Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 377 posts

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#111

Post by subroutine »

fujiters wrote: post #47
andrewfromx wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we leave the Rx system as is, in that we still let pharmacists do their job and protect their mainstream normal patients and give good standard of care, but any party drugs where there is already a clandestine market become OTC. i.e. if you want some weird medicine for some weird thing that no one else wants, you'll have to go through the steps to get a Rx for it. But it won't be hard to get. Because once add…

I just wish we could do away with having to get the prescription in the first place and have the pharmacist be the gatekeeper. You keep a medical history on file so they can quickly figure out if the medication you want is likely to cause complications. Then I don't have to leave work and meet with my doctor every few weeks/months to get another prescription which I then have to take to the drug store and wait to get…

Right now are you paying cash out-of-pocket or does your health insurance cover your Rx aside from ~ $10 copay?

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#112

Post by saiya-jin »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #86
smallnamespace wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were just following the tradition set by the Germans in WW2: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/05/pilot...

Good point, don't know how I forgot that. I'm fairly convinced Hitler was on the gear too.

Most probably yes, and also on cocaine as his fellow Goring. These things were considered not harmful and you could buy it anywhere.

Amphetamines were still used in 60s as enhancers for mountaineering for example. Most of traditional expeditions to 8000m peaks had the top party high on this, somehow balancing the rush and mental strength it presumably gave with existing in total exhaustion for days and pushing further up. One example out of many is Hermann Buhl climbing Nanga Parbat, solo, hallucinating, as a first ever ascent of the killer mountain.

People like Messner refused to use these, championing clean 'alpine' ascents, without support, just men with their skills and mental+physical strength facing mountains.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#113

Post by machiaweliczny »

blubb-fish wrote: post #82

Here in Germany politicians are still stating that Cannabis is a gateway drug, causes psychosis and makes stupid. They will even actively lie and twist statistics. My theory for why many politicians - especially from the right-wing - are so opposed is b/c they didn't like their weed smoking and long-haired fellow students. It's a Pavlov thing. Like many people dislike golf (justly so in my humble opinion) b/c they di…

Extensive use of cannabis has such effects from my observations. While at University I knew some people who were smoking weed everyday and they exposed psychosis, acted weird and were lazy. Maybe it's from some other substances that could be mixed with it...

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#114

Post by kelnos »

uoaei wrote: post #80
everdev wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, barriers to entry matter. If you're craving a drug and it's sold in a convenient store around the corner, you might purchase it more frequently than if you had to buy it from potentially dangerous people in a seedy part of town. That said, as with any bad habit I'm sure usage would still decrease over time for most individuals as they mature or if healthier alternatives are readily available.

>If you're craving a drug and it's sold in a convenient store around the corner Decriminalization means it's not illegal to possess, not that it's legal to sell. An important distinction in these sorts of discussions.

Shouldn't it, though? Otherwise you still have the crime and violence associated with drug use. It's certainly better than having possession also criminalized, but is it good enough? I'm not so sure.

I would suggest that maybe it's ok to continue to criminalize the sale of the more dangerous stuff, say of Schedule I drugs, but... well, marijuana is still on the Sched I list, so it's not like that list is particular scientifically rigorous.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#115

Post by pitcharoad »

fsloth wrote: post #5

Finally. I hope this will signal a turning point on this insane approach to national health in all countries. Drugs are a health problem, not a criminal problem. Lone experts have been fired in western countries when they have expressed this common sense sentiments alone [0]. I hope this groups fares better. Nixon started the war on drugs anyway as a mean to attack left and black activists [1]. Any previous legislati…

enabling medical issues is a criminal problem, prohibition or not.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#116

Post by Anon1096 »

blubb-fish wrote: post #79
anythingnonidin wrote: post #21

Some reasons for decriminalization of use and possession, summarized: (i.e., removing criminal penalties or making it no jail time possible, but not government supplied) - War on drugs has failed. Criminalization has consequences on community - in many cases, most of the negative effects come from the criminalization, not the drug. - Consensual crimes that don’t harm others shouldn’t be crimes. - Drug prohibition doe…

I'm going to play the devil's advocate here (waited for a long time to use this formulation): > War on drugs has failed. Yes - but - most politicians will go the extra mile to deny they failed. > Consensual crimes that don’t harm others shouldn’t be crimes. Yes - but - how about Armin Meiwes eating Bernd Brandes :o (this time it's the cannibal card I play - the CP card is still ready up my sleeve) > Drug prohibition…

