I'm not sure what we need to do, but if you haven't encountered the epidemic first hand, it's only a matter of time until you do.
http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comic/rat-park/
The gist of it is that yes, rats do get addicted to morphine and prefer it to food, but only if kept in cages.
The rats living in a much less confined space with other rats, allowed to play, nest, have sex and do pretty much all the rat fun things not only did not get addicted to morphine but even waned themselves off of it.
Speaks a lot to the causes which this epidemic is a symptom of and makes me think that addressing it will not be an easy or quick process.
But people still love bringing it up, especially here on HN where people seem to think they know better than the experts on everything to do with medicine.
The problem with opiates (esp in the US) is they ones that are available are too strong and completely unforgiving. Fentanyl is an elephant gun but it's supplanting heroin on streets due to its prevalence (through overuse).
You've got to wonder what a regulated generally-available recreational opiate could do for street safety. It's not just about making sure of the purity, we need help people take the right dose of the right things, so they're not just taking however much of whatever is available.
That, and weaning. I'm sure a lot of these people would prefer not to feel like they do. Quitting opiates cold turkey is not easy.
By comparison I think it would be easier to make a self driving car or automated robot that does most of what a heroin addict does.
Sounds terrible don’t care I’m out of sympathy for addicts in society.
A friend I grew up with just shot himself to death. He was on a TV show, model and had it all going for him..until the night he tried black tar heroin through a needle, off a spoon. An older friend convinced him and four others to try it one night at a wrap party for the TV show. Grew up affluent but drugs immediately nosedived his life. Ended up in and out of jail, losing it mentally, mental institutions, broke every window at his parents house, just living a really rough existence. The part that got me: the older friend who introduced him to it showed up to his funeral.
The other one of the four is on his third strike for heroin, just got his second DUI trying to "live it up" – drugs i.e. heavy drugs, are a game that you do not win.
Fund recovery centers and programs to rehabilitate users and provide them with ongoing assistance so they can get by and stop using. Most addicts who come out of prison say this because they know they will immediately relapse.
I'm sorry, but we don't have to give spaces for people to be hateful - Reddit banning those assholes was the highlight of my week. I'm not trying to claim that these people should just be ignored, but you're conflating very separate problems.
More importantly, the people being affected by the opioid crisis are predominantly not members of these hateful groups, and I'm pretty frustrated you would conflate them in such a way just so you can have an excuse to talk about the loss of a safe space for hateful rhetoric.
*EDIT: After rereading what the poster wrote a few times, I believe they were attempting to claim that the subreddit bans would encourage more people to head to drug use, rather than vice-versa as I originally interpreted it - it's still pretty off-topic though, and again I'm not very sympathetic to people being sad they no longer have a place to be hateful.
Oh my god. I bet you had to stifle tears at this point. It sounds like something you would see in a movie, with the last cut of the scene slowly bringing the bracelet into focus just long enough for you to realize why he was wearing it.
I know a lot of people love capitalism here and I think it works pretty great if you apply it to a lot of markets. But health isn't something that can be regulated by capitalism.
You can buy the new iPhone or you don't. It's a decision. You can make a stupid decision and buy it while you really should feed your kids instead but it's still a decision.
Health issues are not. Nobody decides to have cancer next year because this year things look a bit uncertain at work right now. It just hits you.
Free markets only work when somebody is free to decide.
I think that's the key: shades of grey. At one point I was very seriously alcoholic but pulled myself out of it; I still concede to social situations. It's not a problem, it's a momentary span of blissful negligence followed by a day of sorrow (that I'm fully dreadful of while drunk).
I'm not special in any regard. I was absolutely lucky enough to realize these things internally. Here's the scary thing:
I spent every living weekend at my friends' digs in South Africa, years and years. It took me a long time to learn about their drug habits. The very first friend candidate that I have met in Seattle has guaranteed that he will get me on coke in no time.
It's an epidemic for absolute certainty. I failed to resolve a single friend's addiction and it still haunts me - what am I going to do with thousands of people who are convinced that there is no problem?
Seattle has a big problem. We are telling addicts to come get their fix safely (which I deeply applaud), but are not attempting to understand their motivation.
Is there any charity making an actual difference that I can volunteer at?
Treat me like an idiot, I don’t understand this stuff and I’d like to know more.
* obviously feel free to use a burner account if you’d rather not speak publicly.
It really hit hard with me for some reason, despite never having first hand contact with anyone with this sort of addiction. In particular, a man who was apparently a pentester before having some sort of accident and becoming addicted to prescribed opoids before transitioning onto illegal drugs. It just felt like something that could hit anyone, and not just the standard "junkie" problem.
That's why addiction is a problem. Once the central nervous system is compromised by addictive substances, it's no longer only a matter of personal life choices. It does not matter whether the addiction was started by a leisurely experimentation or by a medicine prescribed by a doctor.
