Are drugs REALLY a problem?

[Dragoncaviar]

FredClogs said:

Puff the magic DragonCaviar, to clarify are you describing the Florida situation as desirable? Or preferable to the current situation in the UK.

A zombie nation?

Seems to me opiates are good and a tad moreish why would anyone not take them if they were more readily available?

Not at all. It's a bad situation, I was just alluring to the fact that we do in fact already have a nation of opioid addicts walking around without any apparent problems, because they all have regular access to their opioid of choice.

And the issue you've raised is one frequently raised by prohibitionists. The simple fact is that drugs are widely available anyway, and the illegal nature of them does nothing to deter use.

I'd point you to Portugal where drug possession of all drugs has been decriminalised and they've seen stable rates of use.

So if you're aware that opiates are "good" and a tad moreish ... why don't YOU take them?

[e21Mark]

Dragoncaviar said:

e21Mark said:

I'm sorry but the idea of there being large numbers of functioning Opiate addicts is a hard one to swallow. No doubt, if you have the funds to buy your drug, you can avoid the usual crime etc but repeated drug use brings its own health issues. Especially those related to IV drug use. I guess Eva Rausing could be called a 'functioning addict' but who would wish that life on anyone?

In 2007, there were 500,000 oxycontin prescriptions filed in the 5 boroughs of New York. By 2010, that had risen to 1,000,000, which amounts to 1 prescription for every 8 people.

"In 2012, an estimated 493,000 persons aged 12 or older used a prescription pain reliever nonmedically for the first time within the past 12 months. This amounts to 1350 new initiates every day. ... Medical emergencies resulting from prescription drug abuse increased 132 percent over the last seven years, with opioid involvement rising 183 percent."



http://claad.org/rx-drug-abuse-stats/

In Florida the picture is much worse. The DEA says Florida distributors bought nearly 40.8 million oxycodone doses for the first six months of 2010, while every other state combined accounted for 4.08 million doses. Compare that with 2006, where Florida consumed 3.9 million grams of oxycodone, just over 10 percent of the 37 million grams distributed nationally.

Florida now prescribes 10x the amount of oxycodone than the rest of the US states combined.

Even those figures though ... do you have any idea how many junkies you can create from 37 million grams of oxycodone? The US has a prescription drug epidemic. The reason it's not as apparent and unpleasant as the heroin problem in Europe is because the drugs are regulated, controlled, and pharmaceutically pure.

e21Mark said:

Society has a responsibility to protect its most vulnerable and for that reason I believe drug use should remain illegal. There is no doubt that the problem of addiction / drug use needs discussion but no-one sets out to become a drug addict. I also know addiction can effect all ages, colours, creeds and sexes.

And it is for EXACTLY this reason that we need to stop drug prohibition. By ostracising drug addicts, we are doing more harm to the most vulnerable than anyone else. Again, PROHIBITION DOES NOT STOP DRUG ADDICTION.

We should look at WHY people become drug addicts, and then help at the root of the problem, rather than chastising them for the one crutch which helps them live an otherwise miserable life.

e21Mark said:

Life is actually pretty good without the need to take any mood altering drug. You're not settling for less, or missing out, if you choose not to drink or take drugs. In fact, quite the opposite.

It's fantastic that you feel this way. It really is, and I'm truly happy for you.

I don't feel this way at all. I feel had I never taken psychedelics, my life would have been profoundly different, and much less fulfilled for it. Psychedelics changed my life for the better, no-one will ever convince me otherwise on that fact. Seriously though, I'm very pleased you feel a sober life is totally fulfilling, but your experiences aren't the same as everyone else's.

I have no doubt prescription rates have risen given the ease with which Oxycodone can be obtained via the abuse of an otherwise 'legal' prescribing service. Even the addicts I work with in deepest, darkest Wiltshire were aware of just how easy it is to get in Florida. I simply don't see that as offering any support to the argument for legalising drug use. Isn't there also a massive growth in the use of Methamphetamines which is far more apparent and equally devastating to both the addict and their families? We have fortunately seen very little Ice in the UK so far, but I have no doubt that it's on its way.

I agree that addicts do not benefit from being criminalised for their addiction, but neither does it excuse criminal behaviour. It may offer an explanation and even an element of mitigation, where they are willing to work with services to address their problem. I also agree that society needs to examine the root of addiction, but the reasons why people become addicts are varied. Addiction is progressive and compounded by personality disorder. I don't believe it's a coincidence that addicts display impulsive and compulsive behaviours and deep rooted denial about their situation. Combine those traits with a physical dependence, the euphoria of using and a distorted perception of the world they inhabit and it's small wonder they feel unable to make the fundamental changes required to get and stay clean.

