Bath Salts Drug Crisis

[Iormlund]

Given that alcohol is so widespread, it's no surprise that it has the highest social and health costs.
A lot more people drink a beer or two than people who smoke pot.
And pot has zero positive contribution to your health, while alcohol as many, particularly wine, but also strong alcohol.
Just like coffee, it can be nocive if you take too much.  But a regular consumption of wine will prevent many cancers and heart diseases.

Overall, alcohol has a lot more positive outcome than any of the illegal drugs when you factor in everything.

Most of the benefits of wine are due to certain flavonoids, not alcohol itself. If good health is what you're after it is much better to get them from fruit.

[Malthus]

I wouldn't be surprised if doing small amounts of drugs such as alcohol actually does you some good, but that fact is irrelevant.

The (reasonable) reason why drugs are illegal is twofold: (1) harm to self and society resulting from addiction (that is, chronic use effects); and (2) harm to self and society caused by taking the stuff on any given occasion (acute use effects).

In terms of actual harms to individuals resulting from chronic and/or acute use, alchohol rates as far, far more dangerous than pot. It is more addictive, has worse chronic health effects, and the acute effects of booze are well-known: they include violent behaviour, blackouts, vomiting, etc.; the acute effect of pot are giggling, eating Doritos and sleeping. 

[HVC]

But without alcohol how would ugly people get laid?

[Iormlund]

But without alcohol how would ugly people get laid?

I said taking fruits instead of alcohol is best for your health. I never denied having your date take alcohol instead of fruits is also best for your health.

[viper37]

Most of the benefits of wine are due to certain flavonoids, not alcohol itself. If good health is what you're after it is much better to get them from fruit.

it's part of the package.  If we were to drink pure, 100% alcohol, I don't think it would be that good for us.  But it's like marijuana, wich comes with THC.  I don't think you could smoke pure THC either, so it's irrelevant what 100% THC would do to you.

[viper37]

In terms of actual harms to individuals resulting from chronic and/or acute use, alchohol rates as far, far more dangerous than pot. It is more addictive, has worse chronic health effects, and the acute effects of booze are well-known: they include violent behaviour, blackouts, vomiting, etc.; the acute effect of pot are giggling, eating Doritos and sleeping. 

pot induce psychosis.  As as been used in legal defense, with success, more than once.
I've never seen a drunk hearing voices, thinking he had to kill the Devil who posessed his friend.
Blackouts, you see that often during rock shows.  Just this Saturday, dozens of poeple used too much pot and either fell asleep or where evacuated by paramedics.
Sickness?  I don't think people turning green and vomitting is something else than sickness related to too much pot.  It could have been the poutine, but I wasn't sick, so...

So, we have essentially the same effects as alcohol, worst, even, and you make others smoke that shit when they don't want to.
Nobody is forced to drink in my presence.  Alcohol 100, Pot 0. 

[Iormlund]

Most of the benefits of wine are due to certain flavonoids, not alcohol itself. If good health is what you're after it is much better to get them from fruit.

it's part of the package.  If we were to drink pure, 100% alcohol, I don't think it would be that good for us.  But it's like marijuana, wich comes with THC.  I don't think you could smoke pure THC either, so it's irrelevant what 100% THC would do to you.

Not really. First of all, you don't need to smoke marijuana to absorb THC. But most importanly, treatments for which marijuana is an alternative have their own problems, while flavonoid alternatives to wine are perfectly healthy.

[Malthus]

In terms of actual harms to individuals resulting from chronic and/or acute use, alchohol rates as far, far more dangerous than pot. It is more addictive, has worse chronic health effects, and the acute effects of booze are well-known: they include violent behaviour, blackouts, vomiting, etc.; the acute effect of pot are giggling, eating Doritos and sleeping. 

pot induce psychosis.  As as been used in legal defense, with success, more than once.
I've never seen a drunk hearing voices, thinking he had to kill the Devil who posessed his friend.
Blackouts, you see that often during rock shows.  Just this Saturday, dozens of poeple used too much pot and either fell asleep or where evacuated by paramedics.
Sickness?  I don't think people turning green and vomitting is something else than sickness related to too much pot.  It could have been the poutine, but I wasn't sick, so...