Why. Do. People. End. Up. In. Jail. Seriously this one is beyond my comprehension - they need treatment, not jails filled with hardened criminals, rapists and probably more (and nastier) drugs than on the street.
It costs less to prescribe drugs than to diagnose and treat underlying problems. So the American profit-driven medical system relies heavily on drugs, especially for poorer patients. And drug companies love addictive drugs. So we get lots of opiate-addicted patients.
And then there's the "drugs are evil" mindset, which justifies criminalization. Even preventing pain is too much like having fun. So it's better for addicts to OD than get safe drugs. Because they deserve it, or whatever. They should just suck it up, walk it off, ...
So it goes.
The perverse US health care system with all its regulation has made it so that doctors primary make money by giving away pills.
There were other models where people would basically have subscription to clinics and those would have a intensive to keep you healthy.
The problem is that all alternative models are literally illegal.
Check out this podcast: http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2017/06/christy_ford_ch.htm...
They talk about this book: Ensuring America's Health: The Public Creation of the Corporate Health Care System
2) Give safe drugs to addicts. Anonymously. Offer help, but don't force anything.
In the case of opiods, the most potent forms are stuff like street fentanyl and oxy 80s pulverized. Milligram mistakes in dosages of this stuff are very dangerous.
The iron law leads to a paradox: decriminalizing a substance makes it safer. Obviously it's more complex than that: addicts need access to safe supplies of the substance. But it's still true.
But keeping opiods criminalized is, basically, makework for law enforcement and public safety people, not to mention people with names like El Chapo.
Switzerland and Portugal are having good success with decriminalization and treatment. Juristictions who don't need anything in the way of foreign aid or other cooperation from the USA are in the best position to do this.
Source: Chasing The Scream, a book by Johann Hari.
All you can do in the end is try to keep things contained. They opened special places were junkies could use their drugs so that they wouldn't have to OD on the streets.
You can't fix someone unless they WANT to be fixed.
Another reason to charge more for working in a big city, since smaller rural cities don’t have this problem as much - like the middle of nowhere in Montana versus Seattle.
I wish people were more specific, particularly when reaching an international audience without an innate understanding of places in the US.
or, maybe they got hooked after being perscribed painkillers for an injury
or, maybe they're suffering from some mental illness
or, literally any number of other reasons besides some evil nation flooding the US with drugs and somehow 'forcing' citizens to take them.
The point is, you can choose to go after the suppliers, but the underlying problem is still there. Until that's addressed (mental healthcare, serious punishment for over-perscription, etc), we'll just see a new drug take the place of the old.
The very reason we have capitalism is that we have dynamic system that reacts to feedback and finds or at least moves the system towards a new optimal point given the new circumstances.
If there is a operation that exists free market would make that operation as cheap as possible and weather it is your decision to need the operation or not, you will still get a very cheap operation. For the market is irrelevant why the demand exists, but it will attempt to satisfy that demand and we are all better for it.
So the problem with opioids is about demand.
People should trust doctors to give sound advice regarding their opioid consumption, as they do with many other things. The majority of people don't want to be addicted and are happy to comply with measures.
There are a couple problems, first, the doctors primary earn money by selling stuff thanks to the perverse system of intensives that the modern american health care system produces.
Second, there was a actual problem where doctors in the US, by themselves started to over-issue these drugs, and they still do. That is as much a cultural problem as it is anything else. This has to change.
Third, I think its pretty clear that the distribution and demographics about this issue tell a story that is hard to explain by a general 'evil capitalist' pushing pills on people. It is clear that some communities are dis-proportionally effected and that is a more deterministic factor then the price of the pills.
Fourth, if there were actually free markets people would buy high quality product that does not kill you. People who take it might be addicts but you can be high functioning and your chances of recovery are much better then with this disgusting stuff people are forced to consume because of government regulation.
If your car breaks down there are other means of transportation like getting a Uber, renting a car, carpooling, riding a bicycle or even walking. This is the typical "infinite" possibilities situation where capitalism really blossoms. I personally don't own a car because exactly all of those reasons, so I chose to never have a car that I need to repair. I hate things to maintain.
Now imagine a situation where you are only allowed to go to your work in a car, nothing else. If you don't go to your work you will be fired and you will never find another job again (i.e. dead). And the spare part you need for it to get it working again is only available through one source that for some reason charges about 100 times more than it takes to manufacture the part itself. You are not allowed to have any other car than the one you currently own, not even the same one new.
Now that's how having cancer works in the field of choice.
People choose to live near volcanoes, mountains, oceans. Places where tornadoes are frequent. There's a good reason most people on Earth never saw one.
Though I agree somewhat on most of your points. Actually one of the biggest problems is that nor the legal opioids nor heroin are freely available towards consumers. A lot of people are killed because impurities or more unhealthy alternatives. Again, mixing pure capitalism without the real choice makes things really ugly.
