2 ms·

Everything is available on the black market, that doesn’t mean regulations are BS, it means people are willing to risk breaking the law to avoid being tracked.

by dahart 3y ago

Everything is available on the black market, that doesn’t mean regulations are BS, it means people are willing to risk breaking the law to avoid being tracked. The demand for Viagra might have more to do with being embarassed about ED or other fears than with concern about the difficulty of getting it legally. (As another commenter pointed out, the bar is extremely low when using online remote clinics.) What does “merely-harmful” mean? What do you mean it can be disclaimed? If it were over the counter, how will people know when and how to avoid fatal doses? Why do you assume it might be either effective or safe if diluted?

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> What does “merely-harmful” mean? Drugs that really only harm the person who takes them if abused. Alternatively, drugs which are unproblematically sold over the counter the world over. > Everything is available on the black market Available versus commonly procured. > that doesn’t mean regulations are BS, it means people are willing to risk breaking the law to avoid being tracked It means they’re willing to break regulations to get it. We can’t impute motivation. > how will people know when and how to avoid fatal doses Same way they do for e.g. Tylenol. > Why do you assume it might be either effective or safe if diluted? I don’t. Dilution is a common (and obvious) pharmaceutical tool for increasing the distance between the therapeutic and harmful dose.
- lostlogin 3y ago
  > What does “merely-harmful” mean? Drugs that really only harm the person who takes them if abused. Alternatively, drugs which are unproblematically sold over the counter the world over. In the extreme case where someone ends up being injured or dead, friends and family are most definitely affected. There are few people this would not apply to. Aside from that, the healthcare system takes a hit, employers do too and a thousand other little ripples spread out. Some drugs are over-regulated and this is why I’m a fan of the middle line where some are sold at a pharmacy with no script needed and they can partially control the purchasing.
- dahart 3y ago
  > We can’t impute motivation. Correct, you’re right, I was speculating on alternative reasons people might avoid the doctor. We also don’t have evidence that the cost or time of a doctors visit is the reason for the existence of the black market demand, contrary to your claim above. Of course, a huge risk for black market purchases is that they turn out to be fake and/or have unlisted harmful ingredients. It’s already happening with black market Viagra. You get what you pay for, which is people who are breaking the law, are secretive and unaccountable, and putting anything they want in those pills. Good luck with that. A co-pay and a quick Zoom call with a doc seems like a safer choice to me…
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > co-pay and a quick Zoom call with a doc seems like a better choice to me Nobody is arguing it isn’t. The point is the forced choice is flawed. There wouldn’t be a market for the adultered stuff if the medicine were OTC.
    - dahart 3y ago
      > The point is the forced choice is flawed. There wouldn’t be a market for the adulterated stuff if the medicine were OTC. You haven’t convinced me that there’s anything wrong with the regulation. There might be, but again, the existence of a black market is not a valid reason to relax the regulation. The black market exists for guns and heroine and antibiotics and certain types of illegal porn too, not to mention crazier things like bazookas. You wouldn’t argue any of those should be less regulated just because you can buy them on the black market right? What actual reasons justify deregulating Sildenafil?
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > wouldn’t argue any of those should be less regulated just because you can buy them on the black market I’d use that as evidence there is demand. Then I’d consider the harm of looser controls. The harm balance for Viagra seems minimal, particularly given so many people take it without bothering with a prescription. If you think Viagra is in the same harm bucket as guns and heroin, then yes, it makes sense to regulate it.

by dahart 3y ago

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> What does “merely-harmful” mean? Drugs that really only harm the person who takes them if abused. Alternatively, drugs which are unproblematically sold over the counter the world over. > Everything is available on the black market Available versus commonly procured. > that doesn’t mean regulations are BS, it means people are willing to risk breaking the law to avoid being tracked It means they’re willing to break regulations to get it. We can’t impute motivation. > how will people know when and how to avoid fatal doses Same way they do for e.g. Tylenol. > Why do you assume it might be either effective or safe if diluted? I don’t. Dilution is a common (and obvious) pharmaceutical tool for increasing the distance between the therapeutic and harmful dose.

lostlogin 3y ago
> What does “merely-harmful” mean? Drugs that really only harm the person who takes them if abused. Alternatively, drugs which are unproblematically sold over the counter the world over. In the extreme case where someone ends up being injured or dead, friends and family are most definitely affected. There are few people this would not apply to. Aside from that, the healthcare system takes a hit, employers do too and a thousand other little ripples spread out. Some drugs are over-regulated and this is why I’m a fan of the middle line where some are sold at a pharmacy with no script needed and they can partially control the purchasing.
dahart 3y ago
> We can’t impute motivation. Correct, you’re right, I was speculating on alternative reasons people might avoid the doctor. We also don’t have evidence that the cost or time of a doctors visit is the reason for the existence of the black market demand, contrary to your claim above. Of course, a huge risk for black market purchases is that they turn out to be fake and/or have unlisted harmful ingredients. It’s already happening with black market Viagra. You get what you pay for, which is people who are breaking the law, are secretive and unaccountable, and putting anything they want in those pills. Good luck with that. A co-pay and a quick Zoom call with a doc seems like a safer choice to me…
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > co-pay and a quick Zoom call with a doc seems like a better choice to me Nobody is arguing it isn’t. The point is the forced choice is flawed. There wouldn’t be a market for the adultered stuff if the medicine were OTC.
  - dahart 3y ago
    > The point is the forced choice is flawed. There wouldn’t be a market for the adulterated stuff if the medicine were OTC. You haven’t convinced me that there’s anything wrong with the regulation. There might be, but again, the existence of a black market is not a valid reason to relax the regulation. The black market exists for guns and heroine and antibiotics and certain types of illegal porn too, not to mention crazier things like bazookas. You wouldn’t argue any of those should be less regulated just because you can buy them on the black market right? What actual reasons justify deregulating Sildenafil?
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > wouldn’t argue any of those should be less regulated just because you can buy them on the black market I’d use that as evidence there is demand. Then I’d consider the harm of looser controls. The harm balance for Viagra seems minimal, particularly given so many people take it without bothering with a prescription. If you think Viagra is in the same harm bucket as guns and heroin, then yes, it makes sense to regulate it.