Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test • Hacker News Board

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#111

Post by kevviiinn » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 11:26 AM UTC

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #83

kevviiinn wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you genuinely suggesting that cannabis is more harmful than alcohol Not to mention, do people use biological weapons recreationally? That's news to me

> Are you genuinely suggesting that cannabis is more harmful than alcohol If consumed in the same quantity, it might be. > do people use biological weapons recreationally? That's news to me Botox is a neurotoxin originally derived from a bacterium. And various pesticides are regulated. Nicotine actually is a naturally occurring pesticide, though these days BigAg companies produce far more potent "Neonicotinoids" for…

Please explain the mechanism by which cannabis causes DNA damage when consumed in the same quantity as alcohol. When you match recreational dose, it doesn't. There is a slight possibility of free radicals in smoke causing DNA damage but that is incredibly minor compared to alcohol and can be avoided with different methods of consumption. You can't avoid the DNA damage of alcohol at any dose or method of consumption

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#112

Post by kevviiinn » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 11:28 AM UTC

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #82

kevviiinn wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you name which ones? Being in the field of pharmacology, this is interesting to me. I'd love to read about it I'd you have sources

Desomorphine seems kind of bad, even without the other nasty effects when it is homemade by people who can't afford the real thing (i.e. Krokodil). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desomorphine > While desomorphine was found to be faster acting and more effective than morphine for the rapid relief of severe pain, its shorter duration of action and the relatively more severe respiratory depression produced at equianalges…

But definitely isn't worse than alcohol and fentanyl and 6MAM are both used medically. The damage from krokodil, as you mention, is from the impurities. Not to mention, krokodil wouldn't even be a thing if people had access to the usual schedule 1 substances

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#113

Post by kevviiinn » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 11:42 AM UTC

sirsinsalot wrote: post #101

kevviiinn wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who drink too much do even more damage to their bodies and brains than any other drug so that argument is nonsense

Fairly sure cocaine in heavy use is more damaging than alcohol? The cardiotoxicity (especially when paired with alcohol which it always is) combined with the vasoconstriction. Maybe. I find in general drug discourse making these comparisons isn't super helpful. The risk and damage profile of different drugs is very complex. Mdma in frequent use isn't very damaging in one sense, but can really impair cognitive functio…

I agree that comparisons are generally a poor way to go about it but I think the "alcohol is actually really bad" point needs to be mentioned because many people do think it's okay and fine just because it's legal

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#114

Post by nradov » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 1:23 PM UTC

eurleif wrote: post #10

anigbrowl wrote: post #4

I always wonder why nobody has made an argument that drug laws are unconstitutional since the 9th amendment states clearly that rights don't need to be enumerated, and there's abundant evidence of people making their own drug decisions prior to the existence of the USA.

To oversimplify, that's why prohibition 1.0 had to be done via constitutional amendment; but since then, we had the Wickard v. Filburn ruling, which made virtually everything regulatable under the Commerce Clause with its extremely broad interpretation of the phrase "interstate commerce". In Wickard v. Filburn, a farmer grew grain on his farm. He did not sell this grain, whether across state lines or otherwise; he me…

I know it's a long shot, but I have some hope that the current Supreme Court will overturn Wickard v. Filburn and eviscerate the authority of the Federal government. This is not terribly likely but they have shown some willingness to take a fresh look at established precedents.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#115

Post by yadingus » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 1:52 PM UTC

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #93

whalesalad wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the difference? Herbs and drugs are different labels for the same thing.

Dosage, and possibly method of consumption, which has an effect or people would never have invented freebasing or snorting. Herbs also have many other components, which may have pharmacological effect, while drugs do not have those components.

That's a modern, western distinction tho. In many cultures plants, mushrooms, and other substances are considered straight up medicine, sometimes mixed with other things, usually surrounded by ritual.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#116

Post by ceejayoz » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 5:12 PM UTC

flangola7 wrote: post #95

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>outright threatening to increase the number of justices to intimidate other justices for that ruling Good thing we’ve learned so much since then. You would never have anyone so short sighted as to jump up and down for that in these more civilized times.

If seriously does need to be done though. It's morbid having a single elderly person's health dictate which way a country goes.

I'd like to see one seat per circuit (13), and a term limit of 20 years.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#117

Post by frant-hartm » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 6:02 PM UTC

josephcsible wrote: post #67

frant-hartm wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No we shouldn't. There is a big difference between a parent safely bringing up a child and a state interfering with what an adult person does to themselves. Otherwise you open a can of greater good worms. If you have money, opioids are easily available via dealers throughout the world and there is no epidemic of addicts. Yes there are individual cases, but most of these would be destroying their lives in some other a…

> opioids are easily available via dealers throughout the world and there is no epidemic of addicts There is absolutely an epidemic of opioid addicts.

Let's agree to disagree.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#118

Post by anonymouskimmer » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 6:40 PM UTC

yadingus wrote: post #115

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dosage, and possibly method of consumption, which has an effect or people would never have invented freebasing or snorting. Herbs also have many other components, which may have pharmacological effect, while drugs do not have those components.

That's a modern, western distinction tho. In many cultures plants, mushrooms, and other substances are considered straight up medicine, sometimes mixed with other things, usually surrounded by ritual.

The point I was trying to make is that a "drug" is typically highly purified and a standardized single component, or at most a mix of highly purified components. Herbs, as medicine, are complex and variable.

Even with highly debased street drugs they're missing the additional herbal components.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#119

Post by frant-hartm » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 6:42 PM UTC

xp84 wrote: post #38

frant-hartm wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No we shouldn't. There is a big difference between a parent safely bringing up a child and a state interfering with what an adult person does to themselves. Otherwise you open a can of greater good worms. If you have money, opioids are easily available via dealers throughout the world and there is no epidemic of addicts. Yes there are individual cases, but most of these would be destroying their lives in some other a…

This is an area where we must acknowledge that one's "values" frame of reference is inextricably linked to how you decide this question. Yes, we definitely are sacrificing some of everyone's bodily autonomy because we think it's less bad than the consequences of putting no limits on it. Caffeine, Alcohol, Cigarettes, Cannabis, Cocaine, Meth, Heroin, Fentanyl, biological weapons and on some parallel track: BB gun, .22…

The line is relatively clear to me - is it easy or not to harm others?

With opioids not really, not easier than with rat poison.

With guns it's super easy, so they should be regulated.

I would not limit your freedom which allows you to hurt yourself, but I would limit your freedom which allows you to hurt me, because that would limit my freedom. Worry about yourself and your loved ones, leave my wellbeing to me.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#120

Post by anonymouskimmer » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 6:43 PM UTC

kevviiinn wrote: post #111

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you genuinely suggesting that cannabis is more harmful than alcohol If consumed in the same quantity, it might be. > do people use biological weapons recreationally? That's news to me Botox is a neurotoxin originally derived from a bacterium. And various pesticides are regulated. Nicotine actually is a naturally occurring pesticide, though these days BigAg companies produce far more potent "Neonicotinoids" for…

Please explain the mechanism by which cannabis causes DNA damage when consumed in the same quantity as alcohol. When you match recreational dose, it doesn't. There is a slight possibility of free radicals in smoke causing DNA damage but that is incredibly minor compared to alcohol and can be avoided with different methods of consumption. You can't avoid the DNA damage of alcohol at any dose or method of consumption

The word I was responding to was "harmful", with no further specification. I stand by what I wrote, and don't feel the need to try to explain a point I wasn't making.