Devil's advocate means you're going to argue in good faith. It's the difference between steelmanning and strawmanning Your comment is a weak attack on a type of person that doesn't exist

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#117

Post by piva00 »

opo wrote: post #62
fsloth wrote: post #5

Finally. I hope this will signal a turning point on this insane approach to national health in all countries. Drugs are a health problem, not a criminal problem. Lone experts have been fired in western countries when they have expressed this common sense sentiments alone [0]. I hope this groups fares better. Nixon started the war on drugs anyway as a mean to attack left and black activists [1]. Any previous legislati…

>Finally. I hope this will signal a turning point on this insane approach to national health in all countries. Drugs are a health problem, not a criminal problem. Agreed. >...Nixon started the war on drugs anyway as a mean to attack left and black activists This point is a little controversial, in, as far as I know, we have to take Ehrlichman's word on this. https://www.quora.com/Is-John-Ehrlichman-a-credible-source-…

As a follow-up, even though Nixon expanded treatment shouldn't we still blame him for the rhetorics that aggravated the "war on drugs" for the rest of the planet?

It's after Nixon "war on drugs" stance that we begin to see harsher and harsher penalties for possession, criminalisation of usage (and this still applies here in Sweden, it's not only illegal to buy, sell or possess drugs but also to take them, if it's detected in a urine or blood test [mandatory tests if you are caught by the police] you have committed an offense) and then the Convention on Psychotropic Substances happened in 1971, very influenced by the US and UK stances on drugs.

So as much as he tried to only "look tough", Nixon has fomented one of the worst problems in modern society, I really don't think we as a society should give him any credit, that façade has fucked up a lot some parts of the world and has killed an uncountable number of people.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#118

Post by kelnos »

jeffdavis wrote: post #28

"scientific consensus" I am very troubled by this phrase -- it's almost an oxymoron. Science is not democratic, and scientists aren't anointed arbiters of facts. Anyone can be a scientist simply by following the scientific method and collecting data in good faith; and a lone outsider with new data can challenge 100 years of "consensus". Obviously they are subject to challenges themselves, or if it's unlikely enough t…

While science is in theory "perfect", unfortunately the people doing the science are still just flawed, imperfect humans. Even scientists who have no malicious intent can still have their work influenced by unconscious biases if they aren't careful.

Given that, I think "consensus" is a useful term. It suggests that a strong supermajority of scientists have findings that agree with something, and with that chorus of agreement, it's harder to oppose those claims by accusing all of those scientists to have flawed results.

I think you can probably find a lot of science out there that supports criminalization of drugs, and showing that there's a "growing scientific consensus" on the failures of criminalization is useful to show that previous research on the subject has either been debunked or proved false by later observations. Because that's literally what's happening.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#119

Post by piva00 »

lqdc13 wrote: post #110
lagadu wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most notorious large-scale, well studied example of complete decriminalization, Portugal, shows the opposite to be true[0]. [0] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/portugal-decr...

That's not true. Usage increased[0,1]. - Reported lifetime use of "all illicit drugs" increased from 7.8% to 12%, lifetime use of cannabis increased from 7.6% to 11.7%, cocaine use more than doubled, from 0.9% to 1.9%, ecstasy nearly doubled from 0.7% to 1.3%, and heroin increased from 0.7% to 1.1% [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20110725093536/http://www.idt.…

Lifetime usage is a different metric than "repeated usage", people can be more curious about it and try but not necessarily stick to using them. Even more when you have policies in place for education and harm reduction.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#120

Post by addHocker »

mythrwy wrote: post #51
fsloth wrote: post #5

Finally. I hope this will signal a turning point on this insane approach to national health in all countries. Drugs are a health problem, not a criminal problem. Lone experts have been fired in western countries when they have expressed this common sense sentiments alone [0]. I hope this groups fares better. Nixon started the war on drugs anyway as a mean to attack left and black activists [1]. Any previous legislati…

Almost every post about drugs on HN has the obligatory bit about Nixon starting the war on drugs. It's like a Shibboleth or something. Nixon probably tried to make political hay out of it sure, but the war against intoxicants has been going on probably since people started using intoxicants. No shortage of earlier historical examples. At most Nixon is a chapter in the ongoing saga. So please, for all that is holy, st…

Its the war of mom & dads state sponsored sock-puppets waged against chemical induced self-destruction.

It would be really interesting to have a panel where both sides could express there interests, trying to find a compromise.

Post reply on HN