Drugs are bad...mmm'kay

[Karma Singh]

[/quote]

Here's an example of the lying and stupidity of the pro-drug side, that more than matches the lying and stupidity of the War on Drugs. :facepalm:[/quote]

No, it's not. It's just the sad facts as anyone with knowledge and experience in the field knows all too well.
Further, decribing those who try to help addicts as being pro drug is an insult way beyond the confines of libel.

Blessed be

Karma

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Here's an example of the lying and stupidity of the pro-drug side, that more than matches the lying and stupidity of the War on Drugs. :facepalm:[/quote]

No, it's not. It's just the sad facts as anyone with knowledge and experience in the field knows all too well.
Further, decribing those who try to help addicts as being pro drug is an insult way beyond the confines of libel.

Blessed be

Karma[/quote]
Your position is fucking horseshit. The pharmaceutical companies, for all their many flaws, also provide a product that works and improves the lives of hundreds of millions of people worldwide. Any claim about prescription drugs that rejects that fact is just wrong.

Sugar isn't "just like heroin" which means you're either lying or outrageously ignorant.

Yeah... you either believe all sorts of stupid things, or you're willing to lie to support your bullshit position, or some combination of the two. I don't know what you expect people to say to you when you spew nonsense, but I'm sure you'll get used to it instead of correcting yourself.

 

[Karma Singh]

As someone who has, through many years, worked trying to help those addicted I can do nothing other than to confirm that far and away the biggest obstacle to getting someone off drugs is the criminalisation of the addict. One of the many effects of this is that there is no funding available to "finance crime" and 99.999% of us who try to help addicts can only do so as a hobby, often to the extent of keeping them alive by buying them food out of our own pockets.

So, basically what you are saying, if we decriminalize drugs, there will be funding to help get those who use them, off of them?

Wouldn't it just be simpler to cut out the middle man and just not get involved with drugs in the first place?

I understand there should be public funding for drug rehabilitation, but legalizing drugs to tax and fund drug rehabilitation is an cyclic situation.

Government propaganda criminalising some drug pushers but deifying others (the pharmaceutical conglomerate) has nothing to do with science, reason, compassion nor anything else of any use to humanity.

You are confusing medical for recreational. Medical benefits of modern drugs are overwhelming, and is entirely due to science and serve tremendous benefit to humanity. If you don't believe me, look up penicillin.

In the 17th century, it was the sugar runners (a drug very similar to heroin) who were the target of the revenuers until the sugar barons offered to finance a couple of wars in exchange for legalising sugar.

Are you talking about sugar as in, glucose, fructose and such? Because if you are, then you are utterly wrong.

Number 1, Sugar is nothing like heroine. Chemically, sugar and heroine are completely different, and have entirely different structures. Sugar is a nutrient utilized in the production of ATP in cells, and heroine is a completely synthetic opiate which has no natural utilization in cellular activity. Sugar is a food product, even in its refined form. The controversy about if its a drug or not is most unfounded and just something that the "legalize everything" groups use to try to justify their stupid position.

Trying to compare sugar to heroine is like trying to compare lettuce to tobacco leaves.

Number 2, Sugar has no detrimental effect from its consumption. Unlike heroine which will royally fuck someone up from the first does.

A land in which deadly drugs such as Gardasil which offers zero benefits and has killed and maimed thousands are actively pushed by government propaganda

Bullshit. Vaccination is one of the most important advances in medicine and has saved countless lives. Gardasil is still too new to see the benefits just yet since it is intended to prevent a disease which is has a very slow onset anyways, unlike small pox which once infected shows symptoms rather quickly and the benefits of the small pox vaccine can be seen immediately.

but heroin, which does nothing other than to numb the pain of loneliness and rejection, automatically makes the user a criminal

No, it makes them a pussy.

As to whether funding would improve, the answer can only be an unequivocal yes. Once governments accept the reality that addiciton requires healing rather than punishment then those funds presently wasted on prisons etc can be usefully employed.
Private funding, once the stigma of criminality has been removed, are also very likely to become available.