But there's a huge incentive to make money not on the best solution for the patient but based on the largest kickback for the doctor and the biggest profit margins for the industry.
Reference: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/pharmaceutical-executives...
Why blame the pharmaceutical industry. Your practitionners and your patients have a problem.
People take drugs because they are unhappy. Show me a drug addict and I'll show you someone with a mental illness, trauma or severe life problems.
Apparently in the US right now there are lots of people who feel pretty bad about life. I can relate.
But Jewish conspiracy is easier to grasp and deal with.
I'd argue if the U.S. had a health care market closer to Iran or something it would actually be better. Like, I should be able to sell my organs if I want. I should be able to buy weed instead of opiods. And so on... Then look at all the medical doctors graduating. Their numbers haven't changed since the 90s, because then they make more money due to scarcity.
Hope the best for you...
2) 24 I tink
3) free prescription no co-pay! Then off the street about $1 per mg of oxy, online and in bulk I can get it for about $.66 per mg
4) originally from a doctor. Then from my coke dealer. Then from the dark net.
5) I haven't been able to stop for more than a couple days
I agree that blame misses the point and also that doctors need to bear some weight of responsibility when dishing out opioids.
Hope the best for you...
I've tried many different antidepressants. My psychiatrist told me that if the next few medications didn't work, he mentioned that I might want to consider electroshock therapy.
I tried heroin with my brother a few years ago, and I got high of course (so my opinion is admittedly skewed,) but it just gave me a couple precious hours of what I imagine it life could be. I work in fintech, so I have to take drug tests, but I've used it off and on since.
I don't want to be high. I just want a life where I actually want to live, an "aspiration" I've had for years.
Maybe my desires are even more skewed due to having gotten high, and knowing that I will forever have a "high bar" for however good it made me feel, but in general it just feels like the quote says, "It gives you a taste of heaven and drags you down to hell." But I was in hell already.
Have you tried tramadol? Or some SNRIs+low dose opiate or tramadol? Ask your psych for a tramadol script I've found my therapist to be receptive to that as med. I find that effexor helps with withdrawals and tramadol and effexor both helped a lot more than SSRIs for me - the problem is with bipolar it causes cycling
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/19/psycho...
I take milder prescription opiates just for fun on rare occasion. That's percocet these days, codeine back in the day.
Only opportunistically though, if I have some left over from a medical reason or someone offers me some. Even then, it's very infrequently. I currently have around 12 percocets that have been sitting around, untouched, for a couple of months now.
I usually don't feel like just lying around and staring at the TV with my mouth open, hence I don't take them. One day though I'm sure I will feel exactly like doing that, at which point might as well add some opiates to make it quite a bit more enjoyable. I usually like to take 2 or 3 with a moderate amount of alcohol, they have a synergistic effect together.
I first tried it around 17, and that was almost 20 years ago. We're talking relatively few occasions over all that time: 0-2 occasions most years, some years more like 4-6, and rarely if ever 6+. I've never seeked it out on the black market or anything; the cost would not be close to worth it, I think. I don't know how much exactly, but surely several times more than medical, where I paid $10 for 20 pills.
I didn't stop, I just don't feel like doing them, most of the time. I have had issues with addiction to other things in the past, but not with these.
That being said, they are quite mild compared to OxyContin, which I think is what most addicts are taking. (Same substance, oxycodone, but much lower dose.) Never tried that stuff but I bet it is a LOT easier to get into trouble with those.
I first used heroin when I was seventeen in 1972. It was the first time I had tried an opiate. At the time Heroin was pricey at $30 a bag/dose in the Boston area. Around 3 years later, I went to Phoenix where Heroin was $10 a bag. Taking a ride across the border to Nogales lowered the cost to $5. Making approx. $100 a week back then, a habit wasn't possible until I found lower cost drugs. These days I feel happier than I could have imagined. While opiates never really made me happy, They decreased my misery at times. As bad as all this sounds, I thank drug addiction for allowing me to survive until I learned how to live.
2) 16-18, mid thirties now
3) Rarely too much, but when I did lots of heroin I ate less and paid for less other entertainment so I guess it evens out
4) Wherever convenient, usually through my social network
5) I just don't care enough to go to the effort. Nice high, excellent for doing work and being social if I dose reasonably. But other things are nice too. Regarding being social, I can take e.g. oxycodone for multiple days/events in a day, but I cannot take MDMA several times to any useful effect. Regarding work, it's good for long sustained bouts of work as it is easy to gently daydream about problems for any amount of time and it's easy to work for hours because I feel great and free of distractions. The side effects of constipation (I LOVE pooping), appetite loss (I like eating), bad sleep (it's really good for you) and apathy towards sex (bad, except for those unfortunate periods in life where it's good) are all worth considering. Generally, it's difficult to maintain ones quality of life and also do boatloads of opiates, just like anything else. It is very easy to find out oneself doing boatloads, though. Regarding addiction-- Tolerance and withdrawal are not currently considered necessary and sufficient for "addiction." It's considered a behavioral phenomenon. A bad case of the flu is much much worse than a bad period of withdrawal. Regarding the behavioral stuff and desire-- Dealing with unwanted desires is a good skill to have, I guess, and I'm lucky I don't want it very much. It is more effort to do more than it is to do less. But every step into "addiction" is infinitesimal and reversible, and every step out of "addiction" is equally infinitesimal and reversible, though you might notice it more.
