4 ms·

It's worth contemplating the ills of alcohol - but it is available in any quantity to anyone who wants it, and it's socially acceptable. If we sold Opiates/Fen

It's worth contemplating the ills of alcohol - but it is available in any quantity to anyone who wants it, and it's socially acceptable. If we sold Opiates/Fentanyl to anyone who wanted it it, in whatever quantities, and there were no social stigma, with 80% of teens doing it 'at least a little bit' before age 21, and 97% of the adult population consuming opiates at least on some occasion again with 'easy access' ... the harm would be orders of magnitude greater than alcohol.

version_five 5y ago
Fentanyl, and especially dangerous fentanyl basically only exists because of prohibition. Ignoring that most people wouldn't try hard drugs even if they were more readily available, the current opiate problem is more like if alcohol was unregulated and made in bathtubs everywhere, and every few beers had methanol in it instead of ethanol.
- com2kid 5y ago
  > Ignoring that most people wouldn't try hard drugs even if they were more readily available, the current opiate problem is more like if alcohol was unregulated and made in bathtubs everywhere, and every few beers had methanol in it instead of ethanol. While I am generally all for harm reduction and even legalization, 19th century history shows what happens when opium becomes readily available to a country with no limitations.
  - Ginden 5y ago
    Arguably, people in XIX century wasn't really aware of opioid addiction. Significant portion of treated troops in US were hooked up on opioids, because physicians weren't aware of issues.
arcticbull 5y ago
Potentially, but that's not really what Portugal found when they decriminalized all drugs in 2001 (not legalized, mind you). They saw usage remain roughly constant, but all the negative effects associated with drug use dropped precipitously. [1] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radic...
- jollybean 5y ago
  Decriminalization is a fairly marginal step away from the status quo and is nothing like true legalization with the inherent distribution, social acceptance etc..
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    I guess the question I would have is - and this isn't meant to come across as though I have a preconceived answer - what evidence do we have that legalization (plus, for instance, a ban on marketing) would actually increase usage? I know it's intuitive to think it would, but is there data? We do know for a fact that usage of many hard drugs is increasing when illegal. And this is on top of all the negative outcomes associated with making it illegal - guns, gangs, prison, felony convictions. Is making it illegal slowing the uptake? By how much? Is it making the problem worse?
  - Broken_Hippo 5y ago
    What makes you think that legalisation would mean social acceptance? It doesn't.
    - nobody9999 5y ago
      > What makes you think that legalisation would mean social acceptance? >It doesn't. Absolutely correct. cf. Tobacco smoking.
      - OJFord 5y ago
        I'm not so sure about that, it's illegal indoors (publicly) in the UK since 2005 iirc, my impression is that it's less 'socially acceptable', to the extent that can be quantified, now than it was when smokers and non-smokers shared a pub.
        nobody9999 5y ago
        >I'm not so sure about that, it's illegal indoors (publicly) in the UK since 2005 iirc, my impression is that it's less 'socially acceptable', to the extent that can be quantified, now than it was when smokers and non-smokers shared a pub. A reasonable point. However, smoking indoors is illegal because smoking is less 'socially acceptable', not the other way around. There has been, over the last 30 years or so, a concerted effort (with warnings on US cigarette packs, more dire ones on UK packs, and disgusting photos on packs elsewhere in Europe), as well as marketing/advertising pushes to make smoking less acceptable. And (in the US, at least, not sure about elsewhere), many fewer people smoke and those who do are often harassed/berated even when they smoke where it's legal to do so. As such, I'd expect similar results (given similar efforts) for other drugs. Before/after photos of meth heads/heroin addicts on packaging, marketing/advertising efforts, etc. would likely have a similar effect. What's more (again, at least in the US, although I'd expect it'd be true wherever such drugs are criminalized), the costs associated with such efforts, as well as treatment programs for those who need them, would be significantly less costly than the monies spent on interdiction, enforcement and incarceration. Perhaps I'm missing something important here?
pstuart 5y ago
I disagree. There would be "social caution" (yes it feels good but you'll get trapped). We could finally have grown up conversations about self-medicating and how to be a mindful consumer.
Nursie 5y ago
> the harm would be orders of magnitude greater than alcohol. This is something of an assertion. We can certainly anticipate some effects, by looking at countries that have had opium problems in the past. But that would have to be countered by looking at the deaths, physical and mental health consequences, violence and all sorts of other problems caused by alcohol, and doing so honestly. There is a huge tendency to write it off as "just a beer" and think "I can handle it" and then compare your relationship with alcohol to the worst addicts of another drug, neatly ignoring the many millions who end up on a dark path through booze.
tayo42 5y ago
If heroine was legal right now would you start using it?

