3 ms·
> Which is a worse outcome? Well, it might be possible to reign in drug-seeking behaviour without denying medicine to people who need it. For example, with mor
by michaelt 4y ago
> Which is a worse outcome?
Well, it might be possible to reign in drug-seeking behaviour without denying medicine to people who need it. For example, with more rigorous oversight of healthcare providers, to make sure they're all providing an equally thorough diagnosis.
There are risks to turning a blind eye to drug use. We turn a blind eye to bodybuilders and hollywood actors using steroids because it's their choice, and it means the non-steroid-users either have to start using, or get left behind.
If we applied the same pressure to the nation's top scientists and mathematicians, or kids trying to get into the top colleges, and they all end up drugged to the gills like sam bankman-fried - we might not be doing the country a favour.
- ParetoOptimal 4y ago> Well, it might be possible to reign in drug-seeking behaviour without denying medicine to people who need it. It may be possible eventually, but in the meantime which side do you err towards? If you err towards denying adhd medication to people that may or may not have ADHD, you will almost certainly deny it to people who need it. That basically leaves that group of people out to dry.