Alcohol and tobacco are by far the biggest threat to human welfare of all addictive drugs

Add sugar to that list

Most, I'd say. The number of people who have a drink or 2 compared to addicts is not close. Nobody uses heroin or coke in moderation.

Actually many people use coke in moderation
 
Knowing the health risks, and the costs, why would anyone START smoking? One of those things I'll never understand.

Why would anyone live in the city without a gasmask? Walk along a road with heavy traffic? Thats a lot of smokes right there.
 
I love how you accuse me of binary conclusions, then go ahead and present a false dichotomy. It's not either you drink a bottle of wine a week in peace or be a homicidal maniac. It's about correlation and measuring the social damage.

Sorry I replied to your post but it was aimed at some posts that I collectively find fallacious.

But then, what is the implication of your post? If we agree that alcohol in small quantities is not bad, but that heavy drinking has consequences, then what do you propose ?
 
Add sugar to that list



Actually many people use coke in moderation

Absolutely. The problem with sugar is that it has crept everywhere in modern industrial food so it isn't as easily avoidable.

I see that as a bigger issue than cigarettes, where today's society has done everything to ensure that non-smokers don't suffer from tobacco.

Or alcohol. Don't want to drink ? It's pretty easy to avoid it.

Fast food will not harm anyone in small quantities, but look at the obesity epidemics. Should we ban fast-food too ?

Anyways, all rethorical questions and not aimed at you. But banning some products and not others is sometimes arbitrary.
 
It is interesting reading about addictive substances, learning the positives and negatives about them.

I'm personally of the opinion from the articles I've read that drinking moderate amounts of alcohol is healthy and will even extend life. With that said, alcohol abuse is a health problem for the abuser and also for those around him/her. I've often though the old prohibitioners were right about fighting against alcohol drinking as that would lead to less disease and crime. The problem of course with prohibition was how leaders went about trying to stop drinking. Alcohol addicts can and often do live long lives. This is in contrast to those addicted to other substances seen today such as meth. Meth addicts I believe live on average 7 years I've read. Other drugs can have similar poor health effects on users.

Tobacco has it's plusses and minuses too. Something some weight loss researchers will point out is that some smoke tobacco to help keep their weight down. Since the war on tobacco in the 1980s, tobacco smoking has decreased but in return our waist line have ever increased. Tobacco smoking is another addictive substance that people can use and live a long life.

Opium addiction and what happened in China in the 19th century is tragic reading. Opium addiciton in China is felt by some writers to have led to wide spread poverty, crime, war. Millions died in China due to opium addiction, and millions suffered due to the drug.

Overall I feel a big short fall that we face is the lack of good and new ideas to fight and overcome addiction. Most addicted people at some point in their lives want to stop taking addictive substances. Sadly, most addiction therapy ideas are not effective. I believe with alcohol addiction therapy success rate is 8%, with most of the 8% being middled aged guys, with jobs and families. There are newish ideas that can help with overcoming addiction but are overlooked and not used by the medical community.

One addiction substance crusader that was having success with patients was Dr. Meg Patterson. Her electric stimulation device helped many famous rock musicians such as Pete Townshend of the Who, Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones, etc stop taking multiple addictive substances. (Similar devices are used today for helping with those with depression but not addiction issues.) is While Dr. Patterson had success, and she received lots of positive press in the UK, the medical community largely didn't use her methods to help other addicted people.

