As I said, many users, not everyone. And yes obviously it depends on what kind of drugs we are talking about. The important aspect to stress is that drugs like heroin, cocain/crack and amphetimines are addictive and expensive substances that most users have started on when they are relatively young (25 is typically the mean age of users) and not equipped to afford in the long run. A drug such as cocain may be less circumspect when it comes to this, but on the other hand it for example also causes elevated levels of agression (significantly more than alcohol can) in the user and can therefore also be potentially dangerous to others in this aspect as well. Drug users can easily cause harm to their surroundings for a number of reasons and it's not just a case of them only hurting themselves.london-boy said:
Ecstasy 'reverses' Parkinson's disease
- Thread starter bloodbob
- Start date
bloodbob said:
Yes, but absolutely clean, while what you buy in the streets has loads of junk (chemical waste, to say so) in it. Also, the amount of the agent in the cough medicine was just a fraction of what a usual fix contains.
They also used to put cocaine into Coke in the beginning, remember?
_xxx_ said:
Heh... those were the good times...
ROFL....
i know that for example ex-Yugoslav Army had so called "tank pills", prolly based on amphetamines, which they used during the war and wich allowed for tank crews to be awake for up to 72 hours, without hunger and fully concentrated.
after 72 hours they would swap new crew and send old one to rest....
i know that for example ex-Yugoslav Army had so called "tank pills", prolly based on amphetamines, which they used during the war and wich allowed for tank crews to be awake for up to 72 hours, without hunger and fully concentrated.
after 72 hours they would swap new crew and send old one to rest....
Google 'meth mouth'.bloodbob said:
Quite frankly, the only people I've ever seen defend meth are users.
silence said:
Now now.... that's stretching it.
london-boy said:
heh.... well, thats what i heard, i never tried those pills. but if they are amphetamine _ONLY_ i doubt it.
OTOH, that doesnt change fact they were used is a way i described..... my guess is that military doesnt need speed junkies inside tanks, so i guess its little bit more sophisticated then pure speed...
silence said:
Oh i'm not doubting that they were awake for days on end, but it's far from being nice and wide awake ready to play who-got-the-quickest-reflexes if you know what i mean.
Blitzkrieg
Newcomer
zifnab, it make damage short term memory and attention span but it has no long term negative effects on IQ.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2140
The light users in that article still smoke more than I do, so I am hardly worried. I would also put money on it that my memory is still far better than the avg persons.
I wouldnt have kicked arse in a trivia night not long ago if my memory was supposedly so shot to shit.
Personally I have not had any problems with my memory or attention span(except when high of course and even then its fairly limited.)
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2140
The light users in that article still smoke more than I do, so I am hardly worried. I would also put money on it that my memory is still far better than the avg persons.
I wouldnt have kicked arse in a trivia night not long ago if my memory was supposedly so shot to shit.
Personally I have not had any problems with my memory or attention span(except when high of course and even then its fairly limited.)
Blitzkrieg said:
IQ is a not an accurate measure of intelligence but unfortunately the media and a minority of people in the scientific community still refer to it as such. IQ measurements can at best give you an indicator of analytical thinking abilities, but intelligence encompasses much more than that. I agree that marijuana likely has limited effects in the IQ respect, but then as you mention, it affects short term memory and attention span, which I would say are a vital part of intelligence.
Here's something else you might want to be aware of (taken from Nature, Jan. 2004 - http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v29/n1/full/1300310a.html):
By the way, I'm not saying you've incurred any damage to yourself from what you've done, but unfortunately marijuana seems to have gotten a reputation for being an all thrills drug that has no strings attached and I'm just saying that I would take these effects into consideration if I were you, as they will eventually come into affect with continued use.
Yes so whats that go to do with the meth or heroin or whatever itself. If anything this is a strong argument for the legalistaion of drugs so this isn't a problem._xxx_ said:
The proper medical term is xerostomia some other drugs that can cause it areRussSchultz said:
most anti-histamines.
most Anti-nausantis.
pseudoephedrine
ephedrine
alochol
some blood pressure medicine e.g. clonidine or methyldopa
caffine
barbiturates
diuretics
many antidepressants
most anti-pyscotics
The caffeine, pseudohephedrine , alchohol, that I've been taking the past 20 year hasn't rotted my teeth out.
So, are you a meth user?
So, are you a meth user?
No I'm not a meth users.
I personally rather doubt caffiene ( rather poor stimulant at common doses ) or alcohol ( I believe its action is simply dehydration ) have a great effect in themselves though if you start taking drugs with an anti-cholingeric effects you'll certainly notice cotton mouth. ( the diuriects in general wouldn't have a major effect either )
Now xerostomia won't cause what you call meth mouth directly neither dose meth. It just makes you significantly more suspectable to the problems you assiocate with meth mouth.
