Drinking/Drugs

[Duff]

I feel weird reading everyone drug habbits and me not having any lol. Makes me feel antisocial :(

Just cause you don't do drugs doesn't mean you're antisocial.

 

If you and your friends don't drink at all and have fun other ways, you aren't antisocial. If you've found a way to have loads of fun with your drunk friends while being completely sober (I couldn't, which is why I started drinking), then props to you, you aren't antisocial. But if you stay at home/in the dorm while all your friends go out, maybe you are antisocial. :P

[Nomrombom]

Lolol, drug habits aren't good. If anything you should feel good that you can resist temptation.

[Duff]

Lolol, drug habits aren't good. If anything you should feel good that you can resist temptation.

I'd agree, that not having drug habits is great. When you're an alcoholic, then drinking becomes a problem, but if you drink to be social, I have no problem with that.

[mcneilp]

I'm starting to think parties are lame. Also I got into the Cavalli in Montreal, which is a good, high-class club apparently, though I thought it was pretty tacky. I danced for a bit but I quickly got bored, despite the alcohol, as I was hardly interested in the music. I kept it up because we were going to leave soon anyway. But yeah I would rather have listened to (or made!) my own music, alone, or with people who appreciate it, like my bandmates.

I've started feeling like this towards nightclubs as well. I prefer spending the end of my night in my favourite pub, with a few buddies talking nonsense about whatever with some decent music on in the background. Clubs (or maybe the extended drinking time they bring) seem to bring out the worst in people, a few of my friends included, getting angry and pissed off at the slightest wee thing which has led to a few incidents in the past that have got sketchy beyond belief. When I get drunk now I just want to chill.

 

As for drinking by yourself, I've nothing against it. Sitting with a whisky and water at the minute sorting through my music. :thumbup:

[kamykazee]

Lolol, drug habits aren't good. If anything you should feel good that you can resist temptation.

 

It's not so much that i resists temptation, just that i never touched them to begin with... Well i did do some ecstasy once for tries but felt terrible 24 hours after (head hurting rapid heart beat, tired but not able to sleeep) and it made me not want to try it ever again. Marijuana i also tried doing but seeing as i never was a smoker i couldnt stand it...Alchohol, it's funny i never got that because my mom was an alchoholic. I don't even drink soft drinks anymore, meh.

[Omar]

I've got two cans of Coke on my table and I don't know which is the empty one. #firstworldproblems

[Distracted]

Simple, lift them up and feel which one's empty.

[I_am_Geed]

I personally believe the idea that we have one life to live, so why must we judge people on their decisions and them doing what they wish to do with their lives.

 

Its understandable if said drinker/drug user has effected you in an immediate way, but besides that, why should you care?

 

I have no problem with people drinking/ doing drugs.

[kamykazee]

I personally believe the idea that we have one life to live, so why must we judge people on their decisions and them doing what they wish to do with their lives.

 

Its understandable if said drinker/drug user has effected you in an immediate way, but besides that, why should you care?

 

I have no problem with people drinking/ doing drugs.

 

For one, smokers affect those around them if they are non-smokers. I know this first-hand because both my parents smoke and sometimes call me in the kitchen while they do that and it's terror since i'm a non-smoker and i cough constatly whiel i'm there, plus the smell is horrid. Drinking and then driving, for example (which is what some do) CAN affect others alot. In cases like the two mentioned above, when you affect those around you, then the decision should not be yours alone anymore, tbh. If your doing drugs doesn't affect others then by all means but in some cases it does affect.

[h3art]

For one, smokers affect those around them if they are non-smokers. I know this first-hand because both my parents smoke and sometimes call me in the kitchen while they do that and it's terror since i'm a non-smoker and i cough constatly whiel i'm there, plus the smell is horrid. Drinking and then driving, for example (which is what some do) CAN affect others alot. In cases like the two mentioned above, when you affect those around you, then the decision should not be yours alone anymore, tbh. If your doing drugs doesn't affect others then by all means but in some cases it does affect.

 

That's just being inconsiderate, and in the case of drink driving, illegal. As someone who both smokes tobacco and consumes alcohol, I do neither (although I smoke inside on the odd occasion with the permission of everyone else).

[Duff]

I personally believe the idea that we have one life to live, so why must we judge people on their decisions and them doing what they wish to do with their lives.

