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

Should DayQuil Be Legal?

theargumentmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 322 posts

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#11

Post by jona-f »

robobro wrote: post #4

Dextromethorphan is definitely not a placebo. Take enough and you'll go to space and meet God. Smaller doses produce euphoria and dissociation, which, even if they don't make the cough go away, makes it easier to tolerate a cold -- same reason antitussives have historically contained alcohol, cannabis extract (which may incidentally work as bronchodilator but was not the reason I imagine it was in antitussives) Funny…

Came here to say this, the author is hating on dextromethorphan like he never robotripped before. But then, overdosing dxm isn't all that healthy and I'd recommend ketamine if you want to experiment like that.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#13

Post by tyami94 »

techbro92 wrote: post #7
nekusar wrote: post #2

All drugs should be legal, full stop. And I should be able to get medical drugs on my own, without a permission slip from a doctor I have to convince. Drug prohibition has caused magnitudes more harm than decriminalization and legalization. And part of this article is about claims from what is likely inert or mild effect at best. Remember, we used to have amphetamines, pseudoephedrine, and much more potent drugs to a…

What is the argument for legalizing drugs that are contraindicated for all medical purposes, are toxic, and have a high addictive potential? How does it benefit me or society if my neighbor is permitted to choose to basically roll the dice on afflicting themselves with a debilitating chronic illness (severe addiction)? If I don’t want to do illegal drugs why would I ant to support this?

[dead]

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#14

Post by yomismoaqui »

techbro92 wrote: post #7
nekusar wrote: post #2

All drugs should be legal, full stop. And I should be able to get medical drugs on my own, without a permission slip from a doctor I have to convince. Drug prohibition has caused magnitudes more harm than decriminalization and legalization. And part of this article is about claims from what is likely inert or mild effect at best. Remember, we used to have amphetamines, pseudoephedrine, and much more potent drugs to a…

What is the argument for legalizing drugs that are contraindicated for all medical purposes, are toxic, and have a high addictive potential? How does it benefit me or society if my neighbor is permitted to choose to basically roll the dice on afflicting themselves with a debilitating chronic illness (severe addiction)? If I don’t want to do illegal drugs why would I ant to support this?

- People that want to do drugs already can buy them, with worse quality and the with the side-effect of funding crime at a planetary scale.

- Alcohol, tobacco & weed are already legal... why them and no other drugs? Check how many deaths do alcohol & tobacco provoke.

- Taxes, lots of taxes, literal mountains of money... a small percentage of which can be redirected to treating addicts.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#16

Post by MisterTea »

jona-f wrote: post #11
robobro wrote: post #4

Dextromethorphan is definitely not a placebo. Take enough and you'll go to space and meet God. Smaller doses produce euphoria and dissociation, which, even if they don't make the cough go away, makes it easier to tolerate a cold -- same reason antitussives have historically contained alcohol, cannabis extract (which may incidentally work as bronchodilator but was not the reason I imagine it was in antitussives) Funny…

Came here to say this, the author is hating on dextromethorphan like he never robotripped before. But then, overdosing dxm isn't all that healthy and I'd recommend ketamine if you want to experiment like that.

> But then, overdosing dxm isn't all that healthy and I'd recommend ketamine if you want to experiment like that.

Ketamine is neurotoxic itself and can cause permanent brain damage. I can't find the info but there was someone in the tech industry who accidentally overdosed and suffered a two year bout of severe debilitating depression culminating in suicide.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#17

Post by bigfishrunning »

nekusar wrote: post #9
antonkochubey wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure you have read the article, not just its title?

Yes, and the question lends itself to control (or lack of) by relevant medical "authorities". I honestly do not trust somebody with a doctor license who I talked to for 7 minutes out of 259200 minutes (6 months). For example, when I went on a camping trip, I got bit by 15 ticks. After I got back, went to doc for 15 day doxycyclene, gold standard. And its cheap, like $15. NOPE, fucker wanted the ticks in a bag to grin…

One of the reasons doxycyclene is so effective is because it's less overprescribed. Antibiotic resistance is a real thing, and the day we run out of viable ones is going to be ugly. Having a gatekeeper isn't a bad idea.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#18

Post by the_sleaze_ »

techbro92 wrote: post #7
nekusar wrote: post #2

All drugs should be legal, full stop. And I should be able to get medical drugs on my own, without a permission slip from a doctor I have to convince. Drug prohibition has caused magnitudes more harm than decriminalization and legalization. And part of this article is about claims from what is likely inert or mild effect at best. Remember, we used to have amphetamines, pseudoephedrine, and much more potent drugs to a…

What is the argument for legalizing drugs that are contraindicated for all medical purposes, are toxic, and have a high addictive potential? How does it benefit me or society if my neighbor is permitted to choose to basically roll the dice on afflicting themselves with a debilitating chronic illness (severe addiction)? If I don’t want to do illegal drugs why would I ant to support this?

I went to a southeast asian country and got a staph infection. I walked down to the pharmacy, asked the pharmastst for a topical and an oral antibiotic. 3 days later i was healed, continued the course the rest of the week and that was it. $12 dollars american.

I got another staph infection previously in the united states. Needed to go to a doc in the box who misdiagnosed it. A few days went by and i needed to go to another doc in the box who gave me topical and trued to give me a steroid shot. Needless to say it progressed and turned into fullblown MRSA which required admitance and a IV antibiotic. Extremely painful. I don't have the ability to add the costs but north of $10k easily.

That's why drugs should be legalized.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#19

Post by stickfigure »

antonkochubey wrote: post #3
nekusar wrote: post #2

All drugs should be legal, full stop. And I should be able to get medical drugs on my own, without a permission slip from a doctor I have to convince. Drug prohibition has caused magnitudes more harm than decriminalization and legalization. And part of this article is about claims from what is likely inert or mild effect at best. Remember, we used to have amphetamines, pseudoephedrine, and much more potent drugs to a…

Are you sure you have read the article, not just its title?

When an article has a misleading clickbait title, I think it's fair game to redirect the conversation to the subject of the title.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#20

Post by nerdsniper »

robobro wrote: post #4

Dextromethorphan is definitely not a placebo. Take enough and you'll go to space and meet God. Smaller doses produce euphoria and dissociation, which, even if they don't make the cough go away, makes it easier to tolerate a cold -- same reason antitussives have historically contained alcohol, cannabis extract (which may incidentally work as bronchodilator but was not the reason I imagine it was in antitussives) Funny…

The left enantiomer of methamphetamine (exact same chemical formula and structure, just mirror symmetry) is also an OTC decongestant.
Post reply on HN