1) I had tried just about every other drug, and I felt at that point like they had been unfairly demonized. A high school friend was doing heroin, and so I wrongfully assumed Heroin would fall into the same category. I was pretty young.
2) 14
3) My usual habit for the ten years of my addiction was around 100-150 a day. I simply couldn't find a way to reliably get more money than that.
4) Drug dealers that I knew or in downtown areas. (West Coast)
5) Life was untenable. I was thrown into a detox for one last time and then six months of rehab. It stuck this time, it's difficult to say why.
I was not, as seems to be the common case these days, drawn to opiates after a major surgery or chronic pain. Nor was Fentanyl / overdose rates nearly as bad as they are today.
Hope this helps?
Glad you kicked the habit. A friend of mine did so too, but was left with some very real permanent damage. Hope you got off easier.
Agree with @icebraining on #1...it’s not fair to group all substances into one category.
hope the best for you...
2. early 20s
3. de minimis. $12-20 total for dozens of doses of kratom, shipped usps.
4. internet sellers.
5. define "stop?" i continue to use them irregularly. opioids have a very nasty side effect of bad constipation (silver lining: it's a strong encouragement to eat lots of vegetables), so it's not really something you can just use every day. at least for me, that kind of makes use self-limiting.
also, opioids just aren't that great. they're very effective at killing pain, but if you aren't in pain, you don't notice that. beyond that, the high is imo really subtle and easy to forget about. in contrast, with weed, alcohol, lsd, shrooms, mdma, adderall, whatever, you know you're high during the experience.
2. 22
3. Currently can get a really good quality (lab tested) gram for $50; this is cartel type pricing
4. Doctor, darknet, in person
5. I haven't. I should, most likely. I should let my tolerance go down but I'm so, so scared to be stuck in bed with pain off the charts combined with the temporary depression.
2. 23 to 25
3. $8 for a packet of paracetamol/codiene plus a few dollars for coffee filters, $10 for 10 tramadols
4. Pharmacy for the codiene, friend gets the tramadol online from India
5. I didn't really get what the whole fuss is about, it wasn't that fun, and I know anything harder than those is a dark dark path that I have no interest in travelling down.
Having taken Tramadols and Oxy for pain (back and separate knee surgery), I can't imagine taking it for fun. The pain stops because they put me to sleep and then I feel like an idiot for 12 hours. At least with the Tramadols I can still sort of function, but I fight the doctor if they want to give me Oxy.
2) It was either senior year of highschool or right after, so around 18
3) Varied, but usually it was $30 for an 8mg dilaudid
4) Everyone I knew had at least one dealer for some drug or other, it was possible to get anything just by asking around
5) Got bored of it
These types of policies should be data and analysis questions, not based on politics and world view. Some of them inarguably work better than others.
We need to exit the theater of unfounded opinion when it comes to these things. It's not useful.
I do recognize that cops are just "trying to help", and that no one cares about social workers. Cops are in an advantaged position in the USA because they are relatively well respected by most mainstream members of the population. So the fact that they want to help is good.
But Cops aren't given the right training to deal with medical problems or other problems (ie: Fire hazards. In theory, cops could be the ones to inspect Fire Hazards in buildings, but realistically, its better for Firemen to do it).
There are lots of social work jobs in America. A big problem, a seriously big one... is that we expect Cops to do any job. Erm... no. Have drug specialists deal with the drug problem. Cops really shouldn't shoulder the burden of everything in the country.
-------
Cops should focus on the distribution of drugs. Not on the users of the drugs. The users need treatment, mental treatment that cops do not have the abilities to give.
These drug abusers need nurses and social workers to check up on them every few hours. Not cops.
Why not give them free medical grade heroin, in a safe environment?
* Keeps them off the streets. * They no longer need to resort to crime to fund their addictions. * Besides their appointed time to get their dose, they can lead relatively normal productive lives.
It will save $$$$ and also keep money out of pockets of organised crime.
win:win in my book
Switzerland gives their most hopeless heroin addicts free heroin, and a safe place to use it. [0]
A friend's son was expelled from his US high school for dealing heroin - this was probably 12 years ago. Addicts have to advertise to their friends to be able to afford their habit.
[0] http://www.citizensopposingprohibition.org/resources/swiss-h...
https://www.thecommononline.org/decriminalization-a-love-sto...
On the other hand... Norway has some of the nicest prisons in the world. Worth checking out prisons in Norway if you never heard of how nice they are.
