New Opioid Study

Palis said:
As it shouldn't be, pal. However, know this, as stupid and idiotic as it sounds for someone to do drugs and become addicted, understand that a lot of these people don't quite know the power these drugs can have over the human body, as far as addiction and a constant need to have to live.

Not only that these people a lot of times suffer from broken homes and abuse. Shit that isn't their fault but fucks with their mind thinking they aren't worthy as human beings regardless. I mean why would they be if their mom or dad beat the shit out of them as kids and showed them no love? Saw this shit a ton as a LEO in LA.

There is a lot more that goes into it other than; "They are just idiots".
Click to expand...

We're talking about inner city people on drugs? This is more empathy than I ever see out of you.
 
luckyshot said:
A correlation between a medical epidemic and a voting pattern is “icky”?

I think it’s food for thought.
Click to expand...
Now find out who inner city crackheads vote for too. Food for thought and all. ;)
 
panamaican said:
We're talking about inner city people on drugs? This is more empathy than I ever see out of you.
Click to expand...
He's usually keeping kayfabe from his Sports Bar persona.
 
All those liberal celebs who off themselves over opiate addictions or ODed ala Bourdain, Ledger, Artist formerly known as Prince etc, etc likely did not vote for Trump

Opiate crisis knows no economic boundary.
 
luckyshot said:
A correlation between a medical epidemic and a voting pattern is “icky”?

I think it’s food for thought.
Click to expand...

Yeah, "icky". What food for thought exactly? I didn't see you provide any.


Here is some food for thought:
  • The opioid crisis didn't start in 2015.
  • Medicare Part-D is for the elderly.
  • Illicit drug use is impossible to determine from this kind of data.
  • The study has many shortcomings; it admits as much. So much that I'm shocked NPR ran with it as a story, tbh.
Here is a question that wasn't answered in the article:
How many of these counties flipped from Obama to Trump?
What would you think if ripskater made a thread in 2014 titled: Obama Country = Opioid Country"?
And what if that thread opened up "Eight years into Obama's presidency and the Opioid Epidemic hasn't been solved."
Still food for thought? Or exploitation for partisan reasons?
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Yeah, "icky". What food for thought exactly? I didn't see you provide any.


Here is some food for thought:
  • The opioid crisis didn't start in 2015.
  • Medicare Part-D is for the elderly.
  • Illicit drug use is impossible to determine from this kind of data.
  • The study has many shortcomings; it admits as much. So much that I'm shocked NPR ran with it as a story, tbh.
Here is a question that wasn't answered in the article:
How many of these counties flipped from Obama to Trump?
What would you think if ripskater made a thread in 2014 titled: Obama Country = Opioid Country"?
And what if that thread opened up "Eight years into Obama's presidency and the Opioid Epidemic hasn't been solved."
Still food for thought? Or exploitation for partisan reasons?
Click to expand...
Well, if ripskater made a thread that was factually accurate and sourced, I’d be shocked, for starters.

Read post 35 in this thread. It seems @panamaican has some relevant observations on the topic. Just because you have none, that doesn’t mean the topic is not “food for thought”— it’s just not food for thought for you. Or maybe, it’s not something you want to think about.

As far as the study itself goes, it is published and reviewed. There HAVE been correlations shown between chronic prescription rates and ODs in the general population. The pills have to get into circulation somehow. People don’t just start on heroin. So, opioid prescription and abuse rates may not be aligned one to one, but there are strong trends.

X-Pac Rules said:
Now find out who inner city crackheads vote for too. Food for thought and all. ;)
Click to expand...
Sure. And if was 1983 and the crack epidemic was at crisis levels, it might be relevant.
 
Last edited:
luckyshot said:
Well, if ripskater made a thread that was factually accurate and sourced, I’d be shocked, for starters.

Read post 35 in this thread. It seems @panamaican has some relevant observations on the topic. Just because you have none, that doesn’t mean the topic is not “food for thought”— it’s just not food for thought for you. Or maybe, it’s not something you want to think about.

As far as the study itself goes, it is published and reviewed. There HAVE been correlations shown between chronic prescription rates and ODs in the general population. The pills have to get into circulation somehow. People don’t just start on heroin. So, opioid prescription and abuse rates may not be aligned one to one, but there are strong trends.


