3 ms·

I am absolutely comparing dextroamphetamine to methamphetamine. It doesn't matter by whom it was synthesized. They are very similar in pharmacology, so you'd b

I am absolutely comparing dextroamphetamine to methamphetamine. It doesn't matter by whom it was synthesized. They are very similar in pharmacology, so you'd be deluded to not compare the two. Same addictive properties, same deleterious effects on health, similar abuse potential.

Bluestrike2 13y ago
And yet, different contexts lead to vastly different results. One is prescribed under a doctor's guidance at therapeutic doses and administered orally; the other is smoked, at [i]significantly[/i] higher dosages, to speed up absorption with much higher concentration levels accumulating directly in the brain. In other words, your argument is inherently simplistic and purposely misleading. Despite similarities in structure, the pharmacodynamics differences between therapeutic usage of Adderall and illicit meth are significant. When you gloss over the differences, you're radically undermining your position. My point with Desoxyn, which you completely ignored, rebuts your position even more clearly. Most medications have the potential for hazardous effects higher up the dose-response curve. That potential, however, doesn't magically negate clinical effects lower on the curve. A little is good, a lot (or with acetaminophen for instance, a little more) can be deadly. That's nothing new. Just as with potential for side effects, you and your doctor work to manage it during treatment. On another note, when you raise the specter of crystal meth usage, you aren't just isolating it to matters of pharmacology. Especially when you're talking about usage externalities and societal benefits: the external costs associated with manufacture and distribution all come along as mental baggage with the words "crystal meth." Your hysterics purposely ignore this in order to make the comparison seem more damning on a purely emotional level.
- code_duck 13y ago
  The reason I appeal to sets of things is because I find it completely ridiculous that children are routinely prescribed this dangerous stimulant drug for what I consider very flimsy reasons. Most people don't really realize what Adderall is, and American society as a whole seems to assume that doctors and pharmaceutical companies know what they are doing and are trustworthy, despite many indications to the contrary. The pharmacology of "illicit meth" is no different than the pharmacology of legal methamphetamine, other than some contamination. The pharmacology of dextroamphetamine is not so different either, mainly it comes on slightly more slowly and lasts less time. The reason that crystal meth usage is so bad for society is because the drug is truly terrible for you. I am well aware of everything you said, and I disagree that "just a little bit of amphetamines" is helpful for kids to be receiving for ADD. I'm confident that history will see me out on this. If you want to give your children speed, have fun.

Bluestrike2 13y ago

And yet, different contexts lead to vastly different results. One is prescribed under a doctor's guidance at therapeutic doses and administered orally; the other is smoked, at [i]significantly[/i] higher dosages, to speed up absorption with much higher concentration levels accumulating directly in the brain. In other words, your argument is inherently simplistic and purposely misleading. Despite similarities in structure, the pharmacodynamics differences between therapeutic usage of Adderall and illicit meth are significant. When you gloss over the differences, you're radically undermining your position. My point with Desoxyn, which you completely ignored, rebuts your position even more clearly. Most medications have the potential for hazardous effects higher up the dose-response curve. That potential, however, doesn't magically negate clinical effects lower on the curve. A little is good, a lot (or with acetaminophen for instance, a little more) can be deadly. That's nothing new. Just as with potential for side effects, you and your doctor work to manage it during treatment. On another note, when you raise the specter of crystal meth usage, you aren't just isolating it to matters of pharmacology. Especially when you're talking about usage externalities and societal benefits: the external costs associated with manufacture and distribution all come along as mental baggage with the words "crystal meth." Your hysterics purposely ignore this in order to make the comparison seem more damning on a purely emotional level.

code_duck 13y ago
The reason I appeal to sets of things is because I find it completely ridiculous that children are routinely prescribed this dangerous stimulant drug for what I consider very flimsy reasons. Most people don't really realize what Adderall is, and American society as a whole seems to assume that doctors and pharmaceutical companies know what they are doing and are trustworthy, despite many indications to the contrary. The pharmacology of "illicit meth" is no different than the pharmacology of legal methamphetamine, other than some contamination. The pharmacology of dextroamphetamine is not so different either, mainly it comes on slightly more slowly and lasts less time. The reason that crystal meth usage is so bad for society is because the drug is truly terrible for you. I am well aware of everything you said, and I disagree that "just a little bit of amphetamines" is helpful for kids to be receiving for ADD. I'm confident that history will see me out on this. If you want to give your children speed, have fun.