5 ms·

Replace 'take drugs' with 'eat food', 'write software', 'go on runs', 'learn skills'. Now also define 'need'. I think blanket statements like this are ignoran

by mrtron 18y ago

Replace 'take drugs' with 'eat food', 'write software', 'go on runs', 'learn skills'. Now also define 'need'. I think blanket statements like this are ignorant. The vast majority of the population takes drugs they don't need, if you define drinking coffee/tea (for caffeine) or smoking or drinking alcohol as taking drugs.

aaronblohowiak 18y ago
Just because most people do it doesn't make it right. Caffeine, nicotine and alcohol are drugs, anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves.
- fallentimes 18y ago
  Just because the government says don't do it or people attach a blanket label to them doesn't make it wrong either.
  - mattmaroon 18y ago
    Right or wrong is irrelevant. They're all bad for you when used frequently. I'm pretty sure that's why the person who said that meant you shouldn't take them, not for any moral reasons.
    - fallentimes 18y ago
      That's not true either, especially for caffeine (particularly when consumed via coffee) and alcohol (it depends on your definition of frequently).
      - aaronblohowiak 18y ago
        Anxiety and sleep disorders,irritability, caffeine dependency (addiction that has withdraw symptoms such as headaches, drowsiness, nausea,) peptic ulcers, ge reflux, increased rates of Parkinson's disease in men, and such. Dependence isn't something I desire.
        fallentimes 18y ago
        Benefits of coffee: Increased sexual drive, increased mental awareness, reduced diabetes risk, mood boost, increased endurance, depression, headache and cavity prevention and decreased Parkinson's risk according to this: http://men.webmd.com/features/coffee-new-health-food http://men.webmd.com/features/coffee-new-health-food This study also points out that the benefits are primarily driven by the caffeine, not the coffee. I think you're confusing dependence with consistent usage. Aaron, I see what you're saying, but even the healthiest food in the world or exercise can be bad for you if you over do it. People often have a knee jerk reaction to drugs: if it alters the mind/body in some way it's bad. I'm saying this notion isn't always true and drugs, when used properly or even, occasionally, for recreation purposes (shown in the article) can have myriad benefits. But as always I enjoy the intelligent discussion provided HN that feels so rare on the rest of the web...
        aaronblohowiak 18y ago
        I did misread my source.. it may show a decreased risk of Parkinson's. Apologies. Dependence, as I understand it, is where the consumption of a substance is required to maintain normal functioning, and absence of that substance leads to predictable withdrawal symptoms. Caffeine withdrawal: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2004/09_29_04.html http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2004/09_29_04.... As has been said before "it is the dose that makes the poison." I also agree that we should weigh the pros and cons of each decision before it is made, and not react irrationally. While the prevalence and social expectation of caffeine usage often discourage dissent, the question of the value of sobriety and intoxication is an individual one. Near as I can tell, caffeine addiction is something our society takes for granted. I don't believe in blanket prohibitions or any other construct that'd diminish a sovereign person's right to chose their own adventure. I just think we should make the decision to consume our vices intentionally, and with all the facts.
        r7000 18y ago
        Regular coffee/caffeine may also keep the blood-brain barrier strong as you age: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7326839.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7326839.stm
    - deleted 18y ago
      [deleted]
    - tdavis 18y ago
