Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

News

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Original poster

Ecstacy not wose than riding a horse!

193 replies

tumtumtetum · 07/02/2009 13:54

here

Love that comparison!

Our risk assessments of so many things are just way off - and society suffers as a result.

This puts the ecstatcy use into context anyway.

Now if we could have some similar ones about crime that would be fab!

OP posts:

christiana · 07/02/2009 15:24

Message withdrawn

Original poster

tumtumtetum · 07/02/2009 15:27

If your position is that all mood altering substances should be banned full stop including caffeine, nicotine and alcohol, and that all things carried by pharmacies should be prescription only (as many of them contain mood altering substances eg codeine) then I would be more able to understand your (and UQD's) POV.

OP posts:

HeadFairy · 07/02/2009 15:33

I haven't been directly affected, but I'm just a bit about people who are so happy to let their children take something which we know so little about. The one thing we can say about alcohol, we know what's in it, we know what it's effects are, after all we've been drinking it for millenia. I would much rather my ds drank than took a drug manufactured in some back street by an idiot drug dealer.

Original poster

tumtumtetum · 07/02/2009 15:40

So in fact you don't know anyone who has been adversely affected by ecstacy use, you just want to believe that it is very very dangerous.

I know stacks of people who have used ecstacy over the years, and I have never known anyone to experience any problems with it. No depression, death, violence, sex assault, waking up in bed with someone you wish you hadn't etc etc

I do however have an alcoholic in my family and know plenty of people who have had terrible things happen to them when drunk/done to them by drunks, or who have had extremely major lapses of judgement, ended up under arrest etc etc.

And that's just people I know.. but the statistics would seem to back up what I have witnessed.

OP posts:

christiana · 07/02/2009 15:43

Message withdrawn

HeadFairy · 07/02/2009 15:47

I don't see how my not knowing someone directly affected makes the research any different. All I'm saying is, it's too much of a lottery for me to be convinced it's safe.

I'm not running off, just got to do some work, back in a mo.

TheBurnsifiedEffect · 07/02/2009 15:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

christiana · 07/02/2009 15:53

Message withdrawn

Original poster

tumtumtetum · 07/02/2009 16:06

theburnsifiedeffect has a point re risk and control.

It's why people are happy to go zooming around in their cars - they feel that they are in control which is why they happily ignore the very real risks.

So people who are very controlling of their environments are unlikely to use drugs and in fact be horrified by the thought of them - as she says such people would be unlikely to drink much either.

What makes me laugh is that all the tabloids stirring up the drugs horror stories are populated by a group of people who notoriously use all sorts of recreational substances...

OP posts:

edam · 07/02/2009 16:08

I gave up horse riding after a nasty accident. Later that week we turned on the news to hear my mother's best friend from her schooldays, a champion showjumper, had been killed.

Was always too much of a scaredycat to do anything more exciting than a spliff (turns out it was just as well in terms of later diagnosis).

But I smoked for 20 years and spent the best part of two decades getting pissed several times a week. Those two are probably far more damaging than the odd E or canter round the lanes. But they are/were 'normal' and socially acceptable so didn't think twice about it.

HeadFairy · 07/02/2009 16:14

I'm back! I've long thought that if drugs were legalised and controlled it would be much better. I've take coke in my reckless youth and I shudder to think what on earth was in there. Just because my friend gave me a little white packet doesn't mean I know what's in there. It's crazy! I would be much happier if E or any other drug was manufactured under laboratory conditions by Glaxo, that way at least I could have someone to turn to if something happened. Not much chance to sue your dealer if you get a bad hit.

Either way, I'd rather my ds took whatever he took in moderation.

HeadFairy · 07/02/2009 16:20

The control thing is interesting. I think that's at the heart of my worries about downgrading drugs. While they're still technically illegal, imported/sold/manufactured by criminals then I'm worried about the lack of control.

I've spent my life doing risky things, I've scuba dived for years (much much much more dangerous than taking drugs) I've sailed lots (also very dangerous, high risk of injury) I've skiied (and been injured, head injuries, bad knee injuries) and I've travelled to war zones for work and yet because every time I've done all those things I've been in control, I've known as much of the risks as I can and I can manage those risks. I just feel with drugs, esp things like E which are seen as softer, that there's not enough control.

