Stramash Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 Who wouldn't want to see superhuman footballers running the pitch length in 4 seconds, jumping 20 feet in the air and volleying a ball that breaks the upright post? He's called Lionel Messi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiaranM Posted May 27, 2011 Report Share Posted May 27, 2011 Who wouldn't want to see superhuman footballers running the pitch length in 4 seconds, jumping 20 feet in the air and volleying a ball that breaks the upright post? u gonna start calling football soccer also ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sukhumvit_Farang Posted May 27, 2011 Report Share Posted May 27, 2011 From an article in today's Bangkok Post, this paragraph sums up what, to me, is the real reason why drugs are illegal: "Gen Prayuth is assistant director of the Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc) and the command's 315 special joint operation is in charge of the drug suppression operation funded with a government budget of about 5 billion baht." http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/election/239141/isoc-accused-of-intimidation What better way is there to steal 5 billion baht from taxpayers - legally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodKarma Posted May 27, 2011 Report Share Posted May 27, 2011 I personally don't smoke "it" BTW..but the stigmata tied to Marijuana is very high no pun intended...LOL According to US Federal Law some say all narcotics are not treated equal... below are some interesting facts..... also attached is a link to a US Federal Drug Schedule chart explaining the different narcotic classifications... Marijuana is classified under federal law as a Schedule I controlled substance, defined as a drug with a high potential for abuse, no accepted medical use in the U.S., and unsafe for use even under medical supervision. Other Schedule I drugs include heroin, LSD and PCP. Schedule II drugs -- still considered to have high abuse potential but with accepted medical uses and considered safe for use under medical supervision -- include cocaine, morphine and methamphetamine. That's right, federal law currently classifies marijuana as more dangerous than methamphetamine . It gets stranger still. THC, the component responsible for marijuana's "high" (but not all of its therapeutic benefits) is available as a prescription pill called Marinol. Marinol is classed in Schedule III -- rated as having lower abuse or dependence potential than Schedule I or II drugs. Indeed, the abuse risks of Schedule III drugs are considered so modest that your doctor can phone in a prescription! This is the case even though the American College of Physicians has noted that Marinol's psychoactive effects are "more severe" than marijuana's. This federal classification -- enacted by Congress in 1970 and not based on any scientific or medical assessment -- stands reality on its head. It ignores the massive evidence of marijuana's medical value, and treats marijuana as more dangerous than pure THC, heroin, and meth. In February 2008 the American College of Physicians stated, " ACP urges review of marijuana’s status as a Schedule I controlled substance and its reclassification into a more appropriate schedule, given the scientific evidence regarding marijuana’s safety and efficacy in some clinical conditions." US Drug Classifcation Chart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
English_Bob Posted May 27, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2011 u gonna start calling football soccer also ?? Whereas you and I are bilingual - understanding both English AND American, I need to make things clear for our cousins across the pond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
English_Bob Posted May 27, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2011 He's called Lionel Messi (Gulp!) Bring it on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiaranM Posted May 27, 2011 Report Share Posted May 27, 2011 (Gulp!)Bring it on... should be a cracking game .... and in a one off who knows .... arsenal were a nick ******* bendtner 1st touch from knocking them out !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodKarma Posted May 29, 2011 Report Share Posted May 29, 2011 (edited) Dutch government to ban tourists from cannabis shops - Yahoo news article link AMSTERDAM (Reuters) – The Dutch government on Friday said it would start banning tourists from buying cannabis from "coffee shops" and impose restrictions on Dutch customers by the end of the year. The Netherlands is well known for having one of Europe's most liberal soft drug policies that has made its cannabis shops a popular tourist attraction, particularly in Amsterdam. Backed by the far-right party of anti-immigrant politician Geert Wilders, the coalition government that came into power last year announced plans to curb drug tourism as part of a nationwide program to promote health and fight crime. "In order to tackle the nuisance and criminality associated with coffee shops and drug trafficking, the open-door policy of coffee shops will end," the Dutch health and justice ministers wrote in a letter to the country's parliament on Friday. Under the new rules, only Dutch residents will be able to sign up as members of cannabis shops. Dutch customers will have to sign up for at least a year's membership and each shop would be expected to have only up to 1,500 members, a justice ministry spokesman said. The policy will roll out in the southern provinces of Limburg, Noord Brabant and Zeeland by the end of the year and the rest of the country next year, the spokesman said. Amsterdam, home to about 220 coffee shops, is already in the process of closing some in its red light district. Some officials have resisted the measures, saying they will push the soft drug trade underground. Some Dutch border towns including Maastricht and Terneuzen have already restricted the sale of marijuana to foreigners. "Under the new rules, only Dutch residents will be able to sign up as members of cannabis shops." hey that sign up thing is kinda like how a once 'dry' state Utah used to be here in the states to drink near bear at dance clubs you had to signup to be a member of the private dance club it however since has been changed it was a 1969 Mormon law which was overturned in 2009...However I don't believe visiting foreigners to the US were excluded from being a private member to the club...I don't smoke but totally ludicrous Edited June 4, 2011 by GoodKarma hey this is a chat forum not an office memo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodKarma Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 (edited) A very interesting BBC article about the 40 year War on Drugs. Also attached is a recent 24 page Global Commission study report. A real big WTF? is that more than 34,000 people have died in drug related deaths in Mexico since 2006. Global war on drugs 'has failed' say former leaders -BBC Global Commission Report on Drug Policy go read the article.... Edited June 4, 2011 by GoodKarma how bout them kibble n bits.