Every time I re-read the initial article I find more inaccuracies. I'd like to know where Mr. Adams gets his info as no references were included. I especially like how when you click on a link in the article it redirects you to the exact same article, that is brilliant!
1. I'd like to see the statistics that show the "millions of military personal" from WWII addicted to methamphetamines. I bet the same people counted the protestors at the million man march.
2. Adams says "meth is made from ingredients found in over-the-counter cold medicines." I guess he couldn't research which ingredient. The author also criticizes "big pharma" and legislators for not listing these cold medicines as controlled substances. However, most states require any product with pseudoephedrine to be kept behind the pharmacy counter, the quatity sold is limited (it takes a lot to make a batch of meth), and a record of the sale and customer information is kept. As far as I am concerened, that seems like legislation to limit availability of the ingedient.
3. "Ritalin is speed for children" - gross generalization. Ritalin is a stimulant used to treat ADHD and I agree that it is over prescribed, but have also seen it be very effective in helping patients. I would also like to know exactly which drug company invented "brain chemistry condition" as the author terms it.
I am not a fan of the pharmaceutical industry in the U.S. by any means, but Mr. Adams' propaganda is nothing but a joke.
If you have sex with a 11 year old... yes, sir, you are a shit head.
Yes, I would be a shit head. But that's not the standard of legality. The standard of legality is the violation of rights, not whether or not I'm a shit head.
A pedophile violates the rights of the 11 year old. Now whose rights does a drug user violate? And what rights?
Yes, I would be a shit head. But that's not the standard of legality. The standard of legality is the violation of rights, not whether or not I'm a shit head.
A pedophile violates the rights of the 11 year old. Now whose rights does a drug user violate? And what rights?
It is a good day.
You are a blamer of victims, ffg, you are. You see the advantage in people's ignorance, and I think you are scum for it.
Every time I re-read the initial article I find more inaccuracies. I'd like to know where Mr. Adams gets his info as no references were included. I especially like how when you click on a link in the article it redirects you to the exact same article, that is brilliant!
1. I'd like to see the statistics that show the "millions of military personal" from WWII addicted to methamphetamines. I bet the same people counted the protestors at the million man march.
2. Adams says "meth is made from ingredients found in over-the-counter cold medicines." I guess he couldn't research which ingredient. The author also criticizes "big pharma" and legislators for not listing these cold medicines as controlled substances. However, most states require any product with pseudoephedrine to be kept behind the pharmacy counter, the quatity sold is limited (it takes a lot to make a batch of meth), and a record of the sale and customer information is kept. As far as I am concerened, that seems like legislation to limit availability of the ingedient.
3. "Ritalin is speed for children" - gross generalization. Ritalin is a stimulant used to treat ADHD and I agree that it is over prescribed, but have also seen it be very effective in helping patients. I would also like to know exactly which drug company invented "brain chemistry condition" as the author terms it.
I am not a fan of the pharmaceutical industry in the U.S. by any means, but Mr. Adams' propaganda is nothing but a joke.
Ritalin is Methelphenidate. Not exactly methamphetamine but the effects are similar just a lot more mild and without all the nasty things the ephedrine gets cut with. I took it for a while when perscribed and yeah it works, but I can't imagine it being something I'd want to take daily, It made me feel like crap and like I drank 12 cups of coffee. Sure I was focused, but I felt terrible.
Methamphetamine is made by reducing ephedrine and psudophedrine from OTC cold medications (Sudafed) etc.
and yeah they are controlled everywhere I've ever been since the past year or so so they aren't exactly OTC, but the production of meth hasn't really stopped at all so the supply is coming from somewhere. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meth#Illicit_production
My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
Ritalin is Methelphenidate. Not exactly methamphetamine but the effects are similar just a lot more mild and without all the nasty things the ephedrine gets cut with. I took it for a while when perscribed and yeah it works, but I can't imagine it being something I'd want to take daily, It made me feel like crap and like I drank 12 cups of coffee. Sure I was focused, but I felt terrible.