To see drug use as ''the one crutch in an otherwise miserable life'' is incredibly sad, but I would argue that using will compound that outlook rather than offer an escape from it. Most people do not use drugs. Most people look for happiness and fulfilment in life experiences.

In 10 years working in addiction, the most common phrase I hear from addicts seeking to get clean? ''I just want to be normal''. They crave the structure and normality of an average life without the need to put a drug in their body.

I had friends who used to take acid regularly. They'd listen to Buthole Surfers albums, read Timothy Leary and bang on about how their minds had been expanded and given a deeper, more spiritual window into their very being. A few years later and most had descended into Opiate abuse, depression and were hardly what one might call happy. The lucky few had moved on and found their slot in 'normality'. Their perceptions of the world they lived in had changed, but I guess age is partly responsible? Personally, I'm a great believer in abstinence. I guess the casualties I've witnessed have coloured my view to some extent, but I know for a fact that happiness isn't to be found in a drug.

Edited by e21Mark on Thursday 3rd July 14:36

[BJG1]

Mark, to say "most people don't use drugs" us simply untrue, isn't it? If guess 90% or more of adults use drugs to add more enjoyment to their lives

[FredClogs]

BJG1 said:

Mark, to say "most people don't use drugs" us simply untrue, isn't it? If guess 90% or more of adults use drugs to add more enjoyment to their lives

Caffeine and nicotine, whilst addictive are not quite the same as opiates in their effects and side effects.

All addiction is about satisfying the cessation from withdrawal, except various hard drugs give an added high to that cessation, a real high that is, not a coffee or nicotine high.

[FredClogs]

Dragoncaviar said:

I'd point you to Portugal where drug possession of all drugs has been decriminalised and they've seen stable rates of use.

So if you're aware that opiates are "good" and a tad moreish ... why don't YOU take them?

I'm not 100% sure on the Portugal stats, but if their rates are stable our rates of heroin use have definitely fallen in the last 25 years, due to the stigma and criminal life style associated with the drug.

I have taken them, perhaps earlier than you I realised that as nice as opiates are (and let's not beat around it if you're a certain personality type then it really is very nice) it would lead me to a lifestyle I didn't want - I chose life - colour TV, sofa on hire purchase, wife, car, family etc... as the saying goes.

[BJG1]

What about alcohol? I just can't see opiates being widely used if legal

[e21Mark]

BJG1 said:

Mark, to say "most people don't use drugs" us simply untrue, isn't it? If guess 90% or more of adults use drugs to add more enjoyment to their lives

I meant illicit drugs and not coffee, tea and fags. I've yet to meet anyone who threatened people at cashpoints, with an HIV infected, blood filled syringe, because he couldn't afford a skinny mocha-locha chino.

[FredClogs]

BJG1 said:

I just can't see opiates being widely used if legal

I can, so one of us is wrong, which way should we legislate to reduce the risk?

[e21Mark]

FredClogs said:

BJG1 said:

I just can't see opiates being widely used if legal

I can, so one of us is wrong, which way should we legislate to reduce the risk?

I think more people will likely give it a go. Just as those people who wouldn't look to score MDMA in a nightclub will happily give so called 'legal highs' a go, because legal = safe right?

[FredClogs]

e21Mark said:

FredClogs said:

BJG1 said:

I just can't see opiates being widely used if legal

I can, so one of us is wrong, which way should we legislate to reduce the risk?

I think more people will likely give it a go. Just as those people who wouldn't look to score MDMA in a nightclub will happily give so called 'legal highs' a go, because legal = safe right?

I agree, if you've got something you need to block out a physical or emotional pain, you can't really beat opiates and the problem with that is that unlike party drugs and lifestyle kind of drugs it something you can take to at any point in your life for a whole load of reasons. It would be incredibly dangerous to even think about that kind of social experiment, as the case of Florida described above shows, of course the corporates and big pharma would love it.

[e21Mark]

FredClogs said:

e21Mark said:

FredClogs said:

BJG1 said:

I just can't see opiates being widely used if legal

I can, so one of us is wrong, which way should we legislate to reduce the risk?

I think more people will likely give it a go. Just as those people who wouldn't look to score MDMA in a nightclub will happily give so called 'legal highs' a go, because legal = safe right?

I agree, if you've got something you need to block out a physical or emotional pain, you can't really beat opiates and the problem with that is that unlike party drugs and lifestyle kind of drugs it something you can take to at any point in your life for a whole load of reasons. It would be incredibly dangerous to even think about that kind of social experiment, as the case of Florida described above shows, of course the corporates and big pharma would love it.

