hmmm. So, wide spread usage is what makes a drug the most dangerous? Because I don't think alcohol is more dangerous than steroids, or PCP except in the widespread nature of its use. I can't fathom that anyone who would say alcohol is the most dangerous to other people, has spent much time around someone tweaking out on meth.
Alcohol "most harmful drug"
- Thread starter Chiliagon
- Start date
Its attack of the do gooders Doctors, and others who have not lived. When will it end?
First we tried to ban it, and prohibition didn't work so we made it legal. Then Pot,
became the killer drug so they could make it illegal . They are now attempting
to make smoking ordinary cigarettes illegal by slowly controlling it to the nth degree.
It won't work either as people will go underground, just like pot and booze if they do
restrict it any further. Often , statistics, fear and distortion are used to build a case
where facts are pretty shallow at best, like the environmental argument. Instead
of coming out with constructive facts that people can come to some consensus on
we end up with polarized positions based on emotions and suspect facts. The result
is people talk the issue to death and nothing ever happens constructively to ensure
those at risk have some measure of protection, while everyone else is not punished or
legislated against unfairly. Another example of which I speak is the gun laws and the
expensive registration when it could have been done without a great deal of cost and
privacy invasion. Now the slow campaign against alcohol has begun and soon it
will deveop into a great debate and the no fun people will use their distorted facts and
multi speak to pursuade politicians that there is a problem much bgger than there is.
What will be next? Sex, Breathing, when does this finally end with people saying
enough of this social redesigning of our society. Sorry for the rant, but God here we
go again.
First we tried to ban it, and prohibition didn't work so we made it legal. Then Pot,
became the killer drug so they could make it illegal . They are now attempting
to make smoking ordinary cigarettes illegal by slowly controlling it to the nth degree.
It won't work either as people will go underground, just like pot and booze if they do
restrict it any further. Often , statistics, fear and distortion are used to build a case
where facts are pretty shallow at best, like the environmental argument. Instead
of coming out with constructive facts that people can come to some consensus on
we end up with polarized positions based on emotions and suspect facts. The result
is people talk the issue to death and nothing ever happens constructively to ensure
those at risk have some measure of protection, while everyone else is not punished or
legislated against unfairly. Another example of which I speak is the gun laws and the
expensive registration when it could have been done without a great deal of cost and
privacy invasion. Now the slow campaign against alcohol has begun and soon it
will deveop into a great debate and the no fun people will use their distorted facts and
multi speak to pursuade politicians that there is a problem much bgger than there is.
What will be next? Sex, Breathing, when does this finally end with people saying
enough of this social redesigning of our society. Sorry for the rant, but God here we
go again.
People are afraid of bears, but deer kill more people in a year than bears do in a century. That problem would be mitigated if people drove more carefully with more awareness. Same thing with alcohol or any drug. But it is really hard to fix stupid. There will always be those who treat life responsibly and those who don't. Not a whole lot can be done about it and legislation sure won't accomplish anything.
Study: Alcohol 'most harmful drug,' followed by crack and heroin
By the CNN Wire Staff
November 1, 2010 9:13 a.m. EDT
The Lancet, a British medical journal, lists alcohol as the most harmful drug among a list of 20 drugs.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- The study uses a new scale to rank the harmfulness of 20 drugs
- Alcohol is the most harmful overall, according to panelists
- A co-author of the study has said horseback riding is more dangerous than ecstasy
London, England (CNN) -- Alcohol ranks "most harmful" among a list of 20 drugs -- beating out crack and heroin -- according to study results released by a British medical journal.
A panel of experts weighed the physical, psychological and social problems caused by the drugs and determined that alcohol was the most harmful overall, according to an article on the study released by The Lancet Sunday.
Using a new scale to evaluate harms to individual users and others, alcohol received a score of 72 on a scale of 1 to 100, the study says.
That makes it almost three times as harmful as cocaine or tobacco, according to the article, which is slated to be published on The Lancet's website Monday and in an upcoming print edition of the journal.
Heroin, crack cocaine and methamphetamine were the most harmful drugs to individuals, the study says, while alcohol, heroin and crack cocaine were the most harmful to others.
In the article, the panelists said their findings show that Britain's three-tiered drug classification system, which places drugs into different categories that determine criminal penalties for possession and dealing, has "little relation to the evidence of harm."
Panelists also noted that the rankings confirm other studies that say that "aggressively targeting alcohol harms is a valid and necessary public health strategy."