 

Its understandable if said drinker/drug user has effected you in an immediate way, but besides that, why should you care?

When talking about addictive drugs, how can we not step in a try to prevent it? It's called solidarity. Mankind has to care for itself and it's existence, else there would be complete chaos. Addictive drugs for users who want to quit (there are tons out there who wish to stop but can't because of addiction) can ruin their lives. That's why I care about people around me using such addictive drugs, because I don't want them to get addicted and have their life turn to [cabbage] (I'm not assuming everyone's life turns to [cabbage] when they get addicted, but many do).

 

Of course, this doesn't really apply to non-addictive drugs (though it can if the person uses it so often that their health becomes an issue).

 

The way I see it, there are plenty of reasons for us to care, even if the drug doesn't directly affect you.

[Nomrombom]

Well, if they're going to let it get that far, why should we care? Why not let them do what they want if it's not hurting anyone but themself?

[Omar]

Because they would like to stop.

[Duff]

Well, if they're going to let it get that far, why should we care? Why not let them do what they want if it's not hurting anyone but themself?

Many times the situation is so that they are actually affecting other people (actually, I'll be bold enough to say that anyone addicted to drugs is not only hurting themselves; no matter what, a person can make a connection and show they are affecting others).

 

If you manage to find someone who actually is only hurting themselves, then yes, we shouldn't care.

 

But if faced with the question: Should people, who are guaranteed to get addicted to a drug, do that drug?

 

Sure, you could say all you want, "I don't care, they can do what they want." But to be honest, it's hard for me to think that on the inside, you wouldn't simply rather have them not do the drug. You may not go out of your way to prevent it, but you'd rather them not get addicted to the drug. It's about empathy. Everyone has it (except those experiencing certain psychological problems). Choosing between whether a person experiences a life of pain and suffering or not, I'm sure you'd wish for them not to, no matter how unrelated they are to you.

[I_am_Geed]

I personally believe the idea that we have one life to live, so why must we judge people on their decisions and them doing what they wish to do with their lives.

 

Its understandable if said drinker/drug user has effected you in an immediate way, but besides that, why should you care?

When talking about addictive drugs, how can we not step in a try to prevent it? It's called solidarity. Mankind has to care for itself and it's existence, else there would be complete chaos. Addictive drugs for users who want to quit (there are tons out there who wish to stop but can't because of addiction) can ruin their lives. That's why I care about people around me using such addictive drugs, because I don't want them to get addicted and have their life turn to [cabbage] (I'm not assuming everyone's life turns to [cabbage] when they get addicted, but many do).

 

Of course, this doesn't really apply to non-addictive drugs (though it can if the person uses it so often that their health becomes an issue).

 

The way I see it, there are plenty of reasons for us to care, even if the drug doesn't directly affect you.

 

 

This is what I get for not thinking my post through, lmfao. :ohnoes: :ohnoes: :ohnoes: :ohnoes:

 

First off I cannot stand Cigarettes, they smell like [cabbage], and iv pushed away 2 friends who started smoking them because I cant handle it.

 

From my experiences I know people do do many social drinking / drugs (parties, etc) and most of they are smart about it so I dont have really any horror stories and whatnot that other people may have. Thats why I really dont have a problem with my friends because they dont do it all that much so I wouldnt classify them as addicts.

[Duff]

I'll clarify that I'm not against social drinking. When talking about drugs, I can't say that I don't care about people doing drugs, because I do. I'd rather they didn't because it probably harms their health, and there's always the scary possibility of addiction.

 

But, I'm not going to be the strict parent and butt into their lives to tell them to stop that [cabbage] (unless it's getting way out of hand).

[I_am_Geed]

I'll clarify that I'm not against social drinking. When talking about drugs, I can't say that I don't care about people doing drugs, because I do. I'd rather they didn't because it probably harms their health, and there's always the scary possibility of addiction.

 

But, I'm not going to be the strict parent and butt into their lives to tell them to stop that [cabbage] (unless it's getting way out of hand).

 

 

Totally respectable.

 

 

But, since my parents were the second option you mentioned, I was naturally curious about all this that everyone was getting into.

As long as you trust your friends things dont end up all that badly.