Methamphetamine is made by reducing ephedrine and psudophedrine from OTC cold medications (Sudafed) etc.
and yeah they are controlled everywhere I've ever been since the past year or so so they aren't exactly OTC, but the production of meth hasn't really stopped at all so the supply is coming from somewhere. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meth#Illicit_production
My post may have been unclear, but I wasn't trying to say that meth and ritalin are the same. I was enumerating various issues I had with the original article.
I agree with you that the legislation regarding OTC cold products has done little to stop the production of meth (was merely pointing out that the author indicated that no such legislation exists). I think much of the supply comes from unregulated sources on the internet or overseas maybe. Not too many people seem to be cleaning out the drugstores anymore.
My post may have been unclear, but I wasn't trying to say that meth and ritalin are the same. I was enumerating various issues I had with the original article.
I agree with you that the legislation regarding OTC cold products has done little to stop the production of meth (was merely pointing out that the author indicated that no such legislation exists). I think much of the supply comes from unregulated sources on the internet or overseas maybe. Not too many people seem to be cleaning out the drugstores anymore.
oh ok, I probably didn't read your post thoroughly before I posted, I was just giving some information. Cheers.
My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
You make good points. You're not converting me, I still believe what I believe but you may be on to something...
At least i can admit that some of my views aren't necessarily the best or correct.
Maybe thats why I'm not president....
yeah, open-mindedness and a willingness to adjust your views to reality aren't good skills in the political world... they call it flip-flopping
anyway, i might sound careless towards addicts. im not, having been one. but i just dont think our current system is doing any good. i think it's making things worse. it's a losing battle and a waste of resources i think. jailtime and a criminal record is not the answer for addicts.
Huh? I think heroin is illegal for obvious reasons. That doesn't take away from the point of the article which is that the Pharma industry makes drugs that are more dangerous and addicting than those that are illegal (and also more safe in some cases). I wasn't ever saying heroin being illegal was part of my problem with the Pharm companies. My problem is they are all about the war on drugs because they want you buying their shit all the while tauting the dangers of the illegal ones. The heroin is just showing the kind of shit they come up with that isn't safe and yet they push it anyways until they no longer can. It about how they, themselves, make these very potent drugs and claim to be against others. The only reason they give a shit is because the money isn't going into their pockets and that is bullshit! I'm not addressing 'evil' here...it's greed and the fucked up priorites that go along with it. I don't believe in evil...just very different points of views about what is most important.
If they could find a way to make money off heroin and not have all the bad PR and liabilities that would come with it, they would. These are drug companies...it's not the same as selling alcohol that doctors advise to take in moderation and talk about it's dangers all the time. They have to be selling heroin as helpful and safe for patients. I don't think that would go over too well knowing the effects of the drug. Look at the class actions against cigarettes. Now tell me that they can sell and doctors are going to prescribe a drug like heroin and pretend it's helping someone.
i think i see what you're saying now and that makes more sense. though i still think pharmas would make a killing if they legalized these drugs, and most of the money funding the scare ads about these drugs comes from them. i think they could look ahead and see that if the stigma changed, they could get rich. though i guess keeping the focus on them does help divert attention from what they're selling now... i still think the prohibition came from moral temperance movements and they just just figured they'd try to make the best of a bad business situation.
I think stating that heroin is "tame" is very very inaccurate.
Also, quality control, as you put it, would likely do little to prevent "overdosages." I agree that quality control would assure the purity of the heroin and prevent it from containing dangerous excipients or additional drugs/toxins that are often associated with adverse events. Quality control would also make all sources of heroin comparable on a mg to mg basis.
That said, unless the use of heroin was managed by a medical professional, overdoses would still be a major issue. "Patients" would continue to escalate their dose as tolerance developed. I can't think of too may physicians that would be willing to supervise maintained narcotic addiction (Don't even compare this to methadone maintenance programs either - whole other topic).
