“Maybe if I was also on speed” was in fact, a personal attack. You chose to refer to my legally prescribed medication by the name used by drug dealers when selling it illegally for the purpose of drug abuse. The implication being that I am “on speed” being that it is incorrectly prescribed and I am abusing it recreationally.
It did not “have the same effect” in the sense that I am being overly sensitive, it had the same effect because it unequivocally was the same thing.
You can be lazy, that’s fine. I’m lazy all the time! In the cases where I do not feel like responding with the appropriate level of rigor and mutual respect I simply choose to not respond at all.
As before, have a wonderful day.
Yes, absolutely society does cause people to feel the need to rely on medication that otherwise would not be required and has long-term harmful effects on their health. I would assert however that the reliance on medication is not, in itself, the problem, and sidesteps the original discussion, which is that someone claimed "people only need these two specific drugs" and I responded that the needs of the individual vary based on their specific environment and biology, using myself as an example.
Your assertion that society is causing these people to take hard drugs they don't need, or shouldn't need, re-orients the discussion away from the claim I was originally responding to. Personally I would love to not need Adderall, and sure, if I was rich and didn't have to work I wouldn't need to take Adderall. If I grew up in a supportive environment, provided behavioral strategies that fostered better coping skills, and a whole bunch of other favorable conditions were present, I would not need to take medication at all.
But medication is not prescribed because those things didn't happen, it's prescribed because in the life I am living right now, in the conditions I'm experiencing, and with the problems I face every single day, it is what I have found to be the best solution FOR ME.
Finally, on tone: "maybe if I was also on speed I'd be interested in continuing" was not a viewpoint, it was a swipe, and I would point to the site guidelines here ("Be kind. Don't be snarky." and "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says"). I engaged with every substantive point you raised, I would have done the same without the jab, and the conversation would have been better for it.
Thanks for reading!