Of course the other argument for legalising drugs is that when someone goes to buy a so called softer drug like cannabis or E they have to go to a dealer, who probably sells other drugs too, and who like any business man will try and sell you something else like coke or heroin. I've been there, it's so tempting, you just want a bit of whatever, but you're offered coke and you're young and think you're invincible, you'll try it won't you?

malaka · 07/02/2009 16:35

No dealer has ever tried to sell me anything I've not asked for. I agree that if drugs were legalised it would not only prevent the quality issues, it would mean that there was decent information about safe dosage and how to take them safely (most ecstasy deaths are from overheating or from drinking too much water). In addition, it would stop the money made from drugs funding warlords and terrorists.

HeadFairy · 07/02/2009 16:37

Maybe I just went to dodgy dealers... It wasn't forced or anything just a casual "anything else?"

Original poster

tumtumtetum · 07/02/2009 17:21

Interesting that we have all come round to the same idea -that if drugs were manufactured legally and controlled with notices on dosages etc we would all be a lot happier.

Re the cutting with other substances it does happen of course but usually with safe substances eg glucose - if they were regularly cut with dnagerous substances the drug manufaturers/dealers would be decimating their client base and we would hear about it much more. As it is there is a warning once every coupld of years about heroin laced with bad stuff - i think it is good that the police issue warnings when this happens as when there was that lethal vodka around the place.

With malaka in that no-one has ever offered me something other than what I was looking for. Most dealers are users themselves and selling to a few mates, so if your social group is hash then that is all he's likely to have, ditto pills. I have never had anyone try to "push" anything on me. headfairy you obviously knew more disreputable types than us

I have been in situations where people have been taking harder drugs/drugs I'm not interested in and I have never been encouraged to join in... But I was older then maybe (early 20's). There are some drugs i would just never touch - but don't condemn others who choose to - I suppose we all have our tolerance level of what type of drugs and what volume and regularity of use we see as "acceptable".

OP posts:

christiana · 07/02/2009 17:25

Message withdrawn

HeadFairy · 07/02/2009 17:44

He's on N24 now....

HeadFairy · 07/02/2009 17:45

Hmmm as far as I can tell, what he's saying is similar to saying more people die from peanut allergies than die from taking E so perhaps we should ban peanuts. Seems a bit too facile for me.

christiana · 07/02/2009 18:50

Message withdrawn

HeadFairy · 07/02/2009 19:02

Well banning things doesn't seem to work, you only have to look at prohibition in the States. I think banning peanuts is probably a step too far, and I do like a nice dry roasted nut

spicemonster · 07/02/2009 19:05

I think the point he was making was that drug classification is supposed to be linked to the level of danger they present to people and that ecstasy is not actually particularly dangerous. There's a huge anomaly with the fact that alcohol is legal and other drugs aren't - it's way more dangerous than a lot of stuff that's illegal. The whole system is utterly nonsensical

Original poster

tumtumtetum · 07/02/2009 19:26

Right let's all go on a binge and storm parliament demanding reclassification

The whole thing's ridiculous though. The whole shifting cannabis up and down and up and down. Nobody decides whether to smoke some or not based on the classification.

OP posts:

UnquietDad · 07/02/2009 20:04

I've done this argument to death before and it is all rather tiresome. Nobody has ever been able to give me a reason for taking their oh-so-big-and-clever and grown-up drugs, apart from "it feels nice." Okay, so thats me convinced...

Original poster

tumtumtetum · 07/02/2009 20:07

No-one is asking you to take drugs UQD. Why would you think that?

Do you drink UQD? That feels nice... If not then fair enough but it's no different to taking other drugs.

I think people just get annoyed that such a huge amount of people (millions) are criminalised for doing things which are just, well, as normal as smoking or drinking and proven to be less dangerous.

OP posts:

rolandbrowning · 07/02/2009 20:10

Do you not like feeling nice then, UQD?

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8