The country with the best drug policy is Portugal which quietly decriminalized all personal amounts and they have one of the lowest OD rate now
A middle ground would be a good solution IMO - some kind of jail-esque treatment center or set wings in existing jails just for drug users where they undergo some sort of treatment/detox program. I daresay in a lot of cases, voluntary treatment isn't going to work, and I suspect a lot of treatment centers out there now are nowhere near as secure as a jail.
Ask the politicians that own large stakes in (or have ties to) corporate-operated prisons, and you'll find your answer.
I had no desire to get high off the pain killers, hell, they didn't even do anything for me in that regard - but I could feel the need to take them. I can easily see how someone without the awareness, willpower and a number of other factors could give in and start down the path of self-destruction. It was a terrifying place for me to be in, and as someone who has responsibly taken prescription opiates for multiple other oral surgeries as well as a septoplasty it was one I never thought possible.
In fact, I don't know anyone who got addicted to opioids due to overprescription, but I know several people who didn't get prescribed opioids they needed because of the fears of overprescription, and thus were left in terrible pain. I don't know how you draw the line, but I think it's evil to leave people in pain because you're afraid they'll use the drugs for fun. Most people who take opioids do not get addicted.
A very real factor of this crisis is the pain aversion, people working in dentistry have higher rates of depression and suicide due to the psychological effects of inflicting pain on people (unless the dentist is played by steve martin ofc) and it's a problem without clear solutions. Legalization of marijuana would probably help reduce the mild-moderate pain classes in a non-addictive manner, but for extreme pain there isn't a good solution.
Anyways... there are plenty of first-hand accounts and plenty of studies showing the connection here, please do a little research before posting unsupported claims.
My father is a Anthologist and they are very careful with how much they give. It is a major issue.
For some reason, the US, including doctors, have developed a anti-pain philosophy where they oversubscribe these drugs and it is know to cause addiction.
Then a few things happened: (1) more data was collected that suggested when used for severe pain, the addiction potential was low, (2) adequately controlled pain leads to quicker recovery times and (3) there was a lot of untreated pain at the time.
As a result, opioid use when way up. One could argue it went to far with very strong opioids being given for mild or moderate pain.
The sad thing is that we're already seeing doctors get more stingy with opioids. My guess is we'll swing too far in the other direction and in a decade we'll have people with severe, incurable cancer pain being told "you don't need opioids".
It would be illegal for Purdue to promote on any other than 12 hours. It's called off-label promotion and companies pay multi-billion dollar fines for it.
with regards to #2, it would good to know death rates and severe medical incident numbers in any localities to see how much of an effect such an approach is having.
#3 should be requiring all police departments having the training and recovery drugs necessary to pull someone out of an overdose along with no charges being filed for any parties involved in such a call.
this problem has been around a long time and only recently was it even addressed at the highest levels. it seemed like the problem everyone wanted to ignore
It really just depends on the individual institutional setup, and it depends on the culture of the doctors.
But its not a problem with capitalism, it just depends on what your legal rights are. Any institutional setup could have the same problem.
'Dreamlands' addressed the same problem.
There was genuine movement among doctors in the US, with serious people writing about how pain was not necessary. It is also the case that legally in the US you can be accessed of not addressing peoples pain enough.
Also again, if doctors had an intensive to care for their patient they would have to be more careful about what they give to them.
But more people die from opiates than apap nih: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16294364
I’m suspect of your claim that the majority of addicts seek treatment, since I’ve not seen any data on seeking cessation. Maybe you know of some other data showing that most addicts seek treatment that includes cessation. However, according to surveys by CDC and national survey on drug use and health 23 million Americans have a substance addiction and 3 million seek treatment. Approx 1 in 6 adults has some form of substance abuse problem. There is nowhere near that number seeking treatment.
I too have had a major surgery several years ago. I was given morphine and than Oxycodone when discharged, but not at high enough dosage for adequate relief - 3 or 4 days of pure misery. There is no reason, when short-term opiate use is easily available, for patients to suffer like this.
It seems like the medical establishment was really pushing opiates for years, even when they probably weren't needed. Now they're swung too far in the other direction: under-prescribing them for fear of overdosage, addiction, and even punishment by the DEA and government. Wish we could find some middle ground.
The war on drugs really needs to come to an abrupt end, people who need opioids to manage their pain should have them, people who are hopelessly addicted should have access in a controlled and safe manner, and for crying out loud can we just legalize weed already?
I haven't seen any evidence that actual rates of heroin abuse increasing year over year. Just wealthier people dying from poorly cut drugs at a more alarming rate.
This was the most recent report I could find: https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUH-FRR1-2...
You imagine going from a numb high... to feeling everything you were blocking out with opiates. Many of these people have legitimate pain. You'd probably not be too happy.