version_five 5y ago

Fentanyl, and especially dangerous fentanyl basically only exists because of prohibition. Ignoring that most people wouldn't try hard drugs even if they were more readily available, the current opiate problem is more like if alcohol was unregulated and made in bathtubs everywhere, and every few beers had methanol in it instead of ethanol.

com2kid 5y ago
> Ignoring that most people wouldn't try hard drugs even if they were more readily available, the current opiate problem is more like if alcohol was unregulated and made in bathtubs everywhere, and every few beers had methanol in it instead of ethanol. While I am generally all for harm reduction and even legalization, 19th century history shows what happens when opium becomes readily available to a country with no limitations.
- Ginden 5y ago
  Arguably, people in XIX century wasn't really aware of opioid addiction. Significant portion of treated troops in US were hooked up on opioids, because physicians weren't aware of issues.

arcticbull 5y ago

Potentially, but that's not really what Portugal found when they decriminalized all drugs in 2001 (not legalized, mind you). They saw usage remain roughly constant, but all the negative effects associated with drug use dropped precipitously. [1] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radic...

jollybean 5y ago
Decriminalization is a fairly marginal step away from the status quo and is nothing like true legalization with the inherent distribution, social acceptance etc..
- arcticbull 5y ago
  I guess the question I would have is - and this isn't meant to come across as though I have a preconceived answer - what evidence do we have that legalization (plus, for instance, a ban on marketing) would actually increase usage? I know it's intuitive to think it would, but is there data? We do know for a fact that usage of many hard drugs is increasing when illegal. And this is on top of all the negative outcomes associated with making it illegal - guns, gangs, prison, felony convictions. Is making it illegal slowing the uptake? By how much? Is it making the problem worse?
- Broken_Hippo 5y ago
  What makes you think that legalisation would mean social acceptance? It doesn't.
  - nobody9999 5y ago
    > What makes you think that legalisation would mean social acceptance? >It doesn't. Absolutely correct. cf. Tobacco smoking.
    - OJFord 5y ago
      I'm not so sure about that, it's illegal indoors (publicly) in the UK since 2005 iirc, my impression is that it's less 'socially acceptable', to the extent that can be quantified, now than it was when smokers and non-smokers shared a pub.
      - nobody9999 5y ago
        >I'm not so sure about that, it's illegal indoors (publicly) in the UK since 2005 iirc, my impression is that it's less 'socially acceptable', to the extent that can be quantified, now than it was when smokers and non-smokers shared a pub. A reasonable point. However, smoking indoors is illegal because smoking is less 'socially acceptable', not the other way around. There has been, over the last 30 years or so, a concerted effort (with warnings on US cigarette packs, more dire ones on UK packs, and disgusting photos on packs elsewhere in Europe), as well as marketing/advertising pushes to make smoking less acceptable. And (in the US, at least, not sure about elsewhere), many fewer people smoke and those who do are often harassed/berated even when they smoke where it's legal to do so. As such, I'd expect similar results (given similar efforts) for other drugs. Before/after photos of meth heads/heroin addicts on packaging, marketing/advertising efforts, etc. would likely have a similar effect. What's more (again, at least in the US, although I'd expect it'd be true wherever such drugs are criminalized), the costs associated with such efforts, as well as treatment programs for those who need them, would be significantly less costly than the monies spent on interdiction, enforcement and incarceration. Perhaps I'm missing something important here?

pstuart 5y ago

I disagree. There would be "social caution" (yes it feels good but you'll get trapped). We could finally have grown up conversations about self-medicating and how to be a mindful consumer.

Nursie 5y ago

> the harm would be orders of magnitude greater than alcohol. This is something of an assertion. We can certainly anticipate some effects, by looking at countries that have had opium problems in the past. But that would have to be countered by looking at the deaths, physical and mental health consequences, violence and all sorts of other problems caused by alcohol, and doing so honestly. There is a huge tendency to write it off as "just a beer" and think "I can handle it" and then compare your relationship with alcohol to the worst addicts of another drug, neatly ignoring the many millions who end up on a dark path through booze.

tayo42 5y ago

If heroine was legal right now would you start using it?