Who is the middle man? The disfunctional family structure? The "education" systems which seeks only to impose conformity? Pharmaceutical medicine which has no competence with the problem? Governments which seek to mask the true problem by criminalising it? Whom do you mean?????
I agree, however, cut them all out and we might do something good for humanity.

Much experience in many countries shows that decriminalising reduces addiction, costs and related crimes by at least 50%! In the UK that means about 1.500 people not dying of drug overdose, 75,000 not being imprisoned and about 3 million cases of petty theft less each year. Is that something you could live with or do you prefer the present status?

Before praising pharmaceutical medicine, I do most strongly suggest that you study the facts and not just swallow the propaganda. Your statement is completely untrue. Pharmaceutical medicine is responsible for the continual deterioration of health over the last 50 years. Whilst penicillin and other anti-biotics did have their day, because their usage is unscientific and just randomly thrown about in the vague hope that something uselful might happen, they have made great strides both in seriously weakening human immunity as well as engendering super germs resistant to all pharmaceuticals. Colloidal silver and the modern nano silver are much more effective and have no side effects. The pharma conglomerate is pulling out all stops to have it banned, however, because they can't patent it and charge extortionate prices for it.

No, I'm talking about saccarose - what most people understand by the word "sugar" - which is a naturally occuring pesticide. It is not and never has been a foodstuff but an hallucinogenic drug. Until the 17th century it was (correctly) classed as a dangerous drug and only available by doctor's prescription.
The effects of taking saccarose are almost identical to those of taking heroin. Those fortunate enough to have been brought up without having to learn a tolerance for this poison will exhibit the same reaction to both saccarose and heroin. Saccarose consumption is responsible for at least one fifth of all illness in the First World.


There is no scientific base for the theory of vaccination! It does not work, it never could work and the few studies which have been done actually show that vaccination actively spreads disease. See "vaccination is a religion" on you tube and my book http://www.theflufairytale.com for which Professor Bruce Lipton has graciously written the forward.


Take some compassion into your heart and your hands, visit with some addicts and listen to them without judgement. Your opinion will change.

Blessed be

Karma Singh

 

[Karma Singh]

Your position is fucking horseshit. The pharmaceutical companies, for all their many flaws, also provide a product that works and improves the lives of hundreds of millions of people worldwide. Any claim about prescription drugs that rejects that fact is just wrong.

Sugar isn't "just like heroin" which means you're either lying or outrageously ignorant.

Yeah... you either believe all sorts of stupid things, or you're willing to lie to support your bullshit position, or some combination of the two. I don't know what you expect people to say to you when you spew nonsense, but I'm sure you'll get used to it instead of correcting yourself.

Improbable, you're beginning to get impossible.

Your ignorance about pharmaceutical "medicine" is not proof of it's effectiveness. When you actually STUDY it instead of swalllowing the propaganda hook. line and sinker then you will learn something of great benefit to yourself and others.

I am an empiricist: If something works, I use it. If it doesn't, I junk it. Try it; it's much more effective than any sweet sounding theory.

Try knowledge - it works better.

Blessed be

Karma Singh

 

[Eidolon]

Before praising pharmaceutical medicine, I do most strongly suggest that you study the facts and not just swallow the propaganda. Your statement is completely untrue. Pharmaceutical medicine is responsible for the continual deterioration of health over the last 50 years. Whilst penicillin and other anti-biotics did have their day, because their usage is unscientific and just randomly thrown about in the vague hope that something uselful might happen, they have made great strides both in seriously weakening human immunity as well as engendering super germs resistant to all pharmaceuticals. Colloidal silver and the modern nano silver are much more effective and have no side effects. The pharma conglomerate is pulling out all stops to have it banned, however, because they can't patent it and charge extortionate prices for it.

This is starting to sound like conspiratorial bullshit.

While I agree that pharmaceuticals are wrong to attempt to ban anything which may have medical benefit, that doesn't play into the fact that they still produce very useful tools for combating disease. No one has ever said that the pharma companies are perfect, or that anyone likes them or their practices. But when someone comes down with tuberculosis, they don't turn to colloidal silver, or some kind of new age crap, they want Rifampicin.

Your claim that health has deteriorated due to medical advancement is completely unfounded. Look back 200 years ago and see the difference between the life expectancy of that era, and the life expectancy of today.

