EMS addiction

So tell me, then (and this argument pertains to mary-j and all the other drugs that, let's face it, drugees, want legalized)


Why is MDMA better then any of the commercially available, legal, and arguably safer, alternatives already out, to treat PTSD and other psych related ailments?
 
Linuss said:
(and this argument pertains to mary-j and all the other drugs that, let's face it, drugees, want legalized)
Click to expand...

People who have been drugged, as contrasted with those who do the drugging? Dragees?

Now that I've clawed my way back up to my usual level of snideness, that argument only pertains to the legalization of marijuana and other drugs for medical purposes. I believe the OP is considering criminalization in a more general sense. This will end poorly.

OP, what are you trying to get out of this thread? It's fairly clear that even if posters here had interesting anecdotes, they're not likely to share them in public. If you're simply trying to encourage productive discussion and debate, you'll need to find a more conducive forum.
 
Linuss said:
So tell me, then (and this argument pertains to mary-j and all the other drugs that, let's face it, drugees, want legalized)


Why is MDMA better then any of the commercially available, legal, and arguably safer, alternatives already out, to treat PTSD and other psych related ailments?
Click to expand...
Its way more fun.

I really don't think MDMA should be legalized. Most people would abuse it, they just don't have the intelligence or self control to know when to stop.

That said, the speed limit is something most people should obey. If you feel you can handle the risk, drive faster. You'll arrive at the destination quicker, but you are responsible for the outcome.

MrConspiracy said:
People who have been drugged, as contrasted with those who do the drugging? Dragees?

Now that I've clawed my way back up to my usual level of snideness, that argument only pertains to the legalization of marijuana and other drugs for medical purposes. I believe the OP is considering criminalization in a more general sense. This will end poorly.

OP, what are you trying to get out of this thread? It's fairly clear that even if posters here had interesting anecdotes, they're not likely to share them in public. If you're simply trying to encourage productive discussion and debate, you'll need to find a more conducive forum.
Click to expand...

Out of this thread I was just looking for entertainment!

I figured people wouldn't post much up because they haven't remained anonymous and pretty much can't, and I was right. Either that or nobody on here has anything much to say about the topic.
 
Or the fact that these types of threads usually end up with somebody becoming the focus of my complete and undivided attention.
 
Like I said, I have written volumes on it here, in numerous threads.

Sometimes in reference to THC, but no matter what street drug is selected, the argument is still the same.

Caffeine is my drug of choice.

Alcohol in limited quantities on social occasions.

Never had the desire or need to try anything else. If I did I would take a hard look at what was driving such a decision and remove it, surgically if there was no other way.

Not out of some moral conviction, but because I value my mental faculties and dexterity very highly and anything that would diminish them has always been in contra to my goals.
 
Veneficus said:
Not out of some moral conviction, but because I value my mental faculties and dexterity very highly and anything that would diminish them has always been in contra to my goals.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the conclusion Feynman eventually came to. Admirable, sort of.

Tone said:
I figured people wouldn't post much up because they haven't remained anonymous and pretty much can't, and I was right. Either that or nobody on here has anything much to say about the topic.
Click to expand...

Mostly the latter. Though you're right in that this is the most identifiable of my names.

Tone said:
Out of this thread I was just looking for entertainment!
Click to expand...
And this one, too?
Shine on, you crazy diamond.
 
Veneficus said:
Like I said, I have written volumes on it here, in numerous threads.

Sometimes in reference to THC, but no matter what street drug is selected, the argument is still the same.

Caffeine is my drug of choice.

Alcohol in limited quantities on social occasions.

Never had the desire or need to try anything else. If I did I would take a hard look at what was driving such a decision and remove it, surgically if there was no other way.

Not out of some moral conviction, but because I value my mental faculties and dexterity very highly and anything that would diminish them has always been in contra to my goals.
Click to expand...
this is an assumption, you wont know unless you try.