The Lancet article was co-authored by David Nutt, a professor and Britain's former chief drug adviser, who caused controversy last year after he published an article saying ecstasy was not as dangerous as riding a horse.
"So why are harmful sporting activities allowed, whereas relatively less harmful drugs are not?" Nutt wrote in the Journal of Psychopharmacology. "I believe this reflects a societal approach which does not adequately balance the relative risks of drugs against their harms."
Nutt later apologized to anyone offended by the article and to those who have lost loved ones to ecstasy. He said he had no intention of trivializing the dangers of the drug and that he only wanted to compare the risks.
In the article released by The Lancet Sunday, ecstasy's harmfulness ranking -- 9 -- indicates it is only one eighth as harmful as alcohol.
The study was funded by the London-based Centre for Crime and Justice studies.
No surprise there. Except that narcotics such as heroin can be beneficial when used properly and have fewer side affects than synthetic drugs pushed by big pharma.
That depends on what they mean by 'dangerous'.
If you're measuring the total effect on society, it would.
If you're measuring the more specific effect on individuals, it wouldn't.
How big is the problem, or for that matter, the are the other social problems we face?
About 6% cheat on taxes, about 6% are alcoholics and even less are drug addicts.
It doesn't matter what social ill you want to mention they are the vast minority of people.
We have to find ways to help them but at the same time. we should not set out to
punish everyone else. In a democratic state we should go by the will of the majority,
and respect the right of the minority. Social vices are as old as time and the government
with heavy handed law never works, those who are marginalized just go underground and
the problem gets worse.
About 6% cheat on taxes, about 6% are alcoholics and even less are drug addicts.
It doesn't matter what social ill you want to mention they are the vast minority of people.
We have to find ways to help them but at the same time. we should not set out to
punish everyone else. In a democratic state we should go by the will of the majority,
and respect the right of the minority. Social vices are as old as time and the government
with heavy handed law never works, those who are marginalized just go underground and
the problem gets worse.
Isn't that comment a bit of a non sequitur? One does not have to jump off a bridge without a bungee cord to know that it may result in severe damage to one's anatomy. Why should anyone have to use any drug before commenting on its possible adverse side effects? There is a ton of literature describing the possible deleterious effects of all drugs.
This seems quite similar to a recent thread that dealt with what were perceived as the most serious problem drugs. At the time I pointed out that drugs that are most easily available, and therefore most widely used tend to be the biggest problems and this study tends to support that.
Indeed it does. And I would never claim someone has to use a particular drug in order to have an opinion.....
But should people be prosecuted for choosing to use a drug that is (on an individual as well as a societal basis) MUCH less harmful than the legal drug alcohol??
I think not.
You don't have to smoke pot to know it is a drug. I also think pot is probably more
of a recreational drug much less harmful than alcohol. The problem is over the
years politics is more of a problem than the social drug pot. The FBI went after the
killer drug pot, because prohibition was ending on alcohol, and the first war on drugs
was over only to see the second battle begin.
Those who say no one needs to do any drugs, including alcohol and that is true.
The fact remains though that some people do so and in a social manner it is not a
problem. The real problem is the addictive ones, coke and so on, pot and booze are
not real addictive substances. True there are addicts who become addicted to almost
anything including gambling, sex, booze and anything they can get their hands on.
That does not say everyone becomes addicted.
of a recreational drug much less harmful than alcohol. The problem is over the
years politics is more of a problem than the social drug pot. The FBI went after the
killer drug pot, because prohibition was ending on alcohol, and the first war on drugs
was over only to see the second battle begin.
Those who say no one needs to do any drugs, including alcohol and that is true.
The fact remains though that some people do so and in a social manner it is not a
problem. The real problem is the addictive ones, coke and so on, pot and booze are
not real addictive substances. True there are addicts who become addicted to almost
anything including gambling, sex, booze and anything they can get their hands on.
That does not say everyone becomes addicted.
Which are completely unreliable due to years of biased "Studies" conducted and sponsored by organizations in favor for or directly fund the "War on Drugs"...... if people only relied on literature for their information, then people today would still believe crap like the following:
The Best of 1930s Anti Cannabis Propaganda Films
The Best of 1930s Anti Cannabis Propaganda Films
Or this little nugget:
The Best of 1930s Anti Cannabis Propaganda Films
Or this little nugget:
Tell me..... how many similar incidences like the above were reported or documented by police in either the US or Canada either back then or recently?