Its very obvious that you don't have a strong understanding of immunology. Please read up on it. Antibiotics have not weakened immunity, they actually strengthen it by allowing the body to develop antibodies against infection which would normally kill it.

No, I'm talking about saccarose - what most people understand by the word "sugar" - which is a naturally occuring pesticide. It is not and never has been a foodstuff but an hallucinogenic drug. Until the 17th century it was (correctly) classed as a dangerous drug and only available by doctor's prescription.
The effects of taking saccarose are almost identical to those of taking heroin. Those fortunate enough to have been brought up without having to learn a tolerance for this poison will exhibit the same reaction to both saccarose and heroin. Saccarose consumption is responsible for at least one fifth of all illness in the First World.

Saccarose, is sucrose. Sucrose is simply the polymerized product of fructose and glucose. Your claims are dubious and speak more of conspiracy theory than valid argument.

There is no scientific base for the theory of vaccination! It does not work, it never could work and the few studies which have been done actually show that vaccination actively spreads disease. See "vaccination is a religion" on you tube and my book http://www.theflufairytale.com for which Professor Bruce Lipton has graciously written the forward.

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!

When you cite something entitled "Vaccination is a religion" You are out.


Honestly, when you first entered this thread, I thought you might have some decent insight since you claim to work in drug rehabilitation, but the more you talk about it, the higher the reading goes on my bullshit-o-meter.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Honestly, when you first entered this thread, I thought you might have some decent insight since you claim to work in drug rehabilitation, but the more you talk about it, the higher the reading goes on my bullshit-o-meter.

He's just lying. That's what people like him do, the way the rest of us breathe. :evil:

 

[IBSpify]

Before praising pharmaceutical medicine, I do most strongly suggest that you study the facts and not just swallow the propaganda. Your statement is completely untrue. Pharmaceutical medicine is responsible for the continual deterioration of health over the last 50 years. Whilst penicillin and other anti-biotics did have their day, because their usage is unscientific and just randomly thrown about in the vague hope that something uselful might happen, they have made great strides both in seriously weakening human immunity as well as engendering super germs resistant to all pharmaceuticals. Colloidal silver and the modern nano silver are much more effective and have no side effects. The pharma conglomerate is pulling out all stops to have it banned, however, because they can't patent it and charge extortionate prices for it.

Oh looks like Niocon will have a new friend to turn blue with from consuming heavy metals.

In all seriousness though your your not likely to find that many people which support the heavy handed way that the pharmaceutical companies handle business, you really can't just throw out a statement like "They are responsible for the continual deterioration of health over the last 50 years" without backing the statement up with actual science, especially when the statistics show that life expectancy has gone up over the last 50 years (odd for a people with deteriorating health)

No, I'm talking about saccarose - what most people understand by the word "sugar" - which is a naturally occuring pesticide. It is not and never has been a foodstuff but an hallucinogenic drug. Until the 17th century it was (correctly) classed as a dangerous drug and only available by doctor's prescription.
The effects of taking saccarose are almost identical to those of taking heroin. Those fortunate enough to have been brought up without having to learn a tolerance for this poison will exhibit the same reaction to both saccarose and heroin. Saccarose consumption is responsible for at least one fifth of all illness in the First World.

Saccarose IS sucrose, the reason most people understand it by the word "sugar" is because sucrose is more commonly known as table sugar. While i honestly feel that pointing out the fact that your dangerous naturally occurring pesticide and hallucinogenic drug is quite literally completely harmless to everybody except perhaps diabetics, if you really need us to compare and contrast the difference between table sugar and heroin i suppose we could, we likely have the time.

There is no scientific base for the theory of vaccination! It does not work, it never could work and the few studies which have been done actually show that vaccination actively spreads disease. See "vaccination is a religion" on you tube and my book http://www.theflufairytale.com for which Professor Bruce Lipton has graciously written the forward.

Yes Vaccines don't work, that's why the American people have an epidemic of TB, smallpox, measles, mumps, rubella.....need i go on listing diseases which are all but non-existent in the US because of the use of vaccines?