There are many preventive measures against these further problems such as improvement general oral hygine. Though what you associate with meth users is a junk and a junky is unlikely to to maintain a normal level of oral hygine let alone anything better regardless of what the cause is( such as say an underling disease ).
I personally rather doubt caffiene ( rather poor stimulant at common doses ) or alcohol ( I believe its action is simply dehydration ) have a great effect in themselves though if you start taking drugs with an anti-cholingeric effects you'll certainly notice cotton mouth. ( the diuriects in general wouldn't have a major effect either )
Now xerostomia won't cause what you call meth mouth directly neither dose meth. It just makes you significantly more suspectable to the problems you assiocate with meth mouth.
There are many preventive measures against these further problems such as improvement general oral hygine. Though what you associate with meth users is a junk and a junky is unlikely to to maintain a normal level of oral hygine let alone anything better regardless of what the cause is( such as say an underling disease ).
Last edited by a moderator:
I refuse to seriously enter a quagmire such as this (yet again), but I do want to step in and show my peoples some support. It's a quagmire, because there will always be that type of person who doesn't think they have to try something, learn about something, or even witness the effects of something before they feel qualified to talk about it. The people are what we know as book people, and i certainly don't mean to imply that they read books. In fact, these are the same types of people on petitions to ban books, or to ban video games, or to ban just well ANYTHING convenient -- even though they have not tried them themselves. Im glad you guys all know a junkie who can scare you away from the occasional pot toke, but... please, just never go into lawmaking, ok? because you don't understand the true meaing of democracy at all.
Of course there are two major categories of illicit drugs that should probably be addressed -- but never will be -- one causes physical dependence, and the other does not. On the latter side, you have Marijuana and LSD, and MDMA if it is pure (but most XTC is cut with speed or coke), and on the other side you have, well, everything else, basically, including alcohol. It's a shame that the ones that shoud be legalized first, won't be. Surely most drugs aren't great for your body and sanity, but what we see is a large amount of brainwashing by our governments, regarding which drugs are ok because they've been grandfathered in and earn lots of tax dollars, and which drugs are not ok because it is still trendy to tell us how we can eat, drink, and fuck.
Finally, I don't mean to cop out by the second paragraph. Even physically addictive drugs are quite awesome in moderation and for every carefully cobbled together pic you can provide of some pitiable crack whore, the kind of person you wouldn't even care about if you had to step over her in the street, you judgmental pricks, yet find convenient to trot out when it's convenient, i can show you a thousand pictures of happy ids who messed around, came up with new ways to think about their world, and moved on to better things than sitting around on the PC, addicted to MMORPGs, pounding coffee and evangelizing. Peace
Of course there are two major categories of illicit drugs that should probably be addressed -- but never will be -- one causes physical dependence, and the other does not. On the latter side, you have Marijuana and LSD, and MDMA if it is pure (but most XTC is cut with speed or coke), and on the other side you have, well, everything else, basically, including alcohol. It's a shame that the ones that shoud be legalized first, won't be. Surely most drugs aren't great for your body and sanity, but what we see is a large amount of brainwashing by our governments, regarding which drugs are ok because they've been grandfathered in and earn lots of tax dollars, and which drugs are not ok because it is still trendy to tell us how we can eat, drink, and fuck.
Finally, I don't mean to cop out by the second paragraph. Even physically addictive drugs are quite awesome in moderation and for every carefully cobbled together pic you can provide of some pitiable crack whore, the kind of person you wouldn't even care about if you had to step over her in the street, you judgmental pricks, yet find convenient to trot out when it's convenient, i can show you a thousand pictures of happy ids who messed around, came up with new ways to think about their world, and moved on to better things than sitting around on the PC, addicted to MMORPGs, pounding coffee and evangelizing. Peace
good post and i agree with you. as long as we have alchohol as legal there is no justification to treat any other drug illegal.... alchoholics are far more dangerous then people that do recreational drugs or smoke pot.... but alchohol is part of society and culture, heck, they even call average american "Joe Sixpack".....
Hashish and MJ have been a part of societies around the world for 6 thousand years or so has opium but not gonna start suggesting opium should be legallised since it can be highly physically addictive. In australia I believe the percent of people who have smoked pot in the last 12 months and are over 14 years of age is something along the lines of 13%. ( I am not part of that 13% )silence said:
According to the US government and I'd suggest many other governments we ( as in the conservative western societies ) live in a liberal democracy where we have minority rights. Clearly 13% is a fairly significant minority shouldn't this minority be granted the right to with a joint and a 6 pack on the weekend?
bloodbob said:
yap, but not "right" ones. as for opium.... its been around ,but....
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/CHING/OPIUM.HTM
interesting read, isnt it....