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stramash Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 you really need to edit these posts mate - not just copy and paste with all the bits in it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodKarma Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 you really need to edit these posts mate - not just copy and paste with all the bits in it! Dude, don't get your feathers all in a rough... have a beer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazel Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 Until they stop using harmful chemicals e.g. toxic toilet cleaning elements etc to produce drugs, drugs will always be harmful for the health. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
English_Bob Posted June 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 Until they stop using harmful chemicals e.g. toxic toilet cleaning elements etc to produce drugs, drugs will always be harmful for the health. Those are used to 'cut' the drugs and make a bigger profit. But seeing as tons of drugs are snorted off the top of a toilet cistern, it doesn't make much difference anyway! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazel Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 Toilet cisterns may be dirty but they aren't toxic while the poisons (the profit-increasing purpose you mentioned) used in the drugs are enough to slowly kill the person's brains and health as a whole. I heard insiders' stories that some factories even used powdered plastic. I find this extremely gruesome as I imagine what the powder will do to one's stomach lining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
English_Bob Posted June 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 Toilet cisterns may be dirty but they aren't toxic while the poisons (the profit-increasing purpose you mentioned) used in the drugs are enough to slowly kill the person's brains and health as a whole. I heard insiders' stories that some factories even used powdered plastic. I find this extremely gruesome as I imagine what the powder will do to one's stomach lining. I wasn't exactly being serious, but the tops of toilets have cleaning fluids, urine and faeces - none of which you should be snorting up your nose. For a while they used dog worming powders to cut with coke. There's a whole load of crap the dealers put in to increase their profits. That's why I wonder if legalising would be a good idea. If drugs were legal, they'd have to be regulated to make sure any additives were safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazel Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 If drugs were legal, they'd have to be regulated to make sure any additives were safe. A decade ago, I asked a couple of people who at that time were working in the drug 'industry' the same question, saying that non-toxic ingredients could be used in place of the digusting poisons (and thus be legalized) and only got laughed off. So I never quite know why not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazel Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 Probably the reasons drugs will never get legalized are related to the initial reasons why they get labelled as illicit - probably because even in their purest forms, they are too addictive psychologically and/or physiologically for the benefits to be overrided by their cons. Like for example, meth (or isit cocaine) used to be used as a legal substitute for weaning people off heroine but it turned out that the patients indeed got over heroine but were then addicted to the new drug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stramash Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 Toilet cisterns may be dirty but they aren't toxic while the poisons (the profit-increasing purpose you mentioned) used in the drugs are enough to slowly kill the person's brains and health as a whole. I heard insiders' stories that some factories even used powdered plastic. I find this extremely gruesome as I imagine what the powder will do to one's stomach lining. Am not sure whether you are talking about illicit drugs here, or the 'fake' legal drugs produced in factories in China and India. If illicit drugs, then this is one of the best arguments for certain illicit drugs to be decriminalised and regulated; quality would be controlled thus reducing the danger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stramash Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 Probably the reasons drugs will never get legalized are related to the initial reasons why they get labelled as illicit - probably because even in their purest forms, they are too addictive psychologically and/or physiologically for the benefits to be overrided by their cons. Like for example, meth (or isit cocaine) used to be used as a legal substitute for weaning people off heroine but it turned out that the patients indeed got over heroine but were then addicted to the new drug. Hmmmm; I think here you are confusing 'meth' (methamphetamine) with 'meth' (methadone). As you can see, it's easily done from the shortened versions. Methadone is very addictive, but it is still the opiate substitute of choice for most countries. This may change over coming years; I know there are several research projects looking at less addictive substitutes at the moment but these will take a while to come to general use. There is also naltrexone (which acts as an opioid blocker) and subutex (also a blocker). Switzerland has been very brave in prescribing pharmaceutical heroin itself to addicts where other treatment pathways have failed. This has been highly successful and will hopefully be seen elsewhere. (recent UK trials also had high success rates). And yes, some drugs are very addictive, but not all drugs are. Hallucinogens are not addictive. It's all about education, preparation and self control. The most successful treatment for heroin addiction so far has been ibogaine, which is itself an African hallucinogen, but has produced 'cure' rates of between 70 and 85%, which is miles beyond ANY other 'treatment'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazel Posted June 5, 2011 Report Share Posted June 5, 2011 (edited) The ones I mentioned are illicit drugs, (not fake drugs) which contain cheap and harmful