 

[Nogre]

Who is the middle man? The disfunctional family structure? The "education" systems which seeks only to impose conformity? Pharmaceutical medicine which has no competence with the problem? Governments which seek to mask the true problem by criminalising it? Whom do you mean?????
I agree, however, cut them all out and we might do something good for humanity.

You're generalizing to the degree of absurdity. Try backing up your claims instead of assuming we share your views about anything not new-age and crazy.

Pharmaceutical medicine is responsible for the continual deterioration of health over the last 50 years. Whilst penicillin and other anti-biotics did have their day, because their usage is unscientific and just randomly thrown about in the vague hope that something uselful might happen, they have made great strides both in seriously weakening human immunity as well as engendering super germs resistant to all pharmaceuticals.

Yes, since absolutely noone actually goes into medicine, you know...to help people. :x There are certainly problems, but pharmaceutical companies are not the cause of all the world's problems. Nor are they the worst problem.

Colloidal silver

:facepalm: You just lost all credibility...

No, I'm talking about saccarose - what most people understand by the word "sugar" - which is a naturally occuring pesticide. It is not and never has been a foodstuff but an hallucinogenic drug. Until the 17th century it was (correctly) classed as a dangerous drug and only available by doctor's prescription.
The effects of taking saccarose are almost identical to those of taking heroin. Those fortunate enough to have been brought up without having to learn a tolerance for this poison will exhibit the same reaction to both saccarose and heroin. Saccarose consumption is responsible for at least one fifth of all illness in the First World.

So common table sugar (*saccharose, not saccarose; or sucrose) is responsible for 1/5 of illnesses in the first world... Did I say you lost all credibility before? You just lost even more.

There is no scientific base for the theory of vaccination! It does not work, it never could work and the few studies which have been done actually show that vaccination actively spreads disease. See "vaccination is a religion" on you tube and my book http://www.theflufairytale.com for which Professor Bruce Lipton has graciously written the forward.

Seriously? Wow... Let's just start burning witches again while we're at it! :facepalm:

Take some compassion into your heart and your hands, visit with some addicts and listen to them without judgement. Your opinion will change.

I don't think of them as "addicts." I think of them as human beings just as unique as any other; they simply share one trait. And I thought you'd be all over the whole postmodern "don't stereotype people" thing that's actually a good result of post-modern radicalism.

Honestly, when you first entered this thread, I thought you might have some decent insight since you claim to work in drug rehabilitation, but the more you talk about it, the higher the reading goes on my bullshit-o-meter.

I'm going to have to agree fully with Eidolon. At first, I was thinking you might bring some interesting cards to the table, Karma. But the more of your points I read the less true this is.

 

[Karma Singh]

Before praising pharmaceutical medicine, I do most strongly suggest that you study the facts and not just swallow the propaganda. Your statement is completely untrue. Pharmaceutical medicine is responsible for the continual deterioration of health over the last 50 years. Whilst penicillin and other anti-biotics did have their day, because their usage is unscientific and just randomly thrown about in the vague hope that something uselful might happen, they have made great strides both in seriously weakening human immunity as well as engendering super germs resistant to all pharmaceuticals. Colloidal silver and the modern nano silver are much more effective and have no side effects. The pharma conglomerate is pulling out all stops to have it banned, however, because they can't patent it and charge extortionate prices for it.

This is starting to sound like conspiratorial bullshit.

While I agree that pharmaceuticals are wrong to attempt to ban anything which may have medical benefit, that doesn't play into the fact that they still produce very useful tools for combating disease. No one has ever said that the pharma companies are perfect, or that anyone likes them or their practices. But when someone comes down with tuberculosis, they don't turn to colloidal silver, or some kind of new age crap, they want Rifampicin.

Your claim that health has deteriorated due to medical advancement is completely unfounded. Look back 200 years ago and see the difference between the life expectancy of that era, and the life expectancy of today.

Its very obvious that you don't have a strong understanding of immunology. Please read up on it. Antibiotics have not weakened immunity, they actually strengthen it by allowing the body to develop antibodies against infection which would normally kill it.