Dr. Shulgin would tell you to be more open minded!


I really hope you know who he is......
 
Tone said:
The whole PTSD and incident debriefing really is a joke. If anyone fell into some serious addictions/ abuse issues, at least the system I know would probably just ridicule them and gossip behind their back about it.


Does anyone on here have a supportive addictions program in their workplace?
Click to expand...

We have a debriefing system of peer support and professional counseling available to employees of the service, as well as students and observers riding with the service. I've come into contact with it a few times because the peer support representatives get called out automatically after you've been to a nasty job, and they bring cookies which is always good. After that chat you can elect to talk further with them or professionals from the Victorian Ambulance Counseling Unit, all confidentially of course and they have a 24 hour support line. VACU resources are also available whether or not the complaint is directly related to ambulance work, and I'm sure addiction is part of that. How it would work if you were nicking drugs out of the DD locker, I'm not sure.

I think compared to many other services, Victoria does it really well, although I'm sure it has its faults as does everything. I never heard a paramedic complain about peer support, and they complain about pretty much everything else, so that's certainly in its favour.

Linuss said:
Right... the DEA is in it purely for political gain and not because it's a dangerous drug.



Patient, 3 weeks ago, dead, 108* temp. E.
Click to expand...

People die of heroin overdoses all the time. Yet its a perfectly safe drug if you know how much you're taking. Far better for you than alcohol in both the long and short term, aside from its far greater addiction potential. The fact that people die from misusing it does not prove that it is, in itself, dangerous. And it should not stop medical authorities from using it in a therapeutic sense if it is properly* indicated.

(*I agree with you completely about the therapeutic mary-J legalisation. Its amazing how many people with long greasy hair and tie-dyed Phish t-shirts suffer from chronic pain, anxiety or phantom cancers. That said though, if THC has a genuine therapeutic role to play then it should be available with similar restrictions to other drugs of dependence in a conventional route of admin, ie not rolling a joint and getting waster with your mates, in a pharmo pure form.)

Nor does the fact that its illegal make it inherently dangerous. The fact that its illegal only proves that the drug was associated at some stage, in some way with real or perceived damage to society. That doesn't mean that the drug is inherently dangerous. Heroin is used extensively as a very affective analgesic in the UK, yet its recreational use is still heavily restricted. Perhaps you could apply the same argument to MDMA. I'm not for it, I'm just saying don't necessarily write off the compound itself because it gets misused by certain sections of the population.
 
Tone said:
this is an assumption, you wont know unless you try.



Dr. Shulgin would tell you to be more open minded!


I really hope you know who he is......
Click to expand...

I won't know if a pharmaceutical agent has more positive effects than negative effects unless I try it? (I have no intention on self experimenting with anticancer or antiviral medications prior to being Dxed with either)

Will this somehow translate to a positive risk benefit analysis for other patients.

I took the time to look up Dr. Shulgin. It seems to me he was advocating for the product he and his friends was using. Not exactly unbiased scientific research. It would be like accepting research from a drug company marketing director.

His own research demonstrates there are hundreds of chemical analogs all of which have a different effect on different people under different circumstances. That is neither accurate or precise enough to treat masses of patients. it is basically a very devastating shot in the dark trying to hit a moving target. even the analog that works for 1 patient one day may not work the next.

What it does actually demonstrate is that having a medical practicioner develop individualized medications for an extremely small population who was preselected may lead to better treatment of those individuals. But we don't need MDMA to tell us that.

Do you think that a patient who self diagnosis, self prescribes, and self dispenses would not be happy with their treatment, even if it was just symptomatic? Once this person becomes addicted or dependant would they report or even try potentially safer medications? Would those medications have any effect after physical or psychological dependence?

Meclin,

What you mentioned about heroine was exactly the argument successfuly used to legalize methadone both in the US and EU. But there is evidence that the benefit can outweigh risks in legitimate medical populations (listed in my prior post)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top