Anyone else about sick to fucking death of the term "social distancing"?

[Dr JIM]

I mean alcohol abuse is probably the worst and the use of alcohol has been normalized and accepted everywhere. Making alcohol illegal should be a given to curb the “scourge”, yet that will never happen. How is any other drug different in that regard?

That's a reasonable question and comparison.

The facts are some can drink alcohol socially and in a responsible manner, the same is true of marijuana, and IMO some who use PEDs.

Yet the degree to which alcohol adversely effects one's life defines whether a patient is an alcoholic and while some drinkers are termed "functional alcoholics" bc they can hold down a job (at least temporarily) many more are not, but let us not forget alcoholics are incarcerated on a daily basis bc of the harm they cause.

And in comparison to the social drinker, although I can't deny their limited existence, I've never heard of a social or functional meth or heroin addict. For these folk their life IS their drug, which BTW is also true of most alcoholics.

Tp that end no substance abuser OR alcoholic has a greater appreciation for what I'm referring to as those in recovery. Only then is their brain clear enough to realize the harm done to themselves and others.

So you are correct ALCOHOL that has become a societal scourge, yet I see no reason to add more to the menace list.

JIM

 

[Millard]

Harm reduction ?

Medicalization ?

Define the terms and their goals in reproducible terms.

I'm assuming that you want specific examples of (comprehensive) harm reduction approaches (programs that reduce harm associated with drug use) and medicalization (treatment of illicit drug use as a medical problem rather than a criminal problem).

Why not critique the Portuguese drug strategy? We can keep it simple and look only at drug-related deaths. Or additional variables if you wish?

 

[Dr JIM]

I'm assuming that you want specific examples of (comprehensive) harm reduction approaches (programs that reduce harm associated with drug use) and medicalization (treatment of illicit drug use as a medical problem rather than a criminal problem).

Why not critique the Portuguese drug strategy? We can keep it simple and look only at drug-related deaths. Or additional variables if you wish?

Ive reviewed the Portugal data previously and its clear Portugal is NOT the US, and since ALCOHOL has become a societal scourge, I see no reason to add more drugs to the menace list.

Yet if a district or state residents pass a referendum and politicians approve of the required legislation enabling unfettered drug abuse so be it, but the negative consequences will be far reaching.

I can only hope any state that follows such a path doesn't expect the federal government to bail them out of the fiscal mess created by such a policy.

JIM

 

[Millard]

Ive reviewed the Portugal data at previously and its clear Portugal is NOT the US, and since ALCOHOL has become a societal scourge, see no reason to add more drugs to the menace list.

Yet if a district or state residents pass a referendum and politicians approve of the required legislation enabling unfettered drug abuse so be it, but the negative consequences will be far reaching.

JIM

The Portugal data clearly shows not only reduced drug-related deaths but also reduced drug use in many instances. And something that I particularly like is the fact that the per capita expediture for illicit drug use is far lower in Portugal.

It's a fair point that Portugal is not the United States and no one can guarantee the similar results. But you've lost me with your conclusion that passing such legislation in the U.S. would have far reach negative consequences and lead to unfettered drug abuse.

If you agree that, in your words, "drug interdiction is and has been a huge waste of money", and the medicalization of drug abuse is not a viable solution, then WHAT is your solution?

It sounds like you think we should continue with the "huge waste of money" on criminalization. Why should we continue wasting money? Why not try another approach?

And while I agree drug interdiction is and has been a huge waste of money

 

[Dr JIM]

If states want to pass legalization allowing or experimenting with uniform drug legalization so be it, their choice. but IMO it will be a fiscal, societal and healthcare nightmare.

What you are suggesting is NOT legalized marijuana Millard (see the enclosed citation)

And I won't be the only citizen who elects not to live in that state, yet know some will relocate to use drugs freely, few of whom will be able to maintain meaningful employment.

 

[Skard]

Harvard Professor Indicted For Secret Work With Wuhan University

JEFF KATZ
JUNE 10, 2020 - 3:18 PM
Syndicated Pop Blog

Former Harvard Professor Charles Lieber was indicted by a grand jury on Tuesday over allegations of a secret financial relationship with China after he took a position as a "Strategic Scientist" at the Wuhan Institute of Technology.