No, I'm talking about saccarose - what most people understand by the word "sugar" - which is a naturally occuring pesticide. It is not and never has been a foodstuff but an hallucinogenic drug. Until the 17th century it was (correctly) classed as a dangerous drug and only available by doctor's prescription.
The effects of taking saccarose are almost identical to those of taking heroin. Those fortunate enough to have been brought up without having to learn a tolerance for this poison will exhibit the same reaction to both saccarose and heroin. Saccarose consumption is responsible for at least one fifth of all illness in the First World.

Saccarose, is sucrose. Sucrose is simply the polymerized product of fructose and glucose. Your claims are dubious and speak more of conspiracy theory than valid argument.

There is no scientific base for the theory of vaccination! It does not work, it never could work and the few studies which have been done actually show that vaccination actively spreads disease. See "vaccination is a religion" on you tube and my book http://www.theflufairytale.com for which Professor Bruce Lipton has graciously written the forward.

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!

When you cite something entitled "Vaccination is a religion" You are out.


Honestly, when you first entered this thread, I thought you might have some decent insight since you claim to work in drug rehabilitation, but the more you talk about it, the higher the reading goes on my bullshit-o-meter.

Sorry to perturb your equilibrium Eidolon but the following facts are relevant:
Far and away the most effective treatments for tuberculosis are chromotherapy, naturopathy and homeopathy. Rifampicin is not even in the same league. People turn to it not because it is best but because of a most carefully designed propaganda campaign aimed at convincing people that it is the only option. This is what the pharmaceutical conglomerate spends $20 billion per year on - suppressing your access to and information about alternatives.

The propaganda that pharmaceutical medicine has made any significant (or even noticeable) contribution to human health collapses under the most superficial scrutiny. All public health advances can be directly traced to engineering! It is better food storage and distribution, better sanitation, water purification and clean air legislation which has achieved 100% of the improvements in public health over the last 200 years. One can truthfully say that public health has greatly improved DESPITE pharmaceuticals!

No, Eidolon, it is you who has no idea how human immunity functions. One of the many problems caused by antibiotics is that they destroy the balance in your intestinal flora. This GREATLY WEAKENS the human immune system. Antibiotics have directly lead to a massive increase in the numbers of chronically ill. The statistics are there for anyone to read. Look up "iatrogenic" in published health statistics. Iatrogenic means "made permanently ill by medical treatment". You are actually confusing the propaganda about antibiotics with the propaganda about vaccination (something else that simply doesn't work).

The vaccination theory is that injecting you with a dead or weakened virus will cause you to produce antibodies to the "real" virus so that, when you come into contact with it, you already have the antibodies and won't get ill. The facts, however, are that this only works if your immunity is fully functional and you would produce the antibodies and not get ill anyway. If your immunity is weakened or compromised so that you would not naturally produce the antibodies then the vaccine will also not trigger antibody production. In point of fact, in the latter case, the vaccine will tend to make you ill. This is clearly shown in all the comparison studies which have been made to date which all show that vaccination INCREASES the incidence of the disease. For many decades, however, the pharma conglomerate has declared such studies to be "unethical" and they are no longer carried out. You guess why.


Again, no; I have not mentioned conspiracy with regard to refined sugar, merely stated basic facts disputed solely by sugar refiners.


Why don't you watch the videos before uttering judgement upon them??? Do let us know your reasoned arguments for your stance.


One last question: What has any of this to do with drug addiction?

Blessed be

Karma Singh

 

[Aught3]

One last question: What has any of this to do with drug addiction?

Good question I was wondering that myself as I read your post.

Ok, Mr Singh a few questions to see whether this conversation is worth pursuing.
Do you accept that you are in the minority viewpoint with respect to vaccinations and antibiotics?
- if not, do you accept that it is the minority viewpoint of the people on this site?
Do you accept science based medicine as the best way to determine effective treatment for a particular disease?
- if not, could you briefly explain the way you think treatments should be determined?
Do you intend to provide science based evidence for your claims on medicine and alternative medicine?
What kind of evidence would convince you that vaccines and antibiotics are effective and safe?

 

[Karma Singh]

One last question: What has any of this to do with drug addiction?

Good question I was wondering that myself as I read your post.

