If I try to synthesize the ancedotes in this thread, it seems: 1. Some people do not seem have an addictive response to opioids. It's roughly in the same safet

If I try to synthesize the ancedotes in this thread, it seems: 1. Some people do not seem have an addictive response to opioids. It's roughly in the same safety category as alcohol and weed. 2. Some people become nearly-instantly profoundly physically addicted to the point that it will inexorably destroy their lives. The only way to figure which category you're in is to try it and find out. There's a personal liberty principle argument that if you are in the first category, you should have access to opioids just like you have access to other pursuits of happiness. But the inability to determine whether you're that category induces a significant risk at the aggregate level. People die and everyone, even those who can take opioids safely end up indirectly dealing with the negative consequences in terms of rising healthcare costs, dealing with homeless drug users on the street, etc. I can think of three philosophical approaches to this: * Communal: Say that since some fraction of people will be grievously harmed by opioids, the greatest good for all is to prohibit them universally. We ask the safe users to sacrifice the harmless positive experience to protect the unsafe users from harm. This is nominally what we do now by outlawing them. * Libertarian: Acknowledge that even trying is a roll of the dice and that if you choose to roll them, you have to take the consequences. This is effectively what we do now since the law enforcement is so ineffective. * Technological: Research a way to determine whether you can take opioids safely without having to try them. Imagine a test your doctor could give you that says "Yes, you'll be physically addicted." That increased certainty would remove much of the stigma of use, and make it easier for those that are at risk to stay away because they know they really are likely to get addicted. I don't usually lean towards tech solutions to societal problems, but this seems like a case where having more insight into an individual's physiology would help everyone make better choices. (Personally, after receiving fentanyl during a medical procedure, I am absolutely certain I should never be given easy access to opioids.)