I'd certainly be wary about administering it to a stranger, without their consent and without knowing what their reaction would likely be. It's legally sketchy, especially if the drug is —as it is— not generally available (it's prescription-only in many places). Still, don't let me put you off saving somebody's life from an accidental overdose.
I think you meant "physical pain"
Being tough on victimless crimes is absurd.
It's truly very black and white.
In a game of "tough on crime"-oneupmanship, when you can't get any tougher you make up new crimes to beat the other guy.
If so, edit your comment to [removed] and I'll delete this one.
Otherwise, I can try to explain my original motives, and what I observed. But it's a tricky conversation to have, and there's a high chance people's tendency to instantly turn to hatred will focus on me. I'd rather pass.
Two days ago, I saw you post something asinine and I tried to respond. You deleted your comment before I could hit the reply button, and I lost the opportunity to quote and refute you.
If this is a recurring problem (that you change your mind about statements on a public forum), think a bit more before posting.
Edit: See what I did there, bud?
The reason I backed out of this subthread is very simple: the first few replies were vaguely insinuating I might somehow be sympathetic to neonazis. That was enough for me to hit the "forget this" button.
"Black people are stupid, we need a white ethno-state" is hatred.
"You're wrong and your ideas are wrong" isn't hatred.
Calling people out on bad ideas is a necessary part of the discussion, to weed out bad ideas.
Edit: I should add there are a couple post scarcity instances in recent history. Establishment of America, and post WW2. These also coincided with the least income inequality. But those periods don't last.
US inflation adjusted per capita GDP is higher today than at either of those times. While I do not think GDP is a great metric, I cannot think of any metric where we, as a society, have less "stuff" to go around then before.
I’d say that jobs in the context of survival are useful, but we as human beings also need a sense of accomplishment, of being useful to others beyond the value associated with mere profit.
http://sci-hub.io/10.2466/pr0.1996.78.2.391
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2616610
But there are other studies linked that seem to confirm it.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3696469
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18463628
Not sure where that leaves us.
But there are very different patterns of prescribing of opioids across the US and eg UK.
Why is this?
I prefer a society where a stupid decision at that age can be corrected for at a later time. I prefer it over a society that oversimplifies all this to 'choice', going against so much of what we've learned about human nature over the past decades.
[1]: Adults are also idiots. People are idiots. Rationality is our weapon against it, but it's so effective precisely because we're so irrational by 'default'. I'm baffled how people can still hold a worldview where 'choice' is somehow a simple concept.
Louis Theroux's "Dark States: Heroin Town" is a good account of how these addictions progress in the US, and some of the reasons for the growing numbers we are seeing.
Opioid abuse is mostly flat or (among youth) decreasing:
https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUH-FRR1-2...
http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/pubs/monographs/mtf-overv...
There is no actual link between opioid prescription and subsequent heroin use shown by any research.
https://grokinfullness.blogspot.com/2017/09/debunking-standa...
At the very least it's a case of consumer product safety liability and negligence fueled by profit motive.
A lot of capitalism's woes would be overcome should that standard be applied.
You're posting about an accusation you can't even remember with incomplete information and out of context. That's like a trifecta of incivility.
If you can't remember exactly what I did, maybe don't spin a half-told version of it?
I get the feeling this is one of the things that no one wants to discuss, or at least it's a bad idea to try to discuss it.
Note how violent and immediate the reaction was, right when I tried to point to a segment of people who are the most likely to be in the target segment of the original article. I don't feel like martyring myself, so I won't push it further. But suffice to say, it does not seem like we as a society are ready to have hard conversations about why people turn to drugs.
You attempted to claim that such overdoses are in part due to Reddit (and society in general) ostracizing neo-nazis and members of hateful groups. Not only is this just wrong, it implies that many affected by the crisis are members of such groups, which they are not (as someone who has a family member addicted to opioids I'm very annoyed by your comparison).
You just wanted to talk about your Neo-Nazi subreddits getting taken away and people called you out on it. Frankly, a Neo-nazi should be an outcast. A racist, sexist, etc should be excluded. And if they don't like that, then they should stop being a Nazi before turning to drugs.
My point was solely "A certain subreddit got banned. Those people seem to have very few options, and maybe they were using it as a support group. They might turn to drugs now."
The reaction violent and immediate: within 5 minutes of posting the comment, you're now trying to imply some very strange things about me. You're even going so far as to "clarify" things for readers by posting something I did not say.
I'd like to end this conversation, because HN is optimized for good conversation and this isn't heading anywhere productive. Agreed?
I have a family member affected by a similar crisis, though thankfully not quite as intense. I'm sorry that the comparison annoyed you, but I was just searching for answers.
The question of whether or not your arguments have merit won’t even get entered upon, nor will the authority ever be able to repeat back your arguments in a form you’d recognize—for even repeating the arguments correctly could invite accusations of secretly agreeing with them. Instead, the sole subject of interest will be you: who you think you are, what your motivations were to utter something so divisive and hateful.