CNBC reports that Lieber, who was also formerly the chair of the Harvard Chemistry Department, was indicted Tuesday for failing to disclose professional and financial relationships with organizations funded by the Chinese government.

Lieber's work with the Wuhan Institute was part of China's "Thousand Talents" program, which seeks to pay American academics in exchange for access to government-funded research.

 

[Villain]

Harvard Professor Indicted For Secret Work With Wuhan University

JEFF KATZ
JUNE 10, 2020 - 3:18 PM
Syndicated Pop Blog

Former Harvard Professor Charles Lieber was indicted by a grand jury on Tuesday over allegations of a secret financial relationship with China after he took a position as a "Strategic Scientist" at the Wuhan Institute of Technology.

CNBC reports that Lieber, who was also formerly the chair of the Harvard Chemistry Department, was indicted Tuesday for failing to disclose professional and financial relationships with organizations funded by the Chinese government.

Lieber's work with the Wuhan Institute was part of China's "Thousand Talents" program, which seeks to pay American academics in exchange for access to government-funded research.

Hmm. I recall a certain person on here saying this was all conspiracy or speculation

 

[Millard]

If states want to pass legalization allowing or experimenting with uniform drug legalization so be it, their choice. but IMO it will be a fiscal, societal and healthcare nightmare.

What you are suggesting is NOT legalized marijuana Millard (see the enclosed citation)

And I won't be the only citizen who elects not to live in that state, yet know some will relocate to use drugs freely, few of whom will be able to maintain meaningful employment.

Hello, strawman. When did we start talking about "uniform drug legalization"?!

So, I was talking about the Portugal drug approach...

As I suspect you know, Portugal did NOT legalize anything related to drug use, possession and distribution.

Drug possession in Portugal. Still illegal. But instead of incarcerating drug users, Portugal offered an administrative option that provide medical drug treatment for addicts/abusers and fines for others. It effectively decriminalized drug use but NOT drug trafficking. (It's VERY different framework than Colorado's legalization of marijuana.)

 

[Millard]

If states want to pass legalization allowing or experimenting with uniform drug legalization so be it, their choice. but IMO it will be a fiscal, societal and healthcare nightmare.

What you are suggesting is NOT legalized marijuana Millard (see the enclosed citation)

And I won't be the only citizen who elects not to live in that state, yet know some will relocate to use drugs freely, few of whom will be able to maintain meaningful employment.

From what I gather from our discussion, you agree that the resources spent of the mass incarceration of drug users have been a waste of money.

However, you do NOT seem to agree that a medicalization/harm reduction approach, as I described, is a preferable solution.

I want to bring this full circle and ask you: what should be done with the billions of dollars used to incarcerate drug users?

If it is a waste of money, should we stop spending it? Or don't rock the boat?

Do you think the funds would be better spent on ANY TYPE of harm reduction / medicalization approach to drug abuse?

I really hoped you would have answered these questions with your opinions on the matter. I respect if you do not wish to and I won't ask again.

 

[BigBaldBeardGuy]

Ive reviewed the Portugal data previously and its clear Portugal is NOT the US, and since ALCOHOL has become a societal scourge, I see no reason to add more drugs to the menace list.

Yet if a district or state residents pass a referendum and politicians approve of the required legislation enabling unfettered drug abuse so be it, but the negative consequences will be far reaching.

I can only hope any state that follows such a path doesn't expect the federal government to bail them out of the fiscal mess created by such a policy.

JIM

There are levels of addiction and certain drugs are more highly addictive. The current use of cheaper fentanyl to cut more expensive heroin is a very bad issue itself. The list of criminalized drugs is very comprehensive right now.

A lot of us are biased here with regard to PEDs but why is testosterone a scheduled drug? This pulls law enforcement resources that could be better utilized elsewhere. How many of us have lost our jobs due to “testosterone abuse”?

How many people are introduced to drug use because a doctor prescribed them OxyContin? Yet the FDA allowed Purdue Pharmaceutical to earn billions off of the sale of that particular drug. When they tried to recoup costs and punish Purdue, the company laundered their money and the family continues to hide it in offshore accounts.