You say "people still od from drinking." Do you not consider alcohol to be quality controlled? How then would quality control of heroin prevent overdoses?
becos addicts know what's going into their veins. they don't right now, so they cook up their usual dose not knowing they've got some bomb shit this time and they're dead. yes, people still od from alcohol... becos they overdo it. people will still do this for heroin too. but fuck em, shit happens. the ones who can and will use responsibly will be safer. the hopeless lost causes will still manage to check themselves out.
i guess what i was saying is accidental overdoses will decline, becos people can know their intake better. people overdoing it on a regular basis or going too far one night will suffer the same fate as the people who overdo it with drinking: removal from the gene pool.
i thought you blamed pedophilia type behavior on alcohol?
huh? ah, saw gue's quote of what you REALLY said... and i still say "huh?" anyway, that and the puppies were thrown in becos you posted a ridiculous propaganda piece from some nutless body builder to sell his products and tried to pass it off as a legitimate informative study. i've seen you stoop pretty low man, but that was probably your lamest hour. i KNOW you can find better stuff on pharmas than thatn nonsense. *edit* i see now it was abook who posted the original article, but that doesnt really matter i suppose. you two are interchangeable.
you would see why they made it illegal. who said anything about 'evil'?? you can be so naive from your hate and anger, have you ever considered dropping all the negativity?
when they started pushing it they didn't realize it was like 3 times stonger than morphine when the liver got a hold of it...there was an explosion of addicts from it and after it became illegal w/o a prescription, doctors compalining about its effects
where does 'big bad evil pharma companies kicking puppies' or any of that shit come in????
i thought you were arguing for some weird conspiracy where pharmas invented heroin for profit, then outlawed it as a business decision. abook has clarified this. i thought you'd really lost it this time... cos if there's one thing they know, it's what's good for business
dude, that was fucking funny! i like when people can laugh at themselves.
oh i can laugh at jokes at my expense, but i got the feeling he wasnt joking and was referring to something specific and am kinda curious what it is. i dont recall saying anything like that. but then, i did have a bad habit of posting while drunk a few years ago... anyway, neither here nor there. we're talking about drugs, my other illicit vice!
anyway, that and the puppies were thrown in becos you posted a ridiculous propaganda piece from some nutless body builder to sell his products and tried to pass it off as a legitimate informative study. i've seen you stoop pretty low man, but that was probably your lamest hour. i KNOW you can find better stuff on pharmas than thatn nonsense. *edit* i see now it was abook who posted the original article, but that doesnt really matter i suppose. you two are interchangeable.
I don't care where the piece came from. It brought up some good points that I agreed with. I wasn't digging for stuff to post about big pharma, I just happened upon this, learned some things I didn't know and liked many of the points he brought up so I posted it. If you want to argue the points addressed, cool. But arguing about where the piece came from instead of disproving the content makes your arguement look weak, imo. I never said this was a definitive study of anything...it was clearly an opinion piece and we share those here from time to time.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Comments
Marijuana may not be a drug, but THC is. Just because it is not synthetic doesn't mean it's not a drug. Many medical compounds are non-synthetic.
Smoke a bowl for me though.
So, then how do you go about it?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I do, but that's not why I'm arguing with you.
Yes, I would be a shit head. But that's not the standard of legality. The standard of legality is the violation of rights, not whether or not I'm a shit head.
A pedophile violates the rights of the 11 year old. Now whose rights does a drug user violate? And what rights?
It is a good day.
A viable corporation can never be disinterested in their consumers. That makes no sense.
You are a blamer of victims, ffg, you are. You see the advantage in people's ignorance, and I think you are scum for it.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
You're full of shit.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=239737
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
So your contention is that pharmaceutical companies aren't researching cancer treatments?
Hey man, ffg is a smart young man, who are you to discredit his wisdom?
Wisdom? He likes a rigged game. He's a cheater. All is fair, victims or no victims. He really doesn't deserve a place on this board.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
What "victims"? How were they victimized?
No. I see disadvantage for people in their own ignorace.
You're entitled to think whatever you'd like.
You are a certifiable fucking moron. Get away from this forum, you don't belong here. Just get the fuck away or I will haunt you on your every post.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Ritalin is Methelphenidate. Not exactly methamphetamine but the effects are similar just a lot more mild and without all the nasty things the ephedrine gets cut with. I took it for a while when perscribed and yeah it works, but I can't imagine it being something I'd want to take daily, It made me feel like crap and like I drank 12 cups of coffee. Sure I was focused, but I felt terrible.