Sure. And if was 1983 and the crack epidemic was at crisis levels, it might be relevant.
Click to expand...

I'm a healthcare professional. I know more about the opioid crisis than most. I don't find the study particularly important. Its actually shocking that it made it into a JAMA publication (I guess this JAMA Open Network is pretty diluted and hangry for hits).
I'm only in here because I find it pretty repugnant that this issue would be leveraged for political gamesmanship.
 
Let's next talk about how the majority of murderers are Democrats. Food for thought. ;)
 
Anung Un Rama said:
I'm a healthcare professional. I know more about the opioid crisis than most. I don't find the study particularly important. Its actually shocking that it made it into a JAMA publication (I guess this JAMA Open Network is pretty diluted and hangry for hits).
I'm only in here because I find it pretty repugnant that this issue would be leveraged for political gamesmanship.
Click to expand...
I think you’re extra sensitive to this topic. No negative judgment— as a medical professional, perhaps you have good reason to be.
But you seem to be getting almost personally insulted by a objective statistical analysis of a societal problem.

X-Pac Rules said:
Let's next talk about how the majority of murderers are Democrats. Food for thought. ;)
Click to expand...
States with the highest violent crime rates 2017:
1. Alaska
2. Nevada
3. New Mexico
4. Tennessee
5. Louisiana
6. Arkansas
7. South Carolina
8. Delaware
9. Missouri
10. Alabama
https://lawstreetmedia.com/blogs/crime/americas-safest-dangerous-states-2017/45

Tell me, proud boy, how many of these states would you consider “Democratic strongholds”?
 
Last edited:
Drenalin said:
It’s hard to afford herion when you’re on welfare
Click to expand...

No...

It isn't.

Heroin is super cheap and you don't need a prescription for it, just cash. That's why Opioid addicts usually go to Heroin. They can't get prescriptions anymore, so Heroin it is...
 
Last edited:
Opioid abuse is a massive problem all over the country and has been for many years but lets associate Trump and Trump voters with it.
 
1. We're not 2 years into Trump's term, he was inaugurated 17 months ago. Oh yeah, if only more people would have voted for Bernie or Hillary, there would be no drug addicts by now.

2. 60/40 is not that much of a split and suggests nothing about opioid abuse and voting. You think a lot of smack heads are running out to voting booths? Which of Trump's policies support drug abuse?

3. You've outdone yourself with this thread. People who voted for Trump live in the same county as drug addicts, so clearly that makes Trump a bad president.

4. According to the left, there is a rape epidemic in hollywood and on college campuses, both of which are comically left-wing. Where was your thread saying Obama country=rape country?
 
Fawlty said:
Really? I doubt most murderers are registered with a political party.
Click to expand...
The same could be said of pill poppers and crackheads. Hmm...
 
luckyshot said:
I think you’re extra sensitive to this topic. No negative judgment— as a medical professional, perhaps you have good reason to be.
But you seem to be getting almost personally insulted by a cold, objective, statistical analysis of a societal problem.
Click to expand...

The analysis stopped being objective when it was associated with Trump.
There is nothing objective about linking an epidemic, which has roots going back 20+ years, with the guy who has been POTUS for less than 2.
And as a person who rather see this guy be POTUS for 4 rather than 8 years, it would be nice if sensational stories that could be chewed to pieces with a glance would stop making headlines. This doesn't help.
 
Anung Un Rama said:
The analysis stopped being objective when it was associated with Trump.
There is nothing objective about linking an epidemic, which has roots going back 20+ years, with the guy who has been POTUS for less than 2.
And as a person who rather see this guy be POTUS for 4 rather than 8 years, it would be nice if sensational stories that could be chewed to pieces with a glance would stop making headlines. This doesn't help.
Click to expand...
The last sentence in that post is a dead giveaway that he's trolling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LeonardoBjj
Social Carriers sneak life-saving drugs over border as Mexico battles opioid deaths
Replies
0
Views
149
LeonardoBjj
LeonardoBjj

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,655
Messages
55,432,376
Members
174,775
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top