5 ms·

So when we legalize all drugs because 'the drug war isn't working' (something I agree with) who do we sue then? I just think the public is overly reactive to w

by Gunax 5y ago

So when we legalize all drugs because 'the drug war isn't working' (something I agree with) who do we sue then? I just think the public is overly reactive to whatever problem is at hand. When the drugs are causing crime we want them legalised. When they are causing addiction we want to producers prosecuted. Opiods helped a lot of people. And the media has constructed this narrative around them being highly addictive which isn't really true.

amznthrwaway 5y ago
Opiods aren’t useless, but it is absurd to see claims that they aren’t highly addictive, and that addictiveness is merely a media narrative.
leetcrew 5y ago
legalization is really an orthogonal issue. opioid painkillers are a very useful class of drugs that also have serious potential for addiction. doctors understand this and must balance the risk/benefit trade off. the problem here is not that purdue sold addictive drugs, it is that the company intentionally deceived the public about how addictive their formulation is. even if all drugs were fully legal, it still ought to be illegal to misrepresent your product this way.
- Gunax 5y ago
  Well I agree. It is the misrepresentation that gets them in trouble. The reason I bring it up is that it's a good test of what will happen if we do legalise drugs. So the claim is that there were a bunch of so-called pain clinics, but which were in reality just fronts for prescribing opioids to addicts. This might be true. But that's effectively the same result as what we will have if we fully legalize drugs--they are just proposing we replace the 'pain clinics' with 'dispensaries' and dispense with the wink-wink claims of addicts needing to feign shoulder/back/whatever pain. I actually lean in favour of legalizing drugs, but I just sense a bit of hypocrisy and pitchfork-raising in the internet mob.

by Gunax 5y ago

amznthrwaway 5y ago

Opiods aren’t useless, but it is absurd to see claims that they aren’t highly addictive, and that addictiveness is merely a media narrative.

leetcrew 5y ago

legalization is really an orthogonal issue. opioid painkillers are a very useful class of drugs that also have serious potential for addiction. doctors understand this and must balance the risk/benefit trade off. the problem here is not that purdue sold addictive drugs, it is that the company intentionally deceived the public about how addictive their formulation is. even if all drugs were fully legal, it still ought to be illegal to misrepresent your product this way.

Gunax 5y ago
Well I agree. It is the misrepresentation that gets them in trouble. The reason I bring it up is that it's a good test of what will happen if we do legalise drugs. So the claim is that there were a bunch of so-called pain clinics, but which were in reality just fronts for prescribing opioids to addicts. This might be true. But that's effectively the same result as what we will have if we fully legalize drugs--they are just proposing we replace the 'pain clinics' with 'dispensaries' and dispense with the wink-wink claims of addicts needing to feign shoulder/back/whatever pain. I actually lean in favour of legalizing drugs, but I just sense a bit of hypocrisy and pitchfork-raising in the internet mob.