How many people have you met who were "Addicted" to Marijuana that went insane and decided to go run a few people down just for the fun of it or were so under the influence of such an evil drug that they somehow ended up in some nasty devil worshiping orgy with random strangers and somehow ended up gunning down one of their friends?
Hearsay information can only tell someone so much, and what it tells someone might not be accurate or unbiased.
Geez by now I should have been locked away in an institution for the criminally insane for how much I smoked over the last 12 or so years..... I should have ran over dozens of people by now, gotten into several orgies (still waiting on that), shot a few of my friends, uncontrollably masturbated a swimming pool's worth of you-know-what..... my palms should be as hairy as an old shoe brush..... I should have done so many horrible things that I'd put Col. Williams to shame.......
..... yet I never did any of that, not even once......
They claim Marijuana is a gateway drug, yet the first drug I ever tried was alcohol..... and even if the gateway drug claim was even true for alcohol or weed.... one would think I would be heavy into Crack, Cocaine, Meth and a bunch of other crap that should have killed me by now...... yet I don't even drink anymore and there's only two things I do now..... smoke weed and smoke tobacco.
I used to believe all the biased BS told to me by tv, after school specials and anti-drug campaigns about marijuana and other drugs like LSD, shrooms, Ex, etc..... yet it wasn't until I actually put those claims to the test that I personally discovered that 93% of the crap they tell everybody is flat out false.
No, this study doesn't support that.... it just says alcohol is the worse of all the other "Evils" through a number of reasons.... accessibility and legality are just a part of it...... it's your own subjective conclusions that make it seem to you that the study claims what you claim.
There's a lot worse things out there then drug use...... wars, injustice, vehicle accidents, plane crashes, hunger, poverty (and as hard as it is to believe, drugs do not always tie in with poverty), chemicals in our food products and in the every day things we use and take for granted each day that affect our DNA, genes and abilities to reproduce (for males especially) due to being exposed to these chemicals through ingestion, application and absorption through our skin and hair, what we inhale when we walk along the sidewalks or past power plants or chemical plants, etc. etc......
But then again, I suppose that's subjective too.
Added:
Now I'm not promoting the suggestion of trying drugs just to know what they're all about, cuz that's not for everybody and not everybody has the same level of tolerance..... just as when one person can drink several beers and be fine, yet another person will get sh*t faced and/or possibly turn into an alcoholic..... everybody is different, thus everybody should only do what they think is best for themselves or attempt something one is willing to accept responsibility for.
My above points was that no matter what opinion you may think you have without trying something, you don't truly know what you're talking about, just as I'd have no idea what I'm talking about in regards to describing what a pregnant woman goes through.
I can describe the basics, just as someone can describe the basics of lighting a joint, inhaling and exhaling pot smoke...... but beyond that, everything else is just mere speculation based on hearsay..... with zero first hand knowledge..... and that hearsay you've been told might not actually be true, be that from anti-drug people or people who use drugs...... including me.....
.... I can tell you all sorts of things, just as anybody else can tell you all sorts of things..... but you'll never know what something is all about unless you involve yourself into said subject.
Last edited:
Saying that alcohol is the most harmful drug is like saying that the automobile is the worst killing device.
This is just a guess, but I think that more agreements than disagreementswere reached over a drink.
Just think of the "Beer Summit" in the White House Garden called by the greatest and wisest President of them all time, who in a moment of inexplicable candor declared that police acted stupidly. One beer and VOILA! Peace!
This is just a guess, but I think that more agreements than disagreementswere reached over a drink.
Just think of the "Beer Summit" in the White House Garden called by the greatest and wisest President of them all time, who in a moment of inexplicable candor declared that police acted stupidly. One beer and VOILA! Peace!
lol.... not based on my experience.... most of what I encountered towards conversations over a drink is that the conversation generally tends to loop over and over again because both people in the conversation keep thinking the other person didn't understand what they were saying or because they don't think they worded themselves exactly as they were thinking, so they repeat it all over and over again, which usually leads to someone getting fed up and walking away or insulting the other, which usually leads to a fight.
Or someone has a few drinks and starts to feel all macho and wants to go around picking fights with people..... I've known a good number of those people.
But who knows.... that could just be my experience where everybody else experiences the total opposite.
And yet if everybody was already smoking pot, the above would never have happened in the first place because everybody would be tolerant and hugging rainbows & sunshine
lol.... not based on my experience.... most of what I encountered towards conversations over a drink is that the conversation generally tends to loop over and over again because both people in the conversation keep thinking the other person didn't understand what they were saying or because they don't think they worded themselves exactly as they were thinking, so they repeat it all over and over again, which usually leads to someone getting fed up and walking away or insulting the other, which usually leads to a fight.