Ok, Mr Singh a few questions to see whether this conversation is worth pursuing.
Do you accept that you are in the minority viewpoint with respect to vaccinations and antibiotics?
- if not, do you accept that it is the minority viewpoint of the people on this site?
Do you accept science based medicine as the best way to determine effective treatment for a particular disease?
- if not, could you briefly explain the way you think treatments should be determined?
Do you intend to provide science based evidence for your claims on medicine and alternative medicine?
What kind of evidence would convince you that vaccines and antibiotics are effective and safe?

Perhaps you'd like to direct your first point to Eidolon who began this digression.


Being in a minority is always the initial state of those who bring about change. I find myself in exalted company in this regard: Jesus, Ghandi, Bell, Churchill and many, many more. I don't find, however, that this has any bearing upon creating the solution to drug addiction. Perhaps you'd like to explain your thinking here?
With regard to the awareness about the ineffectiveness of pharmaceutical techniques and their very poor showing compared to other modes I note that, over the last 20 years, the "aware minority" is daily becoming larger simply because the truth is easier to find.

As to science, it depends upon whether you mean real science or "tobacco science". Let me elucidate; real science is where the scientist is free to pursue an independent investigation. In the field of medicine, an example of this would be Professor Bruce Lipton PhD. Tobacco science is the scientist is employed specifically by those needing "the correct result" to rubber stamp the decision of the marketing department. Almost all "medical research" falls into this latter category.
The name "Tobacco Science" comes from the vast effort which the tobacco companies made portraying the health giving benefits of smoking. For years, their propaganda was believed. Do you believe it now? No, of course you don't; the minority crying for truth has now become the majority.

The basic flaw which pharmaceutical medicine has to correct before any scientific progress with their theories can be made is to develop a coherent theory as to what disease is! They are a very, very long way from presenting such a theory. There is, at present, no scientific base for pharmaceutical medicine. It's nothing other than pseudo-scientific marketing mumbo jumbo (paraphrasing Prof. Lipton, amongst others.)

Fortunately, many real healing techniques do make scientific sense which is why they are so effective (and why the pharma conglomerate has to spend billions each year to keep this knowledge from you). The only way to solve any problem is to find out what the problem is and to then act in a manner appropriate to solving the problem. Suppressing the symptoms (effects) of a problem so that they are no longer in awareness, which is all that pharmaceutical medicine does, merely increases the pressure and leads to more serious "illness". When the truth becomes generally known and accepted, the pharmaceutical bubble will burst - it is, after all, nothing other than a massive con full of hot air and precious little else.

The only evidence which interests me is truth. I have not only seen with my own eyes that vaccination never, ever works but spreads disease, it is also clear to me, as in independent scientist, exactly why it does this. If you have evidence showing that vaccination works, you will be able to sell it to the pharma conglomerate for a vast sum of money because they do not have any!!!! Just try asking them for proof that it works and see what sort of run around you get.

Well, obviously, I can't deliver you my library, 40 years study and 26 years professional experience on a forum. What I can do is to suggest to you some initial points to begin your own studies and research.

You can read the abridged history of pharmaceutical medicine here:
http://www.hsurl.com/medhiste

You can find out about how human immunity works here:
http://www.hsurl.com/immune

Dr. Mercola frequently has some useful titbits:
http://www.mercola.com

The prime source of what is actually going on in this field is:
http://www.healthfreedomusa.org

The Natural Health Foundation is also very informative:
http://www.naturalnews.com/

From here on in, you'll have to spend a little money to get some books:
"The Biology of Belief" Bruce Lipton PhD.
"The Field" Lynn McTaggart
"The Flu Fairy Tale" Karma Singh
"Suppressed Inventions" Jonathan Eisen

That should keep you busy for a while as well as opening your eyes and your mind.

Blessed be

Karma Singh

 

[Nogre]

directly traced to engineering!

Yup. Including biomedical engineering. Please, tell me why you think that as soon as an engineer decides to apply his/her skills to medicine, they suddenly become corrupt and biased. When do they lose the motive of helping to save lives and make the world a better place? I mean, I'm studying this, right now. At what point should I expect a hefty bribe to fake my future experimental results? The moment I enter a lab? Graduation? Really, I'd like to know. That way I can record it, implicate them, and expose this conspiracy. If it's true, that is.

