3 ms·

"The freedom from the scourge of drugs" is why I can't buy an asthma inhaler without paying out the nose to see a specialist that will prescribe it to me. As a

"The freedom from the scourge of drugs" is why I can't buy an asthma inhaler without paying out the nose to see a specialist that will prescribe it to me. As a result I don't have an asthma inhaler. I feel very free when breathing gets hard. This is a snarky comment, but this is the consequence of this "negative freedom". I do think that there's some merit to these ideas, but I think it would always leave the choice to the individual. But we also have to realize that some things you just can't opt out of, eg electromagnetic radiation from cell towers.

nonrandomstring 3y ago
I'd really like to understand your comment better Aerroon. Is this something to do with the US healthcare system? Can you elaborate please? (BTW if it is, one of my friends who is a type-1 diabetic was involved in the very political "humanitarian airdrop" of insulin to the USA. - so I kind of get it)
- Aerroon 3y ago
  I'm not in the US, but drug politics is pretty similar globally due to the Single Convention of Narcotic Drugs of 1961 and its successors. Asthma inhalers just happen to fall under a prescription requirement in my country like most other drugs. Sure, this has its benefits, but also downsides. That's really all there is to it. I only brought it up, because I rarely see this side mentioned. Everybody seems to think that prescriptions aren't a barrier, but from my experience that's not true.
  - nonrandomstring 3y ago
    Thanks, I see. Yeah I used to be more pro-control, particularly because of antibiotic overuse. Now it's clear restraint made little difference I'm more inclined to a free market. Thing about food, drugs and stuff you put in your body though, is quality really matters.
    - Aerroon 3y ago
      I think antibiotics being restricted makes a lot more sense to me than most drug policy. We have a decent understanding of how improper use of antibiotics causes harm to everyone. With most other drugs the harm is a lot less direct (often the policy itself is the main contributor to harm).

nonrandomstring 3y ago

I'd really like to understand your comment better Aerroon. Is this something to do with the US healthcare system? Can you elaborate please? (BTW if it is, one of my friends who is a type-1 diabetic was involved in the very political "humanitarian airdrop" of insulin to the USA. - so I kind of get it)

Aerroon 3y ago
I'm not in the US, but drug politics is pretty similar globally due to the Single Convention of Narcotic Drugs of 1961 and its successors. Asthma inhalers just happen to fall under a prescription requirement in my country like most other drugs. Sure, this has its benefits, but also downsides. That's really all there is to it. I only brought it up, because I rarely see this side mentioned. Everybody seems to think that prescriptions aren't a barrier, but from my experience that's not true.
- nonrandomstring 3y ago
  Thanks, I see. Yeah I used to be more pro-control, particularly because of antibiotic overuse. Now it's clear restraint made little difference I'm more inclined to a free market. Thing about food, drugs and stuff you put in your body though, is quality really matters.
  - Aerroon 3y ago
    I think antibiotics being restricted makes a lot more sense to me than most drug policy. We have a decent understanding of how improper use of antibiotics causes harm to everyone. With most other drugs the harm is a lot less direct (often the policy itself is the main contributor to harm).