3 ms·
I think a lot of people who don’t use drugs at all and don’t associate with those who do underestimate the number of high-functioning regular members of society
by jakeinspace 4y ago
I think a lot of people who don’t use drugs at all and don’t associate with those who do underestimate the number of high-functioning regular members of society partake with minimal detriment to themselves. That applies even to the use of amphetamines and opioids. It should be obvious, when most drinkers manage to avoid alcoholism. I am curious if there are studies that have tried to estimate the ratio of casual users to abusers for various compounds.
- FpUser 4y agoI can believe that the percentage of people who tried /used drugs occasionally without visible detriments is much higher than those who got their lives destroyed. I can also believe that the absolute numbers of a victims of using drugs, alcohol, smoking is very high and so are the direct and collateral damage costs to society.
- pessimizer 4y ago> I can also believe that the absolute numbers of a victims of using drugs, alcohol, smoking is very high and so are the direct and collateral damage costs to society. But is that relevant to the discussion in any way?
- axus 4y agoRough estimates are $100 billion per year revenues for illegal drugs, compared to $350 billion per year for prescription drugs. About 50% of Americans use prescription drugs, so let's say 15% use illegal drugs.
- yusefnapora 4y agoCan you meaningfully compare revenues for an illegal class of products to a legal one? It also doesn't follow that the money spent on either class is evenly distributed across the population.