      "Bad" is subjective. I drink caffeine to stay awake or to wake up; getting my work done is not "bad" for me. I drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes because smoking is relaxing and helps me concentrate and drinking... I won't get into that here. I exercise because it makes me feel good. I eat healthy because I think non-junk food just tastes better. In my mind, all of these things are not "bad" for me. Some may be bad for my physical health, but if physical health were humans' only consideration we would all live in plastic bubbles and eat synthesized protein mash or something. If somebody wants to take Provigil for 30 years and it effectively doubles their productivity and concentration while at the end of which turning their mind to mush, who are we to judge?
      - aaronblohowiak 18y ago
        Right, we should probably use "effective for N" or "inhibits X" instead of good/bad, right/wrong. Value judgments used to be effectiveness positions, wherin N and X were assumed to be common among people (or at least were implied to be superior to any dissenting view.)
    - radu_floricica 18y ago
      Frequently... maybe. A lot of people here pointed out caffeine. I'm going with aspirin: low daily doses are recommended for everybody over 50. Vitamins, too, the whole long list. Mineral suplements. Alcohol, mostly low quantities of red wine. I think we as a society (and I don't talk about americans only, i'm european) have a huge alergic reaction to using medicine for non-healing purposes. I never really understood why. Of course, there are the rational risks, but it looks too much like a gut reaction. Maybe is related to the fact that people avoid doctors in general? Some day we are going to have safe drugs that can make us live 20 years longer and a lot better, and we're not going to realize it. And if that day was in the 80s, we wouldn't know it.
      - rms 18y ago
        From PG's recent essay, I think it's because we're taught from a young age that drugs are bad. And they are kind of bad, but really it's much more complicated than that.
- Prrometheus 18y ago
  Your brain runs on chemicals.
mattmaroon 18y ago
I don't think it's fair to lump writing software into the same category as substances that alter your brain's chemistry. To my knowledge, no permanent negative side effects were ever cause by, say, coding a social network for drugs. I suppose it's ignorant if you take it out of context and then broadly define drugs. But I'm pretty sure it was meant (in context) more for prescription drugs, or more specifically, ones that alter the brain's chemistry.
- Retric 18y ago
  On a side note: I find a significant reduction in verbal skills after an extended period of coding. I don't think there are long term effects but it can be disconcerting when you basically forget how to speak. (Or is this just me?)
  - LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
    It may just be an effect of your coding techniques using the language centers of your brain. I have the same experience when playing a musical instrument or rhythm game, or when reading a book for an extended period of time. It's as if the language centers can focus on one sort of activity at a time. I find that after a few minutes I can switch back to verbal mode. Additionally, when I am focusing on a rhythm I am completely unable to speak. I can internally hear what I want to say, but I can't actually form the words. Friends of mine have great fun asking me questions while I'm playing rhythm-based video games. Usually the most I can respond with is a labored "yes!" or "no!", to humorous effect. Fortunately the behavior dissipates when I'm done playing :) Interestingly, different people can use different portions of the brain for the same activity. A study was performed which measured the performance of participants as they spoke while marking time (holding a steady rhythmic beat). Some of the subjects had irregular beats while speaking, but others kept steady time. When asked how they were performing both activities at once, the unsteady ones said that they were marking time by internally verbally counting. The steady ones were internally visually watching numbers roll by. Both groups had the same performance when marking time while not required to speak. The brain is a funny thing. They can vary greatly in the mechanics of how they accomplish a given task.

