In no way is there cognitive dissonance in the positions of being for legalizing drugs...

[originalpckelly]

and against legalizing prescription drugs with bad side effects.

[NightWatcher]

1. wha

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. That's true, there isn't.

There's a distinction between personal civil liberties and consumer protection.

There is, however, cognitive dissonance in being all worked up over, say, FISA. And at the same time supporting thousands of people, disproportionately black people, in prison, and billions of dollars wasted over marijuana.

[klyon]

4. sorry duplicate

[Warpy]

6. Anti drug laws have always been unconstitutional

which is why they had to set up a catch-22 in the tax code to institute them.

[klyon]

14. I totally agree

If it took a Constitutional Amendment to outlaw alcohol then it should be the same for pot and other recreational drugs. In fact we should be allowed to self-medicate with prescription drugs if we choose.

[klyon]

7. If a women has the right to decide what will be done with her body

then I have a right to decide what I do with mine. Roe vs Wade will set us free if the courts would allow this argument.

[patrice]

3. A degree of cognitive disonance is normal.

The questions are: cognitive dissonance (and also consonance) about what exactly; how many dissonant issues; how many conssonant issues; the relationships between dissonances and conssonants; and situational factors like when and why.

[Warpy]

5. The most dangerous drugs are legal

and those are alcohol and tobacco.

Some drugs do need to be restricted because they require close monitoring. Those would be antibiotics, hormones, cardiac drugs, psychiatric drugs, and other very powerful drugs that control disease processes but must be kept within a therapeutic range and frequently assessed for effectiveness.

None of those drugs is particularly attractive to anyone who wants to send his or her brain on a short vacation to la la land so their restriction won't create a black market.

Recreational drugs need to be legal and taxed, the taxation going to clinics for the small segment of the population that will inevitably run into serious trouble with them. Those clinics could also serve addiction to alcohol and tobacco.

Declaring recreational drugs off limits through well intentioned but oppressive nanny state laws is incompatible with a society that tries to advertise itself as a free one.

[aspergris]

9. not really

THE most dangerous drug I am aware of that is over the counter (legal and no prescription required ) is insulin.

I could go down to my corner drug store and buy a vial of Humulin R and a syringe, inject 3 cc's and be dead

practically a guarantee.

the primary reason you don't need a script for insulin is that the lobby is VERY powerful.

but it is BY far the most dangerous drug that is easily available.

i know several bb'ers who have used insulin, not for recreation or for medicinal purposes, but for nutrient partitioning, to help them build muscle.

[Warpy]

10. You're wrong on two counts

First, in every state I've lived in, insulin is by prescription only.

Second, it's a very poor way to commit suicide. A non diabetic will simply release glycogen stores to support life. There might a result of a permanent vegetative state, but that's because the higher brain functions are sacrificed to preserve the brainstem and therefore life.

I've seen people try to kill themselves with insulin. I have never seen it work.

[aspergris]

11. you are wrong. Humulin R is OVER THE COUNTER in WA STATE

and you are high if you don't think i could kill myself with 3 (actually the syringe will hold about 4 if you pull the plunger back) cc's of insulin on an empty stomach.

adding some alcohol would be a nice boost!


if you want to challenge me on this, I will provide you with evidence.

otherwise, you can just admit yer wrong and move on.

Btw, Humalog iirc is NOT over the counter. But humulin R is.

[Warpy]

12. Let's see, I'm an RN with strong experience in psych

and in 25 years, I never saw anyone be successful at suicide by insulin beyond turning himself into a vegetable, and I'm talking about brittle diabetics with prescriptions.

However, I don't live in Washington state. Every state I have lived in requires a prescription for insulin.

[aspergris]

13. nationally, many states do not require a prescription

for insulin (or syringes) i can provide you with a list if you desire from one of the diabetes listservs.

question: did any of these attempts use a 3 cc (or even a 10 cc syringe)?

I would doubt you could get enough insulin with an standard slin pin.

but a 3 cc or a 10 cc syringe is a different story.

also, did they go subcutaneously or intravenously?

You are an RN. I'm a cop with years of experience, and expert witness testimony as a drug expert (primarily pharamaceutical drugs of abuse. that's my specialty).

I'm telling you. MANY states dispense insulin w/o a script. I am surprised a nurse didn't know that.

Otoh, I was once investigating a ketamine case that involved needles and was interviewing an MD and *he* didn't realize that these guys could buy needles over the counter.

and he's a frigging md.

[Warpy]

15. Laws vary from state to state. Deal.

[aspergris]

16. exactly my point. shuffle!

[aspergris]

8. actually, to some extent there is

in that what is a "bad side effect" is to some extent dependant on the user's risk profile, and desired purpose.

i think it was hippocrates who said anything is a poison in the right dose.

for example, I know several bodybuilders who take insulin (w.o a prescription). perfectly legal. no script required (in my state) but it has DEADLY side effects if misused.

all surgeries have side effects and possible serious complications, including death. but we allow plastic surgery. and we should.

many of the drugs that are currently scheduled/criminalized once WERE prescription drugs - ecstacy comes to mind.

GHB which is totally feared in the US, is a legal drug in many other countries.

the point is that there is a distinction between REGULATION and criminalization.

I would suspect that most of us who are for decrim'ing of marijuana, etc. don't think that you should be able to walk into a drug store and buy any pharmaceutical of any kind without a script.

but generally speaking, if a person KNOWS the 'bad side effects' of a drug, the risks, the benefits, etc. it should generally be his choice.

also, just because one is for decrim of mj etc. doesn't mean one would ever use it oneself . that's tangential

[FloridaJudy]

17. I don't know of *anybody*

Who has died of a marijuana overdose. Ever. Sure, some users get high and then do things that are life-threateningly stupid, but that's even more likely with alcohol, which is legal. And which can be lethal just by itself.

In fact, marijuana is one of the most continuously used drugs in the world - pot has been discovered in pre-historic tombs. You could say it's been beta-tested to the max, and its hazards appear minimal. Not so with man made drugs - some of their dangers only become obvious after hordes of patients have tried them. Are there "natural" drugs that are dangerous? You betcha: I wouldn't recommend anyone try foxglove, castor beans or nightshade. But marijuana is not among them.

In short, marijuana prohibition is perfectly silly. Limiting the use of other drugs to prescription is not.

Oh, and BTW, I'm an RN too. And I don't use the stuff, though I would if it were medically indicated.