[Nomrombom]

Well, to be fully honest, I don't care if they want to do heroin or coke or whatever, as long as they're not a parent or emergency services worker or anything like that. It's their choice and their life, and if they want to be ret­arded with it, then fine.

 

I am beginning to suspect that I am a psychopath.

[Duff]

Well, to be fully honest, I don't care if they want to do heroin or coke or whatever, as long as they're not a parent or emergency services worker or anything like that. It's their choice and their life, and if they want to be ret­arded with it, then fine.

 

I am beginning to suspect that I am a psychopath.

I know this scenario is dumb, but I think it may prove my point.

 

There's a room with two buttons in it. One button gives drugs to a person craving said addictive drugs. Another gives him something that will end said craving (not a drug, just some magical elixir :P). You are sent into the room, and you can either press the two buttons or simply leave without doing anything.

 

For some reason, I think almost all of humanity would press the button that ends their craving for the drug. I doubt anyone would just leave and pass up a chance to make someone's life better.

 

Heck, if you would, I can't change that. I'm just trying to show you that despite what you say, I think you kinda do care. :P Not trying to press my beliefs on ya.

[Nomrombom]

I don't even know what I think should happen anymore :lol:

[Duff]

I don't even know what I think should happen anymore :lol:

Fair enough. :grin:

[venomai]

I just have a question for everybody here. Do you think that there are productive members of society who use hard drugs such as meth and heroine ... ?

My two pennies...

 

a) Yes, but many would not admit to it. The stigma has the potential to ruin your career, love life, family, etc. (Could the stigma potentially be more destructive than the drug itself? That would be ironic.)

b) Imagine this: Productive Paul has dabbled with hard drugs and lived to tell the tale. Tweakin' Terry, on the other hand, has seen his entire life fall apart due to drug use, and is now dead due to an overdose. Which story makes the news? Which story do the children hear? Which story sticks in our memory?

 

 

(On the subject of productive people named Paul...)

 

Paul Erdös (1913-1996) was an extremely influential and prolific mathemtician in the 20th century. Yet, he was also a habitual drug user -- he used amphetamines from the early 1970s until his death in 1996.

 

Erdos often stayed with his close friend Ronald Graham and his wife, the mathematician Mei Fang, and Graham once bet him $500 that he could not give up amphetamines for a month. Graham lost. As Paul Hoffman tells the story, Erdos told him, "You've showed me that I'm not an addict. But I didn't get any work done. I'd get up in the morning and stare at a blank piece of paper. I'd have no ideas, just like an ordinary person. You've set mathematics back a month," and he went back to his pills.

Source: Prime numbers: the most mysterious figures in math

 

That's gotta be the exception to the rule, right?

 

Well, here's some food for thought -- a snippet of Peele's "Cocaine and the Concept of Addiction" published in the journal Addiction Research. The gist of it: Cocaine addiction is not nearly as common as the public perceives; only a small percentage of current cocaine users show signs of clinical addiction.

[hide]

Studies of Human Cocaine Use

 

Addicts' descriptions of their harrowing drug habits are typical media fare and, along with repeated references to animal cocaine-toxicity studies, comprise the major source for claims of cocaine's addictiveness (see DeGrandpre, 1996). "Cocaine addicts tend to go on binges, and monkeys hooked up intravenously will inject themselves repeatedly, rejecting food, sex and sleep until they die" (New York Times, June 14, 1992, p. 7; cited in Morgan & Zimmer, in press). For most of the 1980s, "few data exist[ed] on the characteristics of cocaine users who are not seeking advice or treatment" (Johanson & Fischman, 1989, p. 9). By the late 1980s and continuing to the present, however, a sizable amount of epidemiologic and community-based (as opposed to clinically-based) data on cocaine use have been accumulated which do not indicate that cocaine — whether snorted, smoked, or injected — is especially or inevitably addictive for humans (Erickson, 1993; Erickson & Alexander, 1989; Harrison, 1994).

 

[...]