Or someone has a few drinks and starts to feel all macho and wants to go around picking fights with people..... I've known a good number of those people.
But who knows.... that could just be my experience where everybody else experiences the total opposite.
And yet if everybody was already smoking pot, the above would never have happened in the first place because everybody would be tolerant and hugging rainbows & sunshine
Ah, I remember my university days. A very close friend of mine said one day, 'You're lucky; you don't need to do drugs. You have a great imagination as it is.'
Danny Devito just twittered on prop 19:
"Tomorrow you have to please get out & VOTE California YES on Prop 19. Bitches! Set your private parts on fiiiiyaaaaa! Decriminalise Weed!"
:lol:
"Tomorrow you have to please get out & VOTE California YES on Prop 19. Bitches! Set your private parts on fiiiiyaaaaa! Decriminalise Weed!"
:lol:
Yeah.... I was told that before and after I started doing em..... though I think the actual wording said to me was "You're imagination is so fuct as it is, I'd hate to see you on drugs."
In reality, while it toned me down on a few aspects of my imagination, other parts of my imagination toned up.... so it's pretty much the same out come.... more or less.
As I am sure you are well aware there are now numerous studies on almost every drug available to members of society, many of which have been conducted during the last ten years. To refer to a study done 80 years ago and use that to denigrate all other studies seems specious at best. What you really seem to be saying is that I am in favour of a certain drug and I am therefore going to ignore any and all studies that point out its dangers to society and any side-effects it might have on certain individuals.
BTW read my post again. It was not referring to marijuana; you read that into it. I was referring to all drug use and clearly stated that. Quite frankly I could care less whether or not you use marijuana provided you do so in a manner that does not interfere with my life. But do not pretend that the drug is entirely harmless; if it was it would be the first drug in that category in human history. I have yet to encounter any drug that makes a person smarter, richer or better looking. Alert me if you find one.
Well be a few more years before we get stupid enough to try and legalize marijuana.
LOS ANGELES – California voters said no thanks to a ballot initiative that would have made it the first state to legalize marijuana for recreational use and sales.
, rejected Tuesday, would have made it legal for adults 21 and over to possess up to an ounce of marijuana, smoke the drug in nonpublic places and grow it in private plots.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101103/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_marijuana_legalization
LOS ANGELES – California voters said no thanks to a ballot initiative that would have made it the first state to legalize marijuana for recreational use and sales.
, rejected Tuesday, would have made it legal for adults 21 and over to possess up to an ounce of marijuana, smoke the drug in nonpublic places and grow it in private plots.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101103/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_marijuana_legalization
You know what they say about assumptions..... I have provided a number of recent studies on a number of drugs in a number of topics over the last couple of years, and not all of them shined a particular drug in a good light all the time.
I do favor a certain drug (like some people favor drinking alcohol or coffee), but that's irrelevant since I believe no drug, including alcohol, should be illegal.... which also includes drugs I'd never touch and personally think are bad.
I was making a point about what happens when you only rely on hearsay or studies, which depending on the date the study was conducted and by who, you can get conflicting information and claims, and that's the problem..... especially where conflicting studies can come from equally respectable sources.
Most studies have improved a lot over the years in regards to their bias and accuracy, but there are still groups out there who will hold onto older studies that have since been debunked and there are examples out there of some politicians openly citing false information from out dated studies...... Just as there are some US politicians who still suggest the 9/11 terrorists came from Canada...... it's not about the truth or accuracy, it's about fear tactics..... and using a source you claim as being a study can be enough to sway those too lazy to look into things themselves..... most of the time they forget to mention the finer details of that study they used.
^ This doesn't happen all the time, but it does happen, that's all I was saying.
I used weed as an example, I was aware of what you were talking about.
And whoever claimed weed makes someone smarter, richer or better looking in the first place? (Or any drug for that matter?)
If weed (as an example) was really that bad as they say (some studies claim it's more harmful then cigarettes)..... then Willie Nelson, Cheech & Chong should have died years ago.
Tell you what, rather then asking me to show you a drug that does all these magical things to turn someone into a Prince..... how about you show me documented cases of people who have died directly from the intake of marijuana without the influence of any other form of narcotic and I might believe your claim of "The Drug" being harmful on any level that someone would give a damn about.