I knew a guy who used MDMA and would drink Codeine Linctus cough mixture the next day, to ease his comedown. You could just buy it from Boots then but it was still full of Codeine and highly addictive. Eventually his Codeine addiction was replaced with a Methadone script, where he met the local Heroin addicts and his addiction progressed. I found him dead in the bath. He simply couldn't stop using and his life became an endless cycle of scoring, using, getting money my any means possible and scoring.

[Foppo]

e21Mark said:

BJG1 said:

Mark, to say "most people don't use drugs" us simply untrue, isn't it? If guess 90% or more of adults use drugs to add more enjoyment to their lives

I meant illicit drugs and not coffee, tea and fags. I've yet to meet anyone who threatened people at cashpoints, with an HIV infected, blood filled syringe, because he couldn't afford a skinny mocha-locha chino.

I think you are wrong don't know the statistics but most people use illicit drugs?

NO.

[FredClogs]

e21Mark said:

FredClogs said:

e21Mark said:

FredClogs said:

BJG1 said:

I just can't see opiates being widely used if legal

I can, so one of us is wrong, which way should we legislate to reduce the risk?

I think more people will likely give it a go. Just as those people who wouldn't look to score MDMA in a nightclub will happily give so called 'legal highs' a go, because legal = safe right?

I agree, if you've got something you need to block out a physical or emotional pain, you can't really beat opiates and the problem with that is that unlike party drugs and lifestyle kind of drugs it something you can take to at any point in your life for a whole load of reasons. It would be incredibly dangerous to even think about that kind of social experiment, as the case of Florida described above shows, of course the corporates and big pharma would love it.

I knew a guy who used MDMA and would drink Codeine Linctus cough mixture the next day, to ease his comedown. You could just buy it from Boots then but it was still full of Codeine and highly addictive. Eventually his Codeine addiction was replaced with a Methadone script, where he met the local Heroin addicts and his addiction progressed. I found him dead in the bath. He simply couldn't stop using and his life became an endless cycle of scoring, using, getting money my any means possible and scoring.

Crikey, sorry to read that.

[malks222]

even if drugs were to be legalised, i dont see them ever fully replacing alcohol to the majority of users. I think the balance of consumption/effect of alcohol is one of the things which make it such an effective stimulant.

for instance is anyone going to change a couple of beers/wines after work for half an ecstacy/ half a syringe of heroin??

I'd be interested to see how the different states in america have adapted to legalised weed. I've been to amsterdam a few times and wonder how these cities compare.

[BJG1]

e21Mark said:

I meant illicit drugs and not coffee, tea and fags. I've yet to meet anyone who threatened people at cashpoints, with an HIV infected, blood filled syringe, because he couldn't afford a skinny mocha-locha chino.

Have you deliberately missed off alcohol?

[otolith]

e21Mark said:

I meant illicit drugs and not coffee, tea and fags. I've yet to meet anyone who threatened people at cashpoints, with an HIV infected, blood filled syringe, because he couldn't afford a skinny mocha-locha chino.

I wonder what people would be willing to do to get money for nicotine if prohibition meant that were only available illicitly at prices they couldn't afford?

[bigkeeko]

Getting back to the thread title. Are drugs REALLY a problem?

I can`t believe we`re actually debating it. I have a couple of friends. They were really good friends that I socialised with regularly but in the past few years they`ve fallen into `waster` category and now they`re just people I chat to occasionally. As far as they`re concerned drugs are not a problem but they marvel at how I can afford holidays abroad and run a V8 car like it`s some kind of exotica.
Lifestyle choice, freedom of expression, enhancements etc, call them whatever tosh you want but anyone who needs to borrow £50 for electricity or to go a 21st birthday party or someone who can`t enjoy a days fishing or night in the house watching the TV without smoking weed or dropping some pills needs a kick in the balls and sort their st out.

[jogon]

bigkeeko said:

Getting back to the thread title. Are drugs REALLY a problem?

I can`t believe we`re actually debating it. I have a couple of friends. They were really good friends that I socialised with regularly but in the past few years they`ve fallen into `waster` category and now they`re just people I chat to occasionally. As far as they`re concerned drugs are not a problem but they marvel at how I can afford holidays abroad and run a V8 car like it`s some kind of exotica.
Lifestyle choice, freedom of expression, enhancements etc, call them whatever tosh you want but anyone who needs to borrow £50 for electricity or to go a 21st birthday party or someone who can`t enjoy a days fishing or night in the house watching the TV without smoking weed or dropping some pills needs a kick in the balls and sort their st out.

Strange, as in my group of friends those who still enjoy to dabble are the most successful.