 

Drug use surveys

After a decade when cocaine use was reported to be rampant and uncontrollable for a sizable group of Americans, the 1990 National Household Survey of Drug Abuse (NHSDA) found that 11.5 percent of Americans reported ever using cocaine, 3 percent used cocaine within the past year, and 0.9 percent used in the last month (NIDA, 1991; see Harrison, 1994). Of current users (those who have used the drug in the last year), a third used the drug 12 or more times a year, and 10 percent used cocaine once a week or more. These results replicate another, earlier study:

 

Cocaine use appears to be experimental in nature and to involve few experiences for a substantial portion of those who report any lifetime experience with the drug. One-half (53%) of the male users and two-thirds (67 %) of the female users have used cocaine less than 10 times in their lives; 34% and 28 %, respectively, have used 10 to 99 times, 9% and 3% have used 100 to 999 times, 3% and 2% have used 1,000 or more times. (Kandel, Murphy, & Karus, 1985)

 

A Canadian survey found 5 percent of current users used monthly or more often (Adlaf, Smart, & Canale, 1991). But monthly and weekly use are far from addiction, and only 10-25 percent of regular users resemble clinical addicts, or about 1-2 percent of all current users (Erickson & Alexander, 1989).

 

Natural history or longitudinal data

Indeed, only a small minority of long-term cocaine users actually progress to addiction (i.e., compulsive use that leads to disruption in other life areas, such as health and work). Of the 50 regular users Siegel (1984) tracked for over a decade, only five became compulsive users at any point. The failure of most users to progress to addiction occurred even though average level of use increased during the study, seemingly because subjects — who were college students when first identified — had more disposable income. Studies of ongoing cocaine users in Canada, Scotland, Australia, and Holland identify controlled use as the most common usage pattern (Cohen, 1989; Ditton, Farrow, Forsyth et al., 1991; [bleep]an & Chin, 1989; Mugford & Cohen, 1989; Murphy, Reinarman, & Waldorf, 1989; see Harrison, 1994).

[/hide]

 

--

 

 

Since we're talking hard drugs, here's some unrelated fodder regarding heroin:

Though postaddicts showed no preference for [morphine or heroin] when administered on a single injection basis, five out of eight expressed a preference for heroin in the short-term addiction study. However, on the basis of postaddicts' reports on "the most important effects of morphine and heroin," no constellation of effects could be discerned that explained the preference for heroin. Equipotent doses of these drugs had quite comparable action time courses when administered intravenously, and on this basis there was no marked difference in their ability to produce feelings of "euphoria," ambition, nervousness, relaxation, drowsiness, or sleepiness. Although the heroin abstinence syndrome was of shorter duration than that of morphine, the peak intensity was quite comparable for the two drugs. Data acquired during short-term addiction studies did not support the statement that tolerance develops more rapidly to heroin than to morphine

Source: A comparative study of physiological and subjective effects of heroin and morhine

 

Simply put: Although chemically similar, according to the study heroin is approximately 1.8-2.6 times more potent than morphine. Yet, at equal doses, both drugs produce the same effects on the brain and body and have the same potential for addiction. (In fact, according to the study, heroin's withdrawal symptoms do not last as long as those from morphine).

 

 

The regulation debate always centres so much around cannabis... How about your thoughts on regulating heroin?

[magekillr]

The regulation debate always centres so much around cannabis... How about your thoughts on regulating heroin?

 

Lol, people will call you crazy; at least that's what happens to me when I discuss my views on drugs. Of course, they're attached to stigma and tradition more than the scientific evidence at hand, or what will work better in practice over prohibition. I don't know how I'd feel about heroin being legalized outright; the cultural stigma against it is far too strong. I mean, Amy Winehouse just died...that's not exactly going to help our argument. But in any case, I'd need to see it decriminalized -- in more countries than just Portugal, especially the United States -- before any talk of outright legalization. There would also need to be more focus on health and education.

 

Also, glad to see you here again, venomai. I've missed your well-thought arguments, especially on subjects such as these.

[venomai]

Only here to get my fix -- been itchin' for another dose of drug talk. :ohnoes:

 

I visited Amsterdam this summer, cool to see how a tolerated/decriminalized (but not legalized) drug policy can work.

[mcneilp]

Heroin has always been considered the worst of the worst here. It's a well acknowledged, major problem for Scotland which, even if it was legalised/regulated, would still have the cultural stigma attached to it that it currently does as magekillr said. Many people, here at least, are taken in when the word "drug" is used in any kind of news story or whatever, imagining cannabis use on equal terms with heroin addiction. A bit of general education on the effects of different types of drugs could be well used, I'd say.