4 ms·
A microdoser is not an average drug-seeker.
by vadfa 5y ago
A microdoser is not an average drug-seeker.
- jollybean 5y ago"A microdoser is not an average drug-seeker." They are not an average anything, i.e. not representative of anything really, which is the OP's point.
- realce 5y agoIt's not even factually true - 66% of the US population is on a prescription drug. The average citizen is a "drug seeker" of some type.
- jollybean 5y agoFirst, even if your statement was correct, it would say nothing about the OP (or my) issues of selective sampling. Second, people who receive medicine for their ailments are not 'drug seekers' by any stretch of the imagination. People do not 'seek' blood thinners arbitrarily, people seek drugs which provide some kind of physical or psychoactive experience i.e. cocaine, opiods, thc. Very few prescription drugs fit that category.
- realce 5y agoI sincerely disagree with your somewhat puritanical definition of drug seeking. If someone seeks marijuana to relieve their misery, it's "arbitrary drug seeking behaviour" but if it's blood thinners, then you're just... not looking for drugs to provide a cure? That makes no sense. I certainly do seek out blood thinners, antidepressants, antibiotics, ect, if I am suffering from illnesses that they provide relief for. Nobody seeks out drugs "arbitrarily" whatsoever. You seem to think that people who use narcotics to address their pain aren't worthy of a medical definition that is reserved for people who obtain their medication from a pharma company. It's plain cognitive dissonance.
- jollybean 5y agoIt's 'cognitive dissonance' to contemplate those getting prescriptions for diabetes, cancer and chemo as 'drug seekers' who are in any way remotely similar to those buying illegal drugs, most of which are not purchased for therapeutic value.
- realce 5y ago> most of which are not purchased for therapeutic value There's that puritanism again. Both classes of people are seeking relief, you can simply touch one class of illness but not the other. It's the human condition to seek relief, not some pharma company buzzword that segregates acceptable pharmaceutical use and unacceptable use. Your classification of narcotics users as plain hedonists - in no way empathizing with that user's need to have some form of relief from whatever is plaguing them - is the dissonance.
- monkeybutton 5y agoNot average as in someone that is doctor shopping to get high, but it is someone that self-selected themselves for it. How much of the effect is placebo? Skimming the paper it is not mentioned except in the title of one reference.
- vadfa 5y agoWe're talking about mental health. If it's placebo, what's the practical difference?
- monkeybutton 5y agoWell not being a restricted drug is a practical difference. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against microdosing or anything. I'm just skeptical. I've listened to one too many acid-head's long winded speeches about enlightenment to take what people are self reporting about it seriously.
- gunshai 5y agoSounds like a dinner party in SF
- shawnz 5y agoI'm a big believer in medical use of psychedelics, but if the effect is strictly due to placebo, then there are cheaper and safer placebos we can give.
- vadfa 5y agoOnly that placebos won't work if you know they are placebos. Which means if doctors get a reputation for giving out placebos, they will stop working.
- teataster 5y agoI ate two bananas before my motorcycle test for their placebo effects to calm nerves. Cool as a cucumber I passed without a jitter on the throttle. It's anect-data-l. I know.
- metalliqaz 5y agoThis might be true but in no way refutes grandparent's point.
- vmception 5y agoIn this case someone that isn’t having a pleasant effect isn’t still using it