by mrtron 18y ago

aaronblohowiak 18y ago

Just because most people do it doesn't make it right. Caffeine, nicotine and alcohol are drugs, anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves.

fallentimes 18y ago
Just because the government says don't do it or people attach a blanket label to them doesn't make it wrong either.
- mattmaroon 18y ago
  Right or wrong is irrelevant. They're all bad for you when used frequently. I'm pretty sure that's why the person who said that meant you shouldn't take them, not for any moral reasons.
  - fallentimes 18y ago
    That's not true either, especially for caffeine (particularly when consumed via coffee) and alcohol (it depends on your definition of frequently).
    - aaronblohowiak 18y ago
      Anxiety and sleep disorders,irritability, caffeine dependency (addiction that has withdraw symptoms such as headaches, drowsiness, nausea,) peptic ulcers, ge reflux, increased rates of Parkinson's disease in men, and such. Dependence isn't something I desire.
      - fallentimes 18y ago
        Benefits of coffee: Increased sexual drive, increased mental awareness, reduced diabetes risk, mood boost, increased endurance, depression, headache and cavity prevention and decreased Parkinson's risk according to this: http://men.webmd.com/features/coffee-new-health-food http://men.webmd.com/features/coffee-new-health-food This study also points out that the benefits are primarily driven by the caffeine, not the coffee. I think you're confusing dependence with consistent usage. Aaron, I see what you're saying, but even the healthiest food in the world or exercise can be bad for you if you over do it. People often have a knee jerk reaction to drugs: if it alters the mind/body in some way it's bad. I'm saying this notion isn't always true and drugs, when used properly or even, occasionally, for recreation purposes (shown in the article) can have myriad benefits. But as always I enjoy the intelligent discussion provided HN that feels so rare on the rest of the web...
        aaronblohowiak 18y ago
        I did misread my source.. it may show a decreased risk of Parkinson's. Apologies. Dependence, as I understand it, is where the consumption of a substance is required to maintain normal functioning, and absence of that substance leads to predictable withdrawal symptoms. Caffeine withdrawal: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2004/09_29_04.html http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2004/09_29_04.... As has been said before "it is the dose that makes the poison." I also agree that we should weigh the pros and cons of each decision before it is made, and not react irrationally. While the prevalence and social expectation of caffeine usage often discourage dissent, the question of the value of sobriety and intoxication is an individual one. Near as I can tell, caffeine addiction is something our society takes for granted. I don't believe in blanket prohibitions or any other construct that'd diminish a sovereign person's right to chose their own adventure. I just think we should make the decision to consume our vices intentionally, and with all the facts.
        r7000 18y ago
        Regular coffee/caffeine may also keep the blood-brain barrier strong as you age: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7326839.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7326839.stm
  - deleted 18y ago
    [deleted]
  - tdavis 18y ago
    "Bad" is subjective. I drink caffeine to stay awake or to wake up; getting my work done is not "bad" for me. I drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes because smoking is relaxing and helps me concentrate and drinking... I won't get into that here. I exercise because it makes me feel good. I eat healthy because I think non-junk food just tastes better. In my mind, all of these things are not "bad" for me. Some may be bad for my physical health, but if physical health were humans' only consideration we would all live in plastic bubbles and eat synthesized protein mash or something. If somebody wants to take Provigil for 30 years and it effectively doubles their productivity and concentration while at the end of which turning their mind to mush, who are we to judge?
    - aaronblohowiak 18y ago
      Right, we should probably use "effective for N" or "inhibits X" instead of good/bad, right/wrong. Value judgments used to be effectiveness positions, wherin N and X were assumed to be common among people (or at least were implied to be superior to any dissenting view.)
  - radu_floricica 18y ago
    Frequently... maybe. A lot of people here pointed out caffeine. I'm going with aspirin: low daily doses are recommended for everybody over 50. Vitamins, too, the whole long list. Mineral suplements. Alcohol, mostly low quantities of red wine. I think we as a society (and I don't talk about americans only, i'm european) have a huge alergic reaction to using medicine for non-healing purposes. I never really understood why. Of course, there are the rational risks, but it looks too much like a gut reaction. Maybe is related to the fact that people avoid doctors in general? Some day we are going to have safe drugs that can make us live 20 years longer and a lot better, and we're not going to realize it. And if that day was in the 80s, we wouldn't know it.
    - rms 18y ago
      From PG's recent essay, I think it's because we're taught from a young age that drugs are bad. And they are kind of bad, but really it's much more complicated than that.
Prrometheus 18y ago
Your brain runs on chemicals.

mattmaroon 18y ago

I don't think it's fair to lump writing software into the same category as substances that alter your brain's chemistry. To my knowledge, no permanent negative side effects were ever cause by, say, coding a social network for drugs. I suppose it's ignorant if you take it out of context and then broadly define drugs. But I'm pretty sure it was meant (in context) more for prescription drugs, or more specifically, ones that alter the brain's chemistry.

Retric 18y ago
On a side note: I find a significant reduction in verbal skills after an extended period of coding. I don't think there are long term effects but it can be disconcerting when you basically forget how to speak. (Or is this just me?)
- LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
  It may just be an effect of your coding techniques using the language centers of your brain. I have the same experience when playing a musical instrument or rhythm game, or when reading a book for an extended period of time. It's as if the language centers can focus on one sort of activity at a time. I find that after a few minutes I can switch back to verbal mode. Additionally, when I am focusing on a rhythm I am completely unable to speak. I can internally hear what I want to say, but I can't actually form the words. Friends of mine have great fun asking me questions while I'm playing rhythm-based video games. Usually the most I can respond with is a labored "yes!" or "no!", to humorous effect. Fortunately the behavior dissipates when I'm done playing :) Interestingly, different people can use different portions of the brain for the same activity. A study was performed which measured the performance of participants as they spoke while marking time (holding a steady rhythmic beat). Some of the subjects had irregular beats while speaking, but others kept steady time. When asked how they were performing both activities at once, the unsteady ones said that they were marking time by internally verbally counting. The steady ones were internally visually watching numbers roll by. Both groups had the same performance when marking time while not required to speak. The brain is a funny thing. They can vary greatly in the mechanics of how they accomplish a given task.