A little on Dr. Patterson's method can be read in her book:

Hooked? Net: The New Approach to Drug Cure
https://www.amazon.com/Hooked-Net-Approach-Drug-Cure/dp/0571135145

This tells the story of NET - a revolutionary cure for drug additions. In this remarkable book Dr. Meg Patterson writes of the background to her discovery, her painstaking research and the extraordinary results, which at last offer real hope for addicts. The treatment is fascinating and effective. Using a tiny electrical current tuned to various frequencies, NET (NeuroElectric Therapy) stimulates the production of several body chemicals - including endorphins, the body's natural opiates - enabling addicts to any drug to detoxify with only minimal withdrawal symptoms. Writing from her wide experience with addicts in Asia and the West, Dr. Patterson also stresses the crucial importance of solving the basic psycho-spiritual problems leading to addiction. Rock stars Eric Clapton, Keith Richards and Pete Townshend, as well as hundreds of other ex-addicts from all strata of society and countries, testify to the success of NET. With a worldwide drug problem of frightening proportions, Hooked? reveals a solution-if the battle against government apathy and medical establishment distrust can be won. "It's so simple . it's a little metal box with leads that clip onto your ears and in two or three days - which is the worst period for kicking junk - in these 72 hours it leaves your system." Keith Richards "This book should be standard reading in any modern educational system." Sean Connery
 
<WellThere>Can you imagine this being any other substance, even legal?
In Ontario Canada (my home) cell phone use contributes to more traffic deaths than alcohol. Should we ban cell phones?
 
Add sugar to that list



Actually many people use coke in moderation
No, they don't. They might not snort coke every day, but literally nobody gets "a little coked up". I've never seen anybody snort 1 line and stop.
 
Cocaine vs Crack.
Crack is a million times worse. I spent several years working in an area where crack was extremely prevalent. The changes that drug causes in a person cannot be overstated. Turns people into Gollum.
 
No, they don't. They might not snort coke every day, but literally nobody gets "a little coked up". I've never seen anybody snort 1 line and stop.
I bounced in clubs in Toronto for a long time. I've seen plenty of people do exactly that. I've also seen a fuck load destroy their lives.
 
No, they don't. They might not snort coke every day, but literally nobody gets "a little coked up". I've never seen anybody snort 1 line and stop.

Ohh so because you have never seen it. Snorting one or 5 lines is still moderation if you do it once every 3 months.
 
Absolutely. The problem with sugar is that it has crept everywhere in modern industrial food so it isn't as easily avoidable.

I see that as a bigger issue than cigarettes, where today's society has done everything to ensure that non-smokers don't suffer from tobacco.

Or alcohol. Don't want to drink ? It's pretty easy to avoid it.

Fast food will not harm anyone in small quantities, but look at the obesity epidemics. Should we ban fast-food too ?

Anyways, all rethorical questions and not aimed at you. But banning some products and not others is sometimes arbitrary.

Taxation can be used to alter peoples habits.. Subsidies can help alter prices. Unfortunately in the US they like to subsidize all the unhealthy shit. And if you are a single mom with 4 kids who can barely make ends meet, do you buy the 1 broccoli or the 8 vaccum packed cheeseburgers?
 
In Ontario Canada (my home) cell phone use contributes to more traffic deaths than alcohol. Should we ban cell phones?

Got a link to that? Not doubting you, just seems quite incredible.

How are the laws regarding cell phone use when driving? You should probably ban drivers from using cell phones when driving.
 
Last edited:
Ohh so because you have never seen it. Snorting one or 5 lines is still moderation if you do it once every 3 months.
Maybe you and I have different definitions of moderation, but if it's balls out every time, that's not moderation. If you black out every time you drink, you have a problem.
 
Based on my experience, the number one gateway drug to other drugs is alcohol. I know that the vast majority of my friends were drunk when they tried an illegal drug for the first time.
 
Maybe you and I have different definitions of moderation, but if it's balls out every time, that's not moderation. If you black out every time you drink, you have a problem.

Lets say you want to keep a buzz going for a night out..

If by alcohol you buy drinks at regular intervals..

If by coke, you snort a line at regular intervals. Really good coke only works for around an hour. It´s not like meth where 1 line will keep you running all night.

So snorting several lines in one night is not going balls out..
 
Based on my experience, the number one gateway drug to other drugs are alcohol. I know that the vast majority of my friends were drunk when they tried an illegal drug for the first time.

I bet they all had milk. Milk is the number 1 gateway drug.
 
Back
Top