Suffice to say, it wasn't too smart to even broach the topic. It derailed the conversation, for one. For two, it didn't lead anywhere productive.
We should have figured this out years ago. This won't be the last article we see like this.
Which is why cops should continue to focus on the violent distributors of drugs. But social workers and hospital workers should step up their responsibility and start treating drug abusers better.
Or perhaps, more programs need to be made so that hospital workers / social workers are paid to fix this drug problem.
Hint: throwing drug USERS in jail, where they only get more underground connections and better learn to become a criminal, will start a cycle where they have to end up in jail again. Jail is just about the worst place you can put a person.
What is: the most profitable outcome you can hope for when your prison system is privately owned?
Citation needed.
Watch the video here: https://twitter.com/ProfLAppleby/status/917838820682489858?s...
Also I have lived in Salem, Oregon look up it's statistics.
Just because my heart doesn't bleed for people who wouldn't do shit to help you doesn't mean I don't understand the problem.
My sister has been on heroin for probably 8 years now. She will call and ask for money and if anyone says no she spouts this same bullshit about it's not her fault etc. and she's an addict. We send her to rehab, she runs away, can't even tell you how many times I've seen it.
Her 4 kids are taken away from her she doesn't even attempt to visit them in any capacity.
Look close enough at a heroin addict you'll find a regular shitty person underneath it.
But it sounds like you're writing them all off, writing the problem off, as something that's just unavoidable, untreatable. It can be both avoided and treated, it just doesn't always work.
Even if you gave up on sympathy for addicts (and I understand, I was in Portland and have been along that hellish amtrak line) - the problem affects all of us, whether we like it or not.
The initial claim was 'usually turn violent', compared to your 'relatively good predictor of violent behaviour'.
I've known quite a few people with drug dependency problems and very, very few of them were violent.
So, citation still needed.
Please stop being so defensive. People dog-piled on you because they thought you said something dumb. They're not being "hateful" or "violent". Those words have meanings, and their meanings are actually directly related to why Reddit banned those subreddits. If you can't tell the difference between me saying "Yo your opinion is dumb and here's why" and "You're black you need to leave" then just wow, you may need to take a step away from the Internet for awhile.
I brought up Neo-Nazis and the Alt-Right because they were the main ones affected by the Reddit bans and your comment did not do enough to distance whatever you were talking about from them. Also, the Alt-Right had a large overlap with the subreddits you do seem to be talking about.
If you want to have a conversation about such a thing, I'm happy to engage over private message. But you bringing it up was so tangental, so unrelated, and so odd that I could not resist calling you out on it.
But again, it was just so out of place in a discussion where people are talking about the opioid crisis. The argument you're trying to make is horribly tangental and out of place.
To be especially frank: people are reacting to you so negatively because your comments are completely unrelated and showed an intense desire to discuss the subreddit bans. When we called you out on this, you got extraordinarily defensive and realized the conversation wasn't going to go your way. So you backed down. Welcome to intellectual discourse. If you don't feel confident defending your opinions in such a space...well maybe they're not opinions that you can defend very well.
The point of HN is to be a search for the truth among colleagues, not a verbal barfight. The fact that you wanted to get into one immediately says a lot about both sides of the conversation.
your comment did not do enough to distance whatever you were talking about from them
You didn't even briefly pause to question whether I might be associated with them. Why should I need to distance myself from them when I'm merely talking about them? The causal linkage is backwards here.
Maybe you feel bad about reacting so harshly and are now backpedaling. Either way, you shouldn't get to force the conversation into a private message:
If you want to have a conversation about such a thing, I'm happy to engage over private message. But you bringing it up was so tangental, so unrelated, and so odd that I could not resist calling you out on it.
If I bring up a topic substantively, honestly, and in a way that's a search for the truth, it shouldn't matter whether it's done in public or in private.
https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/artic...
On a tangent, while I've never had chronic pain, I've had friends who have, and I know it can destroy anyone's life. I don't want to see the abuse of effective pain meds by some lead to difficulties in obtaining pain relief for those who really need it. Someone in chronic pain has enough to handle without worrying about maintaining access to appropriate medication.
One of the traps with pain is the assumption that medication is the answer. It isn’t unfortunately and chronic pain should not be treated with medication alone - at least thats what I took away from discussion with a pain specialist who I happened to be working with on something unrelated. Source required.
"We need to kick you out of the country" is a violent reaction.
"What are you talking about this is dumb" is not a violent reaction.
You shared your ideas, they obviously weren't taken as good ideas by the group here, and people told you so.
No one called for violence against you, no one called you names (as far as I can tell), just no one agreed with you, and maybe a liiiiittle discourteously.
That's not violence, that's discussion.
I'm not upset about mere disagreement. I'm upset that I was searching openly and honestly for an answer to this crisis that affects all of us, and in exchange I was labeled a neonazi sympathizer. On HN of all places.