Perhaps you'd like to direct your first point to Eidolon who began this digression.

Well, the relevance to illegal drugs comes from the question of what qualifies as medicinal use and whether mainstream pharmacy is as bad/worse than the drug cartels pushing the illegal drugs.

I would go on to argue points, but I think it's rather pointless. What you and others like you are proposing would be a revolution in modern medicine. Don't waste your time here. Do some real research, publish your work, get it peer reviewed, and show mainstream medicine how real science is done. But publishing books aimed at the general public is not how science is done. That's the real pseudoscience: "science" aimed at persuading people that have no idea about scientific principles. Get into a position at a university, get a lab, do some research, publish your work, and show the world you're right the way every other scientist does. Otherwise, it's just silly to expect rational minds to take you seriously.

The only reason the general public is so easily molded to your unproven beliefs is because people in this day and age are exceedingly vulnerble to minipulation through rhetoric, especially when you get to point out some evil thing to blame peoples' troubles on and offer what seems like an easy, magical cure-all instead. Then you expect respect from people who see exactly what you're doing. Nope; not how it works. If you want to make a scientific claim, you do science; not rhetoric.

Back to drugs, though...the contribution of decriminalization to rehabilitation does seem like a legitimate argument (because some people do need and want help). Does anyone actually have an answer to that?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Back to drugs, though...the contribution of decriminalization to rehabilitation does seem like a legitimate argument (because some people do need and want help). Does anyone actually have an answer to that?

If by "decriminalization" you mean "not locking up users for years on end for simple possession" I'm with you 100%. I'm not sure how anyone can make a reasonable and rational case against rehabilitation... some people try, but those folks are assholes. :lol:

 

[Eidolon]

If by "decriminalization" you mean "not locking up users for years on end for simple possession" I'm with you 100%.

I agree.

I believe that drugs should of course be illegal, as in banned and punishable, however I think those caught using or possessing should face mandatory rehabilitated and treatment instead of jail time. That would allow the offender to get clean, and keep the prison system from being over populated with minor drug offenses.

 

[DrunkCat]

I feel compelled to leave this here: www.erowid.org

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I feel compelled to leave this here: http://www.erowid.org

Take it with you next time you drop by, ok? :facepalm:

 

[DrunkCat]

Why? Something wrong with actual independent scientific research?

 

[Nogre]

Why? Something wrong with actual independent scientific research?

If you think that it can be called "scientific research" when in describing the top 6 people on the web site, it only mentions education once, and it's a BA in Art. These are the two most credible people: Earth Erowid has co-authored academic posters :? , has been published in...publications :facepalm: , and has been interviewed by the news . Fire Erowid has written a lot :roll: , spoken at academic conferences :| , and her work has been cited in a bunch of places that don't include any serious scientific papers . Source: http://www.erowid.org/general/about/about_crew.shtml

Also, I got this little jewel off their disclaimer:

It is your responsibility to evaluate the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, opinion, advice, statement, or other content available through the Erowid site. Though we do our best to provide accurate information, the user of the domain agrees to assume all risk as to the quality and/or accuracy of the information supplied. All material is provided "as is" without warrany of any kind and should be double-checked and verified through other sources. Please seek the advice of professionals (lawyers, physicians, psychiatrists, chemists etc.) as appropriate, regarding the evaluation of any specific piece of information.

...

Some of the articles contained herein describe illegal activities, which may not be clearly identified as being illegal. It is the responsibility of the individual reader to verify the legality of any actions described in these files. It is not recommended that any of the activities described actually be carried out. These files are provided FOR EDUCATION and INFORMATION ONLY.

(underlining mine) source: http://www.erowid.org/general/about/about_disclaimer.shtml

So...they're trying to get a message out, but if there's any specific fact that has to be backed up, you should "seek the advice of professionals." Well, at least they're honest. They might as well say "We're an advocacy group; not a scientific group. Don't listen to us if you want real science."

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Why? Something wrong with actual independent scientific research?

You're kidding, right?

 

[DrunkCat]

At least it was enough for you guys to explore the link further than the splash page.