3 ms·

Do you have sources for this? My impression is that cocaine is significantly more addictive than caffeine, which seems like a very large negative. This page (wh

Do you have sources for this? My impression is that cocaine is significantly more addictive than caffeine, which seems like a very large negative. This page (which I believe is meant to be sympathetic to legalization) seems to imply cocaine is 'worse' on every metric: http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/28 http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/28

Alex3917 14y ago
"Do you have sources for this?" The two best sources would be - The Consumer Union's Guide To Licit and Illicit Substances: http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/cu/cumenu.htm http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/cu/cumen... (Written by the same non-profit that writes consumer reports) - The WHO report on cocaine: http://transform-drugs.blogspot.com/2009/06/report-they-didnt-want-you-to-see.html http://transform-drugs.blogspot.com/2009/06/report-they-didn... "My impression is that cocaine is significantly more addictive than caffeine, which seems like a very large negative." It's not, the addictive potential is almost identical to that of caffeine. The page you're linking to is wrong, they're comparing people snorting (or smoking) cocaine with people drinking caffeine. They're also not comparing the harms caused by the drugs, but rather the harms caused to users. This might sound pedantic, but it's actually really important because the most hardcore drug addicts are drawn to the drugs that have the reputations of being the most hardcore. Which means that cocaine users on average have more health problems that caffeine users, but that doesn't mean that cocaine is any more dangerous.
- zevyoura 14y ago
  Thanks for following up, this is very interesting reading.
  - njs12345 14y ago
    If you are interested in these kinds of things, you might find David Nutt's book interesting: http://www.amazon.com/Drugs-Without-Hot-David-Nutt/dp/1906860165/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1359682440&sr=8-1&keywords=drugs+without+the+hot+air http://www.amazon.com/Drugs-Without-Hot-David-Nutt/dp/190686... It's perhaps a little UK-centric, but I found it well argued and the author is eminently credible.
    - Alex3917 14y ago
      FWIW the analysis that I'm criticizing as propaganda is straight out of Nutt's research. (Or else is very similar to Nutt's research, I didn't look at the source.)

Alex3917 14y ago

"Do you have sources for this?" The two best sources would be - The Consumer Union's Guide To Licit and Illicit Substances: http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/cu/cumenu.htm http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/cu/cumen... (Written by the same non-profit that writes consumer reports) - The WHO report on cocaine: http://transform-drugs.blogspot.com/2009/06/report-they-didnt-want-you-to-see.html http://transform-drugs.blogspot.com/2009/06/report-they-didn... "My impression is that cocaine is significantly more addictive than caffeine, which seems like a very large negative." It's not, the addictive potential is almost identical to that of caffeine. The page you're linking to is wrong, they're comparing people snorting (or smoking) cocaine with people drinking caffeine. They're also not comparing the harms caused by the drugs, but rather the harms caused to users. This might sound pedantic, but it's actually really important because the most hardcore drug addicts are drawn to the drugs that have the reputations of being the most hardcore. Which means that cocaine users on average have more health problems that caffeine users, but that doesn't mean that cocaine is any more dangerous.

zevyoura 14y ago
Thanks for following up, this is very interesting reading.
- njs12345 14y ago
  If you are interested in these kinds of things, you might find David Nutt's book interesting: http://www.amazon.com/Drugs-Without-Hot-David-Nutt/dp/1906860165/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1359682440&sr=8-1&keywords=drugs+without+the+hot+air http://www.amazon.com/Drugs-Without-Hot-David-Nutt/dp/190686... It's perhaps a little UK-centric, but I found it well argued and the author is eminently credible.
  - Alex3917 14y ago
    FWIW the analysis that I'm criticizing as propaganda is straight out of Nutt's research. (Or else is very similar to Nutt's research, I didn't look at the source.)