chemicals to increase profits. I must admit I have never been to an illicit drug factory; the use of those gruesome ingredients was told to me to be used in some Malaysian or Indonesian factories by people (who were more than casual, bragging know-it-all teenaged 'runners') who at that time were working in the 'industry' and they expressed their own disgust at it too (behind closed doors, definitely). I can't quite recall which meth it was or if it was cocaine, but one of them, from what I read, was that it was originally used to break the habit of heroine consumption. Halluginogens and the other so-called soft drugs are definitely non-addictive physiologically, but are psychologically. Usually people who get themselves into substance abuse and then psychological addiction have areas of their social lives and emotionality which they have difficulty addressing, thus using drugs and/or alcohol to mask their feelings of inadequancy. By using drugs, they are distracted from their feelings of inadequancy but because they need a continued use of drugs to continue getting away from those feelings, they are increasingly psychologically dependent on the drugs. Or so it is theorised by some mental health scientists. Edited June 5, 2011 by Hazel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stramash Posted June 5, 2011 Report Share Posted June 5, 2011 I can't quite recall which meth it was or if it was cocaine, but one of them, from what I read, was that it was originally used to break the habit of heroine consumption. Halluginogens and the other so-called soft drugs are definitely non-addictive physiologically, but are psychologically. Usually people who get themselves into substance abuse and then psychological addiction have areas of their social lives and emotionality which they have difficulty addressing, thus using drugs and/or alcohol to mask their feelings of inadequancy. By using drugs, they are distracted from their feelings of inadequancy but because they need a continued use of drugs to continue getting away from those feelings, they are increasingly psychologically dependent on the drugs. Or so it is theorised by some mental health scientists. It was, and is, methadone. You could argue that most things have some level of psychological addiction; sport, chocolate, etc etc You made a good point that many people use drugs to cope with areas of their lives that they have difficulty coping with, then you blew it with the 'feelings of inadequacy' comment. Certainly it is not a widely accepted viewpoint within the addictions field that this is a common reason for any form of addiction. But when people have any sort of problems they have difficulty with, it is the physiologically dependent drugs they turn to; heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine etc. Hallucinogens are a recreational drug and although one could develop a very mild psychological 'addiction' to them (though I would hesitate to use that word) it is akin to the 'addiction' to chocolate, sport etc mentioned at the start. And in fact, hallucinogens can often be a very useful tool for coping with issues in your life (I refer back to ibogaine being the most effective opiate treatment). You could also look at the use of MDMA to treat PTSD which seems to have a growing body of evidence to support it. To move the whole debate on drugs forward, there has to be an established differentiation between 'high harm' and 'low harm' substances. Only when this is established can countries begin to move towards sensible drugs policies; targeting resources on the high end producers and suppliers of drugs like methampehtamine, cocaine and heroin and bringing in regulation and decriminalisation of the low end substances such as cannabis, MDMA and hallucinogens. Statistically, you are more likely to die riding a horse than taking an MDMA tablet. Finally; on the " it is theorised by some mental health scientists" comment; the problem with theories is that is all they are until they are evidenced. And "some" could mean 3 out of 3,000,000. Theorists tend to live in their own wee world and have little knowledge of street level reality. And the problem with the vast majority of the mental health field is that they have little true understanding of the addictions field, and can in fact often be as guilty as the tabloid media of promoting a narrow and stigma inducing focus on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazel Posted June 5, 2011 Report Share Posted June 5, 2011 How about those studies which show laboratory rats have long-term brain defects after being fed drugs... Surely in its purest form, drugs still retain an element of ill-health effects... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazel Posted June 5, 2011 Report Share Posted June 5, 2011 You made a good point that many people use drugs to cope with areas of their lives that they have difficulty coping with, then you blew it with the 'feelings of inadequacy' comment. At least to me, it appears that people have difficulty coping often because they do not feel sufficiently adequate about their own self and thus in their ability to work around adverse situations without the use of mind-altering drugs. Be it self esteem, feelings of security and etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stramash Posted June 5, 2011 Report Share Posted June 5, 2011 (edited) How about those studies which show laboratory rats have long-term brain defects after being fed drugs... Surely in its purest form, drugs still retain an element of ill-health effects... Which is why I used the terms 'low harm' and 'high harm' rather than 'harmful' and 'harmless'. There is no completely harmless substance; it is about weighing up the risks and benefits and being educated about harm reduction, toxicity etc. Again I refer you to the fact that MDMA is less likely to produce a fatality than riding a horse. Edited June 5, 2011 by Stramash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stramash Posted June 5, 2011 Report Share Posted June 5, 2011 At least to me, it appears that people have difficulty coping often because they do not feel sufficiently adequate about their own self and thus in their ability to work around adverse situations without the use of mind-altering drugs. Be it self esteem, feelings of security and etc. Yes, but these are not the primary reasons for their use of drugs. The low self esteem etc is usually a symptom of a more underlying cause such as childhood abuse, bereavement etc. There are also social issues to consider; social exclusion (poverty, unemployment) is very often the initial route into drug use as a form of escapism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now