There are certainly drugs that can safely be decriminalized to better focus on the more addictive drugs. Marijuana is being decriminalized and legalized across the country with tax dollars being effectively used for other programs. PEDs could certainly follow and be decriminalized and legalized as well, if people could safely use them without following the stupid protocols that many newbie users inevitably follow. I’m not sure how to fix stupid.

 

[ickyrica]

It's clear as day the current standards for managing drug use and all that comes with it is a failing model. I have zero pity for those that are addicted but an augmented approach to this does seem justified.

Same as the failed decades of self governed governmental reform, failed decades of illegal drug policing are reaching critical mass.

Change is needed on all fronts.

Nancy said just say no 38 years ago. Worked wonders...

War on Drugs Cost Statistics – NCDAS

 

[Cookieman]

We have already proven as a nation that prohibition doesn't work. The only thing that the alcohol prohibition did successfully was create a black market and environment conducive for crime. In my opinion, Portugal got it right.

Drug use is currently illegal in the U.S., yet people continue to use and abuse them. Deemimg them illegal does nothing as a deterrent. The people that are going to use drugs will do so regardless. Just because something is legal doesn't mean people will purchase it and use it. I don't foresee mass quantities of people running out to buy heroin if it is made legal to purchase. I think the people that are going to use drugs will do so, the people that aren't going to use them won't.
What our nation needs more than anything, is more treatment options for those that are addicted. Jail and prisons do absolutely nothing to rectify this problem.

 

[flenser]

There isn't much of a chance for decriminalization as long as the pharmaceutical industry has it's talons in both political parties. The prison lobbies could be defeated now, but so far not the pharmaceutical lobbies.

 

[Skard]

Undercover nurse/investigative journalist says non-covid patients intentionally murdered.

 

[Gbro]

Let's not go full tinfoil.

 

[Kingsmountain]

Hello, strawman. When did we start talking about "uniform drug legalization"?!

So, I was talking about the Portugal drug approach...

As I suspect you know, Portugal did NOT legalize anything related to drug use, possession and distribution.

Drug possession in Portugal. Still illegal. But instead of incarcerating drug users, Portugal offered an administrative option that provide medical drug treatment for addicts/abusers and fines for others. It effectively decriminalized drug use but NOT drug trafficking. (It's VERY different framework than Colorado's legalization of marijuana.)

I'm not even going to try to argue whether the Portugal system works or not. However, I have a serious question.

You stated the system offers help for users to get clean and I think that's great.

You stated that others get fines (I'm assuming those users who don't want help)

What happens to those who fail to pay the fines? Do they incarcerate them ?

The reason I ask is most of the users I have known throughout my lifetime did not want intervention and self admittedly had no intention of quitting.

So where do these people fall in the Portugal method?

 

[Millard]

You stated that others get fines (I'm assuming those users who don't want help)

What happens to those who fail to pay the fines? Do they incarcerate them ?

Most drug users don't need help in the Portugal system. Only a small minority are deemed problematic are referred to treatment. The fines are relatively small (25 to 50 euros I think?). There does not appear to be a problem with non-payment. I don't know what happens if the fines are not paid.

 

[Millard]

How many people are introduced to drug use because a doctor prescribed them OxyContin? Yet the FDA allowed Purdue Pharmaceutical to earn billions off of the sale of that particular drug. When they tried to recoup costs and punish Purdue, the company laundered their money and the family continues to hide it in offshore accounts.

War on Drugs Cost Statistics – NCDAS

There isn't much of a chance for decriminalization as long as the pharmaceutical industry has it's talons in both political parties. The prison lobbies could be defeated now, but so far not the pharmaceutical lobbies.

The pharmaceutical companies are something else. Whether it's Purdue's aggressive marketing of Oxycontin or the price gouging from the pharmcos that provide substitution treatment drugs (see link provided by @ickyrica). Whether drug abuse remains criminalized or medicalized, the pharmaceutical companies role in all of this needs to be seriously addressed.

 

[ickyrica]

Whether drug abuse remains criminalized or medicalized, the pharmaceutical companies role in all of this needs to be seriously addressed.

b.i.n.g.o.

 

[ickyrica]

U.S. states accuse 26 drugmakers of generic drug price fixing in sweeping lawsuit