Methamphetamine is made by reducing ephedrine and psudophedrine from OTC cold medications (Sudafed) etc.
and yeah they are controlled everywhere I've ever been since the past year or so so they aren't exactly OTC, but the production of meth hasn't really stopped at all so the supply is coming from somewhere.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meth#Illicit_production
Certifiable how? And by whom?
What qualifications are there to "belong" to this forum.
You may haunt whomever you wish.
My post may have been unclear, but I wasn't trying to say that meth and ritalin are the same. I was enumerating various issues I had with the original article.
I agree with you that the legislation regarding OTC cold products has done little to stop the production of meth (was merely pointing out that the author indicated that no such legislation exists). I think much of the supply comes from unregulated sources on the internet or overseas maybe. Not too many people seem to be cleaning out the drugstores anymore.
oh ok, I probably didn't read your post thoroughly before I posted, I was just giving some information. Cheers.
We've got a ways to go, I'll enjoy the trip. Of course, there'll be hell to pay for your wasting my time like this.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
sometimes el kabong you are just too nice, you should have stuck to your guns, i was getting a little excited for the response
i disagree
yeah, open-mindedness and a willingness to adjust your views to reality aren't good skills in the political world... they call it flip-flopping
anyway, i might sound careless towards addicts. im not, having been one. but i just dont think our current system is doing any good. i think it's making things worse. it's a losing battle and a waste of resources i think. jailtime and a criminal record is not the answer for addicts.
i think i see what you're saying now and that makes more sense. though i still think pharmas would make a killing if they legalized these drugs, and most of the money funding the scare ads about these drugs comes from them. i think they could look ahead and see that if the stigma changed, they could get rich. though i guess keeping the focus on them does help divert attention from what they're selling now... i still think the prohibition came from moral temperance movements and they just just figured they'd try to make the best of a bad business situation.
becos addicts know what's going into their veins. they don't right now, so they cook up their usual dose not knowing they've got some bomb shit this time and they're dead. yes, people still od from alcohol... becos they overdo it. people will still do this for heroin too. but fuck em, shit happens. the ones who can and will use responsibly will be safer. the hopeless lost causes will still manage to check themselves out.
i guess what i was saying is accidental overdoses will decline, becos people can know their intake better. people overdoing it on a regular basis or going too far one night will suffer the same fate as the people who overdo it with drinking: removal from the gene pool.
huh? ah, saw gue's quote of what you REALLY said... and i still say "huh?" anyway, that and the puppies were thrown in becos you posted a ridiculous propaganda piece from some nutless body builder to sell his products and tried to pass it off as a legitimate informative study. i've seen you stoop pretty low man, but that was probably your lamest hour. i KNOW you can find better stuff on pharmas than thatn nonsense. *edit* i see now it was abook who posted the original article, but that doesnt really matter i suppose. you two are interchangeable.
i thought you were arguing for some weird conspiracy where pharmas invented heroin for profit, then outlawed it as a business decision. abook has clarified this. i thought you'd really lost it this time... cos if there's one thing they know, it's what's good for business
i think this is proof ffg just won the debate. have a nice time being banned... again.
What's to disagree? A drug is broadly defined as any substance, other than food, intended to affect the structure or function of the body.
Do you consider aspirin to be a drug?? That came from tree bark.
there is a man made process needed to turn the tree bark into aspirin, i can pick a bud off a plant and away we go, no process needed.
i am in fucking tears over here...hahahahaha
cute. trying to get a rise out of me or something? it wont work... you're too old. :rolleyes:
dude, that was fucking funny! i like when people can laugh at themselves.
oh i can laugh at jokes at my expense, but i got the feeling he wasnt joking and was referring to something specific and am kinda curious what it is. i dont recall saying anything like that. but then, i did have a bad habit of posting while drunk a few years ago... anyway, neither here nor there. we're talking about drugs, my other illicit vice!
I don't care where the piece came from. It brought up some good points that I agreed with. I wasn't digging for stuff to post about big pharma, I just happened upon this, learned some things I didn't know and liked many of the points he brought up so I posted it. If you want to argue the points addressed, cool. But arguing about where the piece came from instead of disproving the content makes your arguement look weak, imo. I never said this was a definitive study of anything...it was clearly an opinion piece and we share those here from time to time.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde