Nutt on drugs classification - alcohol worse than heroin
01 November 2010, 06:45 PM
#31
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well you haven't proven what I said was nonsense at all. I can have a beer and it wont kill me, I can have 5 beers and it wont kill me or make me an addict.
1 shot of heroin could kill me or make me an addict, 5 shots of heroin would definitely kill me due to causing an overdose.
Alcohol addiction takes a hell of a lot of alcohol abuse to make you addicted over a period of time. Heroin is extremely addictive and can be hooked from one shot and it's quite possible to be killed from one shot through an initial overdose.
Heroin is far more dangerous than alcohol on that basis, I can't see how there is any argument to say it's not.
1 shot of heroin could kill me or make me an addict, 5 shots of heroin would definitely kill me due to causing an overdose.
Alcohol addiction takes a hell of a lot of alcohol abuse to make you addicted over a period of time. Heroin is extremely addictive and can be hooked from one shot and it's quite possible to be killed from one shot through an initial overdose.
Heroin is far more dangerous than alcohol on that basis, I can't see how there is any argument to say it's not.
01 November 2010, 07:59 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The yorkshire dales - best roads in the UK
Posts: 3,311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well you haven't proven what I said was nonsense at all. I can have a beer and it wont kill me, I can have 5 beers and it wont kill me or make me an addict.
1 shot of heroin could kill me or make me an addict, 5 shots of heroin would definitely kill me due to causing an overdose.
Alcohol addiction takes a hell of a lot of alcohol abuse to make you addicted over a period of time. Heroin is extremely addictive and can be hooked from one shot and it's quite possible to be killed from one shot through an initial overdose.
Heroin is far more dangerous than alcohol on that basis, I can't see how there is any argument to say it's not.
1 shot of heroin could kill me or make me an addict, 5 shots of heroin would definitely kill me due to causing an overdose.
Alcohol addiction takes a hell of a lot of alcohol abuse to make you addicted over a period of time. Heroin is extremely addictive and can be hooked from one shot and it's quite possible to be killed from one shot through an initial overdose.
Heroin is far more dangerous than alcohol on that basis, I can't see how there is any argument to say it's not.
Yes but you don't take 5 shots of gear just like you don't drink 50 pints of lager in one go. You can't compare it like that.
I watched most of my mates become junkies, most were hooked within 6 to 8 weeks, as soon as the physical side of the drug starts to take hold your hooked. It took 10 years for most of them to kick the habit but they did in the end.
My old boss was a full on drinker, he went to rehab several times but could not stop. He's dead now. The ex junkies are all married and doing fine.
01 November 2010, 08:12 PM
#34
Guest
Posts: n/a
*IF* it was free, it would only be because the gov. were using tax payers money to make it free. Two things. 1) NO WAY would any gov. stay in power if they were using tax payers money to subsidise peoples narcotics habits. 2) The gov. would not provide it for free anyway, they'd maybe ensure it was *pure* but they'd tax it to death. So we'd be back to the current situation where smack-heads would be robbing and mugging to pay for it and there'd be suppliers of 'cut price' heroin for those that couldn't afford the *good* stuff. Oh, just like now. A bunch of criminals would get into the act ... 
Dave
01 November 2010, 08:12 PM
#35
Well you haven't proven what I said was nonsense at all. I can have a beer and it wont kill me, I can have 5 beers and it wont kill me or make me an addict.
1 shot of heroin could kill me or make me an addict, 5 shots of heroin would definitely kill me due to causing an overdose.
Alcohol addiction takes a hell of a lot of alcohol abuse to make you addicted over a period of time. Heroin is extremely addictive and can be hooked from one shot and it's quite possible to be killed from one shot through an initial overdose.
Heroin is far more dangerous than alcohol on that basis, I can't see how there is any argument to say it's not.
1 shot of heroin could kill me or make me an addict, 5 shots of heroin would definitely kill me due to causing an overdose.
Alcohol addiction takes a hell of a lot of alcohol abuse to make you addicted over a period of time. Heroin is extremely addictive and can be hooked from one shot and it's quite possible to be killed from one shot through an initial overdose.
Heroin is far more dangerous than alcohol on that basis, I can't see how there is any argument to say it's not.
01 November 2010, 08:23 PM
#36
Ummm. Why would it be free? Or have you been smoking something and are having a fantasy ... ? *IF* it was free, it would only be because the gov. were using tax payers money to make it free. Two things. 1) NO WAY would any gov. stay in power if they were using tax payers money to subsidise peoples narcotics habits. 2) The gov. would not provide it for free anyway, they'd maybe ensure it was *pure* but they'd tax it to death. So we'd be back to the current situation where smack-heads would be robbing and mugging to pay for it and there'd be suppliers of 'cut price' heroin for those that couldn't afford the *good* stuff. Oh, just like now. A bunch of criminals would get into the act ...
Dave
*IF* it was free, it would only be because the gov. were using tax payers money to make it free. Two things. 1) NO WAY would any gov. stay in power if they were using tax payers money to subsidise peoples narcotics habits. 2) The gov. would not provide it for free anyway, they'd maybe ensure it was *pure* but they'd tax it to death. So we'd be back to the current situation where smack-heads would be robbing and mugging to pay for it and there'd be suppliers of 'cut price' heroin for those that couldn't afford the *good* stuff. Oh, just like now. A bunch of criminals would get into the act ... Dave
Tax payers money being used to provide addicts with a FREE legal, safe fix.
There is also a black market for methadone, which is as addictive as heroin.
01 November 2010, 08:44 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But isn't Heroin pretty cheap bought at cost price? Main cost would be in refining/cleaning it I suppose.
If it was provided for free or close to cost then I presume that money saved in lower crimes rates, policing etc would far exceed cost of provision. But I do think this is cloud cuckoo land while the Daily Mail is still around
PS. Why is Methadone better than medical Heroin for addicts? (genuine question).
If it was provided for free or close to cost then I presume that money saved in lower crimes rates, policing etc would far exceed cost of provision. But I do think this is cloud cuckoo land while the Daily Mail is still around
PS. Why is Methadone better than medical Heroin for addicts? (genuine question).
Last edited by David Lock; 01 November 2010 at 08:48 PM.
01 November 2010, 10:02 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes but you don't take 5 shots of gear just like you don't drink 50 pints of lager in one go. You can't compare it like that.
I watched most of my mates become junkies, most were hooked within 6 to 8 weeks, as soon as the physical side of the drug starts to take hold your hooked. It took 10 years for most of them to kick the habit but they did in the end.
My old boss was a full on drinker, he went to rehab several times but could not stop. He's dead now. The ex junkies are all married and doing fine.
I watched most of my mates become junkies, most were hooked within 6 to 8 weeks, as soon as the physical side of the drug starts to take hold your hooked. It took 10 years for most of them to kick the habit but they did in the end.
My old boss was a full on drinker, he went to rehab several times but could not stop. He's dead now. The ex junkies are all married and doing fine.
Most of the people i know from 16 to 40 almost all of them have a little extra pep up at the weekends, wether it weed, coke or pills!
Most of them lead a normal life and earn good money, most alkies are fcuked up and cant do **** when theyve had a drink!
My fcukin area manger has the odd line at weekend and he is no idiot, junky or smack head!
Most people have outdated pre conceptions about "drugs": i.e they are bad, end of.
Thats bollocks and the truth would be out if labour didnt start sacking anyone who dared tell the truth or go against the draconian policies of this country.
Look at portugal for the modern way to do things!
01 November 2010, 10:05 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ummm. Why would it be free? Or have you been smoking something and are having a fantasy ... ? *IF* it was free, it would only be because the gov. were using tax payers money to make it free. Two things. 1) NO WAY would any gov. stay in power if they were using tax payers money to subsidise peoples narcotics habits. 2) The gov. would not provide it for free anyway, they'd maybe ensure it was *pure* but they'd tax it to death. So we'd be back to the current situation where smack-heads would be robbing and mugging to pay for it and there'd be suppliers of 'cut price' heroin for those that couldn't afford the *good* stuff. Oh, just like now. A bunch of criminals would get into the act ...
Dave
*IF* it was free, it would only be because the gov. were using tax payers money to make it free. Two things. 1) NO WAY would any gov. stay in power if they were using tax payers money to subsidise peoples narcotics habits. 2) The gov. would not provide it for free anyway, they'd maybe ensure it was *pure* but they'd tax it to death. So we'd be back to the current situation where smack-heads would be robbing and mugging to pay for it and there'd be suppliers of 'cut price' heroin for those that couldn't afford the *good* stuff. Oh, just like now. A bunch of criminals would get into the act ... Dave
01 November 2010, 10:09 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well you haven't proven what I said was nonsense at all. I can have a beer and it wont kill me, I can have 5 beers and it wont kill me or make me an addict.
1 shot of heroin could kill me or make me an addict, 5 shots of heroin would definitely kill me due to causing an overdose.
Alcohol addiction takes a hell of a lot of alcohol abuse to make you addicted over a period of time. Heroin is extremely addictive and can be hooked from one shot and it's quite possible to be killed from one shot through an initial overdose.
Heroin is far more dangerous than alcohol on that basis, I can't see how there is any argument to say it's not.
1 shot of heroin could kill me or make me an addict, 5 shots of heroin would definitely kill me due to causing an overdose.
Alcohol addiction takes a hell of a lot of alcohol abuse to make you addicted over a period of time. Heroin is extremely addictive and can be hooked from one shot and it's quite possible to be killed from one shot through an initial overdose.
Heroin is far more dangerous than alcohol on that basis, I can't see how there is any argument to say it's not.
01 November 2010, 10:44 PM
#43
Guest
Posts: n/a
I smoked weed heavily for 10 years (mostly skunk/super skunk) and looking back it was the worst thing I ever did and massively regret it now. I was around all sorts of dealers and low lifes. You might grow up one day and realise drugs **** you up big time, yes even weed. You just don't realise it until you've stopped doing them.
01 November 2010, 11:20 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes but you don't take 5 shots of gear just like you don't drink 50 pints of lager in one go. You can't compare it like that.
I watched most of my mates become junkies, most were hooked within 6 to 8 weeks, as soon as the physical side of the drug starts to take hold your hooked. It took 10 years for most of them to kick the habit but they did in the end.
My old boss was a full on drinker, he went to rehab several times but could not stop. He's dead now. The ex junkies are all married and doing fine.
I watched most of my mates become junkies, most were hooked within 6 to 8 weeks, as soon as the physical side of the drug starts to take hold your hooked. It took 10 years for most of them to kick the habit but they did in the end.
My old boss was a full on drinker, he went to rehab several times but could not stop. He's dead now. The ex junkies are all married and doing fine.
I have no idea if she's still alive, I couldn't cope with it all.
01 November 2010, 11:41 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well you haven't proven what I said was nonsense at all. I can have a beer and it wont kill me, I can have 5 beers and it wont kill me or make me an addict.
1 shot of heroin could kill me or make me an addict, 5 shots of heroin would definitely kill me due to causing an overdose.
Alcohol addiction takes a hell of a lot of alcohol abuse to make you addicted over a period of time. Heroin is extremely addictive and can be hooked from one shot and it's quite possible to be killed from one shot through an initial overdose.
Heroin is far more dangerous than alcohol on that basis, I can't see how there is any argument to say it's not.
1 shot of heroin could kill me or make me an addict, 5 shots of heroin would definitely kill me due to causing an overdose.
Alcohol addiction takes a hell of a lot of alcohol abuse to make you addicted over a period of time. Heroin is extremely addictive and can be hooked from one shot and it's quite possible to be killed from one shot through an initial overdose.
Heroin is far more dangerous than alcohol on that basis, I can't see how there is any argument to say it's not.
What you are totally omitting from your argument is that one shot of heroin or similar can be very dangerous because the end user has NO CLUE what the dosage is. Of course the uncontrolled nature can make it very dangerous - it could be 1% pure or 100% pure.
There are examples of people drinking tampered 'punches' at parties where pure alcohol has been added - to very detrimental effect. Not common, but it has happened.
It is not the make the point that alcohol is very toxic (although it is) but that alcohol that you drink comes in very controlled and measured doses.
So you argument is specious as it is an argument to dosage rather than toxicity.
02 November 2010, 12:06 AM
#48
Guest
Posts: n/a
Trout I can't disagree with your points, however the initial argument/statement from Mr Nutt is about heroin vs alcohol as the public knows it, not alcohol in it's pure form which is not sold to the public for consumption. i.e. what is available in public via pubs/bars and shops etc is what you have to go on vs the nature of heroin.
Pure alcohol vs pure heroin is a different argument.
In fact this part of the article really backs up my argument as i'm talking about the individual:
So his argument is based on the risk to society as alcohol is the most widely used, individually Heroin is the most dangerous which is what i've been trying to point out. Someone on here in his replies is still arguing that Heroin is not the most dangerous to the individual which the article does not back up.
Pure alcohol vs pure heroin is a different argument.
In fact this part of the article really backs up my argument as i'm talking about the individual:
The modelling exercise concluded that heroin, crack and methylamphetamine, also known as crystal meth, were the most harmful drugs to individuals, but alcohol, heroin and crack cocaine were the most harmful to society.
02 November 2010, 12:11 AM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 9,368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For about 20 minutes until it wears off, then its time to scurry off to the bogs to repeat the whole ridiculous process before the paranoia sets in.
The favoured topic of conversation? Coke. How much they've done, where they got it from, how good it is and the appropriate time to shovel more up their nose. Its all they bloody talk about
Easily the most tedious people I have ever had the misfortune to meet.
astraboy.
02 November 2010, 12:11 AM
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Anyway, maybe the Prof. is setting the scene for his own financial gain? As if, I hear you ask!! Well, take a look at ... http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...n-3-years.html ... **
"... A SUBSTANCE said to give the feeling of booze without the health risks is being developed by controversial ex Government drugs tsar Professor David Nutt.
The solution is added to liquid. It is claimed anyone using it will get the alcohol high without the hangover or deadly liver damage.
There is even an antidote which would allow a user to DRIVE home after taking it. ..."
So, let me see. Alcohol becomes demonised as the most lethal of *drugs*. Calls for its ban/prohibition etc. Threats of civil war in the country if it is banned. But wait, lets give old Nutt job's synthetic booze a go. Hey, solves all the problems! Thanks Prof. Saved the day (and increased your bank balance by a gazillion squids!).
Dave
** - nabbed from a comment after one of the blogs I read on this.
02 November 2010, 01:35 AM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One drink could kill and there are plenty of examples of it happening.
What you are totally omitting from your argument is that one shot of heroin or similar can be very dangerous because the end user has NO CLUE what the dosage is. Of course the uncontrolled nature can make it very dangerous - it could be 1% pure or 100% pure.
There are examples of people drinking tampered 'punches' at parties where pure alcohol has been added - to very detrimental effect. Not common, but it has happened.
It is not the make the point that alcohol is very toxic (although it is) but that alcohol that you drink comes in very controlled and measured doses.
So you argument is specious as it is an argument to dosage rather than toxicity.
What you are totally omitting from your argument is that one shot of heroin or similar can be very dangerous because the end user has NO CLUE what the dosage is. Of course the uncontrolled nature can make it very dangerous - it could be 1% pure or 100% pure.
There are examples of people drinking tampered 'punches' at parties where pure alcohol has been added - to very detrimental effect. Not common, but it has happened.
It is not the make the point that alcohol is very toxic (although it is) but that alcohol that you drink comes in very controlled and measured doses.
So you argument is specious as it is an argument to dosage rather than toxicity.
Drugs like meth, heroin are way more addictive than booze.
The social aspects of being a meth-head are terrifying. It basically turns people into Zombies living on the very fringes of society, who don't work, don't contribute, just take drugs.
02 November 2010, 01:52 AM
#52
Your missing the point about the social aspects though Trout with your blinkered focus on the biological facts.
Drugs like meth, heroin are way more addictive than booze.
The social aspects of being a meth-head are terrifying. It basically turns people into Zombies living on the very fringes of society, who don't work, don't contribute, just take drugs.
Drugs like meth, heroin are way more addictive than booze.
The social aspects of being a meth-head are terrifying. It basically turns people into Zombies living on the very fringes of society, who don't work, don't contribute, just take drugs.
As a general rule though, most people seem to be able to moderate their intake of alcohol, and not cause any problems along the way, I'm not sure the same could be said for the majority of hard drug users. By that, I'm not talking about those who like the odd E or line of coke.
02 November 2010, 02:00 AM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In fairness the social aspects of people who abuse alcohol can be equally disturbing. Some people cannot function at all without a drink and there will be a fair amount of people out there that can't sustain a job and probably any meaningful relationship because of alcohol.
As a general rule though, most people seem to be able to moderate their intake of alcohol, and not cause any problems along the way, I'm not sure the same could be said for the majority of hard drug users. By that, I'm not talking about those who like the odd E or line of coke.
As a general rule though, most people seem to be able to moderate their intake of alcohol, and not cause any problems along the way, I'm not sure the same could be said for the majority of hard drug users. By that, I'm not talking about those who like the odd E or line of coke.
Most don't though.
Drugs like meth though are virtually all or nothing.
You don't really get casual meth-heads, it's just so easy to get addicted. It takes dedication and time to become a fully fledged alcoholic otoh.
02 November 2010, 11:18 AM
#55
Whether it takes 6 hours or 6 months for the habit to form, or for death to occure, the fact is they are all either, psycologically or physically adictive. Should you choose to abuse them.
Both have fairly equal effect on society across the whole range. It probably also cost more to keep a dying alcoholic alive for as long as possible, than it does to pay for everything the junkie thieved in his 'career'.
You either end up in hospital with a p1ss bag and tubes hanging out of every orifice, slowly and painfully wasting away. Or your found dead in a corner somewhere, covered in bof with a needle in your arm.
Last edited by Glowplug; 02 November 2010 at 11:27 AM.
02 November 2010, 11:23 AM
#56
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 3,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guess first person evidence doesn't count?
Also, interesting, in light of this study, that the statement was made 80% of those there were there because of drugs. Not drink, drugs and they were all repeat offenders knocking off cars etc.
5t.
02 November 2010, 11:27 AM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frankly alcohol, heroin, crystal meth, and crack all cause serious problems and in reality they should all be illegal. I can well believe that Alcohol is more dangerous to society as a whole than cocaine, Ecstacy, weed, methadrone,, benzo fury 5IAI, MDAI, Dimethocaine, NRG1 NRG2 and Kryptonite. The hugely increaseing list of drugs available does indicate a serious problem with our society and perhaps understanding why the UK loves drugs so much as a nation will be a better way to deal witht he problems than argue about which drug is the worse for you.
02 November 2010, 11:48 AM
#58
That's my point. It would NOT be free, just a controlled dose.
It would be free. Like those that get it free now. Who picks up the cost of councilling, treatment, medication etc for the alcohol addict. The same people that pick up the bill for Methadone for the heroin addict.
There would still be smack-heads out after cheap H thus there would still be crime as there is now!
Yes, as above, there will still be abusers and they will be treated. With either a free controlled dose, or councilling and treatment etc.
Anyway, maybe the Prof. is setting the scene for his own financial gain? As if, I hear you ask!! Well, take a look at ... http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...n-3-years.html ... **
"... A SUBSTANCE said to give the feeling of booze without the health risks is being developed by controversial ex Government drugs tsar Professor David Nutt.
The solution is added to liquid. It is claimed anyone using it will get the alcohol high without the hangover or deadly liver damage.
There is even an antidote which would allow a user to DRIVE home after taking it. ..."
So, let me see. Alcohol becomes demonised as the most lethal of *drugs*. Calls for its ban/prohibition etc. Threats of civil war in the country if it is banned. But wait, lets give old Nutt job's synthetic booze a go. Hey, solves all the problems! Thanks Prof. Saved the day (and increased your bank balance by a gazillion squids!).
Dave
** - nabbed from a comment after one of the blogs I read on this.
It would be free. Like those that get it free now. Who picks up the cost of councilling, treatment, medication etc for the alcohol addict. The same people that pick up the bill for Methadone for the heroin addict.
There would still be smack-heads out after cheap H thus there would still be crime as there is now!
Yes, as above, there will still be abusers and they will be treated. With either a free controlled dose, or councilling and treatment etc.
Anyway, maybe the Prof. is setting the scene for his own financial gain? As if, I hear you ask!! Well, take a look at ... http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...n-3-years.html ... **
"... A SUBSTANCE said to give the feeling of booze without the health risks is being developed by controversial ex Government drugs tsar Professor David Nutt.
The solution is added to liquid. It is claimed anyone using it will get the alcohol high without the hangover or deadly liver damage.
There is even an antidote which would allow a user to DRIVE home after taking it. ..."
So, let me see. Alcohol becomes demonised as the most lethal of *drugs*. Calls for its ban/prohibition etc. Threats of civil war in the country if it is banned. But wait, lets give old Nutt job's synthetic booze a go. Hey, solves all the problems! Thanks Prof. Saved the day (and increased your bank balance by a gazillion squids!).
Dave
** - nabbed from a comment after one of the blogs I read on this.
02 November 2010, 12:02 PM
#59
Unless of course you watched that Coppers programme last night where smack addled prossie clearly said that the first time she took it she was sick as anything but it was brilliant so she went back for more.
Guess first person evidence doesn't count?
Just like the first time you get p1ssed you mean?? And what did you do?? Oh yeah, went right back and had some more.
Also, interesting, in light of this study, that the statement was made 80% of those there were there because of drugs. Not drink, drugs and they were all repeat offenders knocking off cars etc.
That'll be because, as has already been pointed out, alcoholics have less need to commit crime to support their addiction. Mainly due to the differencies in the drus.
5t.
Guess first person evidence doesn't count?
Just like the first time you get p1ssed you mean?? And what did you do?? Oh yeah, went right back and had some more.
Also, interesting, in light of this study, that the statement was made 80% of those there were there because of drugs. Not drink, drugs and they were all repeat offenders knocking off cars etc.
That'll be because, as has already been pointed out, alcoholics have less need to commit crime to support their addiction. Mainly due to the differencies in the drus.
5t.
Frankly alcohol, heroin, crystal meth, and crack all cause serious problems and in reality they should all be illegal. I can well believe that Alcohol is more dangerous to society as a whole than cocaine, Ecstacy, weed, methadrone,, benzo fury 5IAI, MDAI, Dimethocaine, NRG1 NRG2 and Kryptonite. The hugely increaseing list of drugs available does indicate a serious problem with our society and perhaps understanding why the UK loves drugs so much as a nation will be a better way to deal witht he problems than argue about which drug is the worse for you.
But, yes, i agree.
02 November 2010, 12:20 PM
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just like the first time you get p1ssed you mean?? And what did you do?? Oh yeah, went right back and had some more.