[e21Mark]

BJG1 said:

e21Mark said:

I meant illicit drugs and not coffee, tea and fags. I've yet to meet anyone who threatened people at cashpoints, with an HIV infected, blood filled syringe, because he couldn't afford a skinny mocha-locha chino.

Have you deliberately missed off alcohol?

No, not really. It bring it's own problems and there are plenty of alcoholics, but there are also plenty of people who don't drink to excess. I'm not sure why there appears to be a slight difference, but I guess the consequences are equally potentially devastating. Not forgetting it's the example people usually opt for when trying to justify other drugs.

I witness the devastation of illicit drug use every day. I see the kids who go without food because their parents spend every last penny on their drug of choice. Maybe there are some 'functioning addicts' but they don't come through our doors. Yes, these people made some bad choices and are certainly responsible for the consequences of their actions, but their addiction is something we all pay for. The last thing these people need is for more drugs to be more easily accessible. We have a responsibility to care for our most vulnerable and like it or not, addicts qualify. They're human after all. I don't have an answer but I agree that a little compassion and empathy would be a good place to start. Were these people my children, I would like to think there would be that cared enough to help.

Edited by e21Mark on Thursday 3rd July 18:45

[Dragoncaviar]

e21Mark said:

No, not really. It bring it's own problems and there are plenty of alcoholics, but there are also plenty of people who don't drink to excess. I'm not sure why there appears to be a slight difference, but I guess the consequences are equally potentially devastating. Not forgetting it's the example people usually opt for when trying to justify other drugs.

Why do you suppose the same is not true of other drugs? There are plenty of people that don't smoke cannabis to excess. Plenty of people that don't use MDMA to excess. I know almost no people that use psychedelics to the point of excess. In fact, the overwhelming majority of drug users are not problematic users. At the core of it, why should the majority be punished for the actions of a truly tiny minority?

e21Mark said:

I witness the devastation of illicit drug use every day. I see the kids who go without food because their parents spend every last penny on their drug of choice. Maybe there are some 'functioning addicts' but they don't come through our doors. Yes, these people made some bad choices and are certainly responsible for the consequences of their actions, but their addiction is something we all pay for. The last thing these people need is for more drugs to be more easily accessible. We have a responsibility to care for our most vulnerable and like it or not, addicts qualify. They're human after all. I don't have an answer but I agree that a little compassion and empathy would be a good place to start. Were these people my children, I would like to think there would be that cared enough to help.

This is a totally different issue though. Drug misuse will happen whether drugs are legal or not. Drug purity and thus safety would increase with a strictly regulated market. Taxation would be pumped into proper education so that people might decide for themselves whether they think drug use is bad or not, rather than having this notion that all drugs are bad, or "It's not illegal so it's safe" approach. When you educate people properly, pickup rates of use drop, just as they did when large, bold text and graphic images started coming onto packets of cigarettes. Taxation money would also be pumped healthcare for those addicted individuals, only under this system, instead of someone coming through the clinic doors to get their methadone script which they will take home and sell because it's worth more as a pharmaceutically pure drug on the black market than street heroin is, well this time they'll get the drug they want in a pharmaceutically pure form which won't do their body any damage at all. Then, perhaps, we could focus on dealing with their inevitably associated mental health issues and address the issue of their addiction - when it isn't slowly killing them.

And let's be clear here, pharmaceutically pure diacetlymorphine, when administered at the correct dosage is one of the few drugs which does no harm to the body. Yes, it's highly physically addictive, and yes it causes pretty horrific constipation, but beyond that, provided the dosage isn't too high for the individual, it doesn't harm the body. The principle harms come from the fact that IV users are shooting 80% contaminants straight into their systems.

The global harms from the 'war on drugs' go far beyond the lives of the people you see on a day to day basis as well. If you're arguing this from a compassion point of view, then what about the 120,000 dead and 27,000 missing since 2006 in Mexico as a direct result of cartel violence? That war only stepped up when military intervention and an increased focus on prohibition came in. Globally, the war on drugs is ravaging countries that are just trying to survive. Mexico does not have a significant drug problem. They have a drug war problem. The USA is the one with the drug lust fuelling Mexico's drug trade and in a painful twist of irony they also happen to have some of the worlds most punitive measures against drugs.

It's just painfully obvious that the system we're trying isn't working. Since the 1970's, the global war on drugs has cost over $1tn and resulted in 45 million arrests. During that time illegal drug use has remained unchanged. I know we can't fix the system overnight, but more people need to be willing to acknowledge a "drug free world" is not a reality we're ever going to see. The sooner we come to terms with that, the sooner we can start accepting drug use as a normal side effect of an imperfect society, and start helping those people affected.