The conversation shouldn't be about me and my ideas. That's selfish and counterproductive to HN's aims. The goal is to gratify intellectual curiosity, and the subthread I started here is the opposite of that.
HN isn't a place for ideological battle. The fact that two members of the community decided to immediately call out my bullshit suggests that HN wasn't the appropriate venue for this conversation.
And you've posted you figured it would go like this.
Take the hint you are giving yourself: best re-consider what it is you're about to post, given your past experiences.
Sorry to read about your family situation. That said...
There is an entire field dedicated to this. In the spirit of DRY, let's not spin our wheels with hackneyed theories, thinking we'll do better than the individuals that dedicate their lives to rigorously testing hypothesis and formulating therapies.
That was about 40 minutes ago.
Drug potency follows something like an S-curve. As enforcement increases a drug will get increasingly stepped on, until the purity is low enough that the drug gets replaced with a more potent analog. Consumer Reports wrote about this in their guide to drugs from the 70s.
I've come to realize that the concept of gateway drugs is bullshit. Kids are going to try whatever they have available. If heroin suddenly enters the scene, then heroin is what they're going to try. Same thing for meth.
Also, it's a different sort of high. When you want to get drunk, you drink. When you want to feel stupid, you smoke weed. But when you just want to feel like everything is beautiful and nothing is wrong, you try opiates (or amphetamines).
Interesting, this is exactly what weed is giving me, without any nasty effects and addictions of hard drugs. If in nature, this effect is super strong. I came up with most important decisions in my life when high, and they are still solid and best choices possible, even when looking back after 10 years. Different perspective on situations, in some cases really proactive thinking and resolving issues before they arise and so on...
I guess it really affects us differently. I've seen few people get weird/aggressive on it, but then again I would never want to drink with them either. Something badly broken deep inside, with no real chance of fix, ever.
Some people are just attracted to the crazy unknown. Many can’t believe they could become addicts because they’ve never been addicted. Others still don’t care because they’re just one step removed from suicide.
Yes. "Find what you love and let it kill you" somebody said. And most people don't feel safe unless they're living fearfully close to the edge of what is possible for them. In the past men worked till they dropped dead in their 40s to keep their families alive through the winter; women had baby after baby until they died or couldn't otherwise cope.
The strange thing is that, absent those harsh historical conditions, people still want the feeling of an edge, an existential risk. So they gamble, they do drugs, etc.
But these aren't good edges to be on. There are many real, urgent problems the world faces that could benefit from obsessive, risk-seeking commitment to the 'crazy unknown'. Addiction-level commitment. It shouldn't have to be to drugs. How do we funnel ourselves towards these problems?
And once you're in the throes of addiction from smoking it, I'm guessing injection seems less and less objectionable.
Heroin, tried once, is not instantly addictive for most people.
Terrifying stuff. I've had a run-in with it myself, when someone slipped me a cut pill of molly, in my younger or dancing-at-parties days lo these many years ago; luckily I had friends there who realized something was up and looked out for me, or almost missing a flight the next morning would no doubt have been far from the worst consequence. I've never had the urge to go back to that particular well, but what I remember of the experience makes it easy to understand why someone would; there is that about it which, while under its influence, makes it impossible for the world to touch one in any meaningful way. Of course, when not under its influence, the opposite is true and very emphatically so, which I think is in large part what keeps people going back even when they're as dedicated as they can be to the goal of kicking.
Natural. Selection.
Drugs have always been cut. Historically it was just cut with OTCs or detritus, which was a problem that could be solved in most cases by simply doing more.
The problem as of late has become when they lace it with things like fentanyl, which is a cheap filler that actually improves the high (thus encouraging repeat business) but can be lethal in large doses.
Well, until you get a more pure batch and you try to do the same amount you do with the dilute batch.
I lost a relative to drug abuse. I think one of the reasons they got into it was she they were very intolerant to boredom and just scoffed at everything. Nothing was serious, everything got a do over.
If a chemist is reading this, I would love your imput. I was under the assumption fentynl complicated to produce.
That said, my wish is the government would provide generic bupenorpine to any person that wants the drug. It needs to be easily available to anyone. No b.s., just give out the drug. Save all the drama. Give them a long half life drug that will get them off the hard stuff. Let them taper off the bupenorpine when they see fit.
Now--they will say the addict needs counseling, nalaxone, and blah, blah, blah.
Just give out generous bupenorpine. It has a long half life, and you have to be determined to overdose on it.
I will be shocked if anything is done for most addicts.
Hell--when my psychiatrist retires, I honestly don't know what I'm going to do. I'm on two very controlled substances, and so tired of hearing the experts opinion, and their outlandish prices.
So yes, we will see commercials, etc., but just give out bupenorpine. Most addicts don't need extensive counseling--I believe. They are just afraid of widhdrawls. Withdrawals that might be less severe than they imagine?
Imported from China. Wasn't regulated at all there until recently, then the producers started messing with the formula.