379 karma · joined November 30, 2013
>Why don't you display actual milligram quantitative amounts? #
> In short, we are not allowed to do so. In the United States, the handling of Schedule I substances (MDMA, LSD, Cannabis, etc) is restricted to those with a valid license. Forensic labs such as DDL and others require and obtain licensure in order to operate. An unpublished administrative rule stipulates that licensed labs are not allowed to provide quantitative data to the public, reportedly for fear of providing 'quality control' to dealers and suppliers of black market products.
https://www.drugsdata.org/about_data.php
In Europe, one can send samples to drug checking services and get information about potency, but here the US Government is basically admitting that it's artificially inflating the risk of overdose by denying consumers information they need to stay safe. They can point to these inflated harms as justification for continued persecution of individuals who use drugs.
1. Statements like "we can't legalize a drug until we have proven that it's not harmful" are nonsensical given that it's easier to become habituated to drugs that are less harmful. The standard should be, "when measured holistically, does legalization and regulation increase or decrease harm relative to banning and criminalization?"
2. Lumping habitual use and sporadic use together as "abuse" is counter-productive.
3. A humane and just drug policy would focus on removing the causes of people wanting to escape negative emotions rather than on removing the tools they use to escape those emotions.
Panera used to sell a drink that contained close to the FDA maximum recommended daily quantity of caffeine, and also allowed free refills. Several people died, and sales were halted after some wrongful death lawsuits.
This isn't to say that caffeine is dangerous. Danger isn't an intrinsic property of a substance but rather an emergent property of the context in which it is used. (This is why the schedules of the Controlled Substance Act are inherently stupid.)
Sounds interesting, but I don't know what search terms to use. Does anyone have any representative examples?
/s
So now you're putting words in my mouth?
> I'm actually amazed you think this way, but then again, you are a foreigner in Japan and those are constantly bitter
"Pointing out ways that something you like can improve means you secretly hate it" is not a cogent argument.
> that places in East Asia are actually not rampant with drugs and drug abused homelessness.
Have you ever been to Japan? I've met a lot of drug users, and I've seen a lot of drugs. I know someone who runs a methamphetamine self-help group and credits cannabis with his recovery. I've met compassionate growers who supply cancer patients with free cannabis. I've been in a brick-and-mortar store that sells grey-market research chemicals from overseas. I know a shaman who runs underground pharmahuasca ceremonies. And last but not least, I dodge drunk salarymen and puddles of vomit on my way home from work every Friday night. Or do you not consider alcohol to be a drug...?
> Why do you think I'm commenting here so bluntly if you think I don't know about what I'm talking about?
You didn't even know about cough medicine. You have a credibility deficit right now. I've given you names and keywords and falsifiable statements and personal experience. All you've given me is baseless confidence and status quo bias. Throw me a bone!
In the meantime, may I suggest you read a book? "Drug Use for Grownups" by Dr. Carl Hart is a good place to start.
Of course not, that's why I provided the name of an authority.
> You literally said “cough medicine isn’t mind altering,” and then used the next paragraph to explain how it is mind-altering.
Paraphrasing the argument of my interlocutor and then immediately refuting it is a common rhetorical device.
> How about, you know, real medical help?
Of course people need real medical help. It's easier for them to seek it if they aren't at risk of criminal prosecution. Look up "harm reduction".
Of course cough medicine isn't any more mind altering than caffeine - except that there at least two types of highly psychoactive cough medicine: opioid, which has narcotic effects, and dextromethorphan, which has dissociative effects.
Experts, including Dr. Toshihiko Matsumoto, claim that wrist-cutting, suicides, and other self-harm increases when it becomes more difficult for young people to purchase cough syrup, presumably because they use it self-medicate trauma.
This is a microcosm for drug policy in general. Prohibition is only successful if you ignore second-order effects.
None of this is to discourage you from learning more about drug policy. Maybe if more people learned about it we would stop repeating the same mistakes over and over again