So, we have essentially the same effects as alcohol, worst, even, and you make others smoke that shit when they don't want to.
Nobody is forced to drink in my presence.  Alcohol 100, Pot 0. 

You've never heard of DTs? 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delirium_tremens

Or alcohol-related psychosis?

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/289848-overview

Alcohol-related dementia?

http://www.annals-general-psychiatry.com/content/5/S1/S57

I've never seen any pot-smokers who thought they heard devils. 

[Barrister]

I've never seen any pot-smokers who thought they heard devils. 

I knew someone would correct viper.

But pot is strongly associated with a variety of mental illnesses, including schizophrenia.  Heavy pot users are much more likely to develop such illnesses when compared to the general population.  Now the comeback to this is you can not prove causation - theoretically you could argue that people predisposed to mental illness are more likely to smoke pot.

Drug use has certainly been a factor with a few of the raving loonies I've dealt with.

[LaCroix]

I've never seen any pot-smokers who thought they heard devils. 

i knew a girl who claimed she thought she was in hell after smoking too much (also an inexperienced user), but she was very drunk at the time. it can happen

[Malthus]

I've never seen any pot-smokers who thought they heard devils. 

I knew someone would correct viper.

But pot is strongly associated with a variety of mental illnesses, including schizophrenia.  Heavy pot users are much more likely to develop such illnesses when compared to the general population.  Now the comeback to this is you can not prove causation - theoretically you could argue that people predisposed to mental illness are more likely to smoke pot.

Drug use has certainly been a factor with a few of the raving loonies I've dealt with.

Yeah, I've seen research that indicates that pot use can trigger psychosis in some people.

If it's a question of comparative harms in the form of mental illnesses triggered or exacerbated by sustance abuse, alcohol "wins" hands down, I would think.

And if it's a question of its use being a factor in crimes and accidents, I doubt it's even a contest.

[Malthus]

I've never seen any pot-smokers who thought they heard devils. 

i knew a girl who claimed she thought she was in hell after smoking too much (also an inexperienced user), but she was very drunk at the time. it can happen

Huh? If she both smoke and drank to excess, seems her testimony is worthless if the question is which of those two causes mental problems. 

[Barrister]

I've never seen any pot-smokers who thought they heard devils. 

I knew someone would correct viper.

But pot is strongly associated with a variety of mental illnesses, including schizophrenia.  Heavy pot users are much more likely to develop such illnesses when compared to the general population.  Now the comeback to this is you can not prove causation - theoretically you could argue that people predisposed to mental illness are more likely to smoke pot.

Drug use has certainly been a factor with a few of the raving loonies I've dealt with.

Yeah, I've seen research that indicates that pot use can trigger psychosis in some people.

If it's a question of comparative harms in the form of mental illnesses triggered or exacerbated by sustance abuse, alcohol "wins" hands down, I would think.

And if it's a question of its use being a factor in crimes and accidents, I doubt it's even a contest.

And what of it?

I don't have a problem saying I see alcohol as being a factor in a lot more files than I do marijuana.  That doesn't mean that we should legalize marijuana though.

[LaCroix]

haven't read the past few pages of the thread, i was only commenting on that one line

[Malthus]

And what of it?

I don't have a problem saying I see alcohol as being a factor in a lot more files than I do marijuana.  That doesn't mean that we should legalize marijuana though.

Think it through.

Surely though if one were to make decisions about the laws based purely on the potential for harms, pot would likely rate far lower on any objective scale than alcohol in both acute and chronic effect.

Given that there is a scale of harm, from the "not very harmful" effect of (say) caffene on the one hand (a cup of tea, anyone?) through to the "most harmful" effect of (say) krocodil  on the other(causes gangrinous wounds and death), most folks who think drug laws are necessary are going to have to draw a line on that scale and say 'anything worse than X is going to be prohibited'.

The question is, where to draw that X? Given the widespread acceptance of booze, it makes sense to say that 'anything worse than booze is prohibited', right?