because these substances are all different from each other & all very difficult to compare with alcohol. but i have to say that on balance I don't consider them to be a particulalry powerful force for good.

paulmapp8306

moneyinmypocket wrote: »

Alcohol and fags are much worse than most class a,b and cs

SERIOUSLY need to do some proper research there. some Class Cs, have less of a medical issue of a physiological nature than alcohol or tobacco. Pretty much ALL class B and Class A drugs are far worse - if not deadly.

Class C drugs have so many other issues, particularly on mental health far worse than alcohol or tobacco. There are so many popular myths that are just false.

Get hold of some of the drug users help people and social workers with MANY years experience. See some of the presentation they give on the effects of such drugs - you would be put off them for life.

Id also say, that socially acceptable is not correct - its illegal. Simple. May as well say stealing is acceptable, after all it doesnt actually harm anyone does it?

Just because a certain sector of society, in a certain age group dont see an issue - does not make it right, or legal, or generally acceptable.

paulmapp8306

Carl31 wrote: »

Its a no brainer, anyone that is against legalisation is an ill informed fool. The negative effects of drugs are fairly minimal, especially compared to other, legal, things that are far more life threatening.

I cant smoke a few leaves, yet i can jump out of a plane at a few thousand feet? I cant pop a pill and have a few hours fun, yet I can gorge myself to death on alcohol and junk food, and even have any resultant medical treatment paid for?

For a minority, there are negative consequences, but thats the same in all walks of life

Your an idiot mate.

I have done plenty of research, have seem many prentations by experts in the field of not only drugs, but drug users/Ex users and
Drug support charities.

without exception EVERYONE of them say the biggest issues, is that most people who use dont know the facts. that there is this belief that class c drugs are safe - and alcohol and tobacco are worse. in 99% of cases its wrong. There are areas where the legal drugs are worse, but across all areas they generally arnt.

Drugs are just a bad idea - both legal and illegal. There not safe - no drug is safe. Its not "just having a good time". the long term mental health issues are well documented, and often severe.