Derail from GRD : pros and cons on the legalization of drugs

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

I don't think they will--there won't be enough money in it. And note that I didn't specify over 18 for an addiction prescription.

Most will disappear as you say, but the designer drug pushers will remain if we let them continue to exist by not placing all the other drugs under medical or prescription restrictions.

That was the finding of the Canadian Royal Commission on Psychotropic drugs.

Yeah, anything that influences mental state should by default go under such rules.

If we are to legalize, then we should include all the psychotropic drugs and not have to do one drug at a time.

I think taking pot first will help--when it's legalized and the sky doesn't fall in people will begin to see we have a point.

Let us pray my friend. Way too many of our young burn out way too early in life.

Regards
DL

Let me suggest you avoid expecting Skeptic members on this board to "pray" at any time as a mean to resolve a variety of issues. "Let us pray" belongs in a gathering of believers, not when addressing the communicated thoughts of non believers.

If even an atheist will not pray and hope for fewer children burning out then they can bite me. They are not worth the air they breathe.

Regards
DL

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

By Gnostic Christian Bishop :Most will disappear as you say, but the designer drug pushers will remain if we let them continue to exist by not placing all the other drugs under medical or prescription restrictions.

You then place the expectation on health care providers/professionals to hand out prescriptions WITHOUT a medical justification. If the reliance on therapeutic cannabis is 100% justified under medical scripts for a variety of health related conditions, I doubt that the same would apply for "all the other drugs" known as recreational.

The moment we talk about involving the health care industry in drugs prescriptions of any sort, it can only be justified by demonstrating a therapeutic value supported via clinical data.

Further, you have to consider health insurance coverage addressing Rx plans. Of course it is to the advantage of the insurance industry to cover under their Rx plan prescribed therapeutic cannabis considering its low cost compared to pharma manufactured drugs. Take the high cost of pharma origin anti emetics prescribed to manage CINV (chemo induced nausea and vomiting) as one example. With the added benefit of therapeutic cannabis being an appetite stimulant (preventing "wasting"). And its anti anxiety properties which certainly applies to patients diagnosed with catastrophic illnesses. And its anti spasmodic properties which would benefit spinal cord injuries patients and those affected with chronic muscular degenerative ailments. And its therapeutic properties for glaucoma. And those patients affected by neuropathy. Adding the recent passage in Florida of the Charlotte's Web legislation allowing for the prescription of a cannabis derived solution mixed with olive oil and absorbed orally, to manage epilepsy.(project launched by the parents of Charlotte Figi, who was diagnosed when a toddler with Dravet syndrome). Charlotte is now 8 years old.

I am part of the 80% of Florida residents who are optimistic that medical cannabis will be legalized comes November since it is now officially on the ballot. Also a savvy political move on the part of gubernatorial candidate Charlie Crist and the pursued advocacy to get it on the ballot by the Democrat Party loyals Morgan and Morgan (law firm) as it will draw young voters out to vote. Consistently, States who have legalized the recreational use of cannabis had to first take the step of legalizing medical cannabis. And mind you, it is not just young voters, but also older Fl. residents affected by a degenerative condition such as Parkinson's (considering clinical data showing the effectiveness of cannabis on tremors and what we refer to as "parkinsonism episodes"). And of course any Fl. resident affected by a condition the symptoms of which can be managed by reliance on the therapeutic properties of cannabis.

Florida has had a long history (especially Tampa Bay) to fester "pill mills" otherwise known as some pain management clinics flagged by the DEA as prescribing and also dispensing too liberally opiate derived pharma drugs. Resulting in attracting a "pill mill" tourism of folks coming out of state who do not have a medically documented history of chronic pain but are drug addicts and/or traffickers. The response from legislators was to place extremely restrictive conditions regarding how many pain pills a patient may have in his/her possession. Adding to that restricting how much quantity can be prescribed at once by licensed physicians. Add to that mandated sentencing in Fl. which results in putting behind bars folks possessing a quantity above the allowed limit(or multiple prescriptions obtained illegally) by hitting them with a mandated sentence corresponding to trafficking. I have encountered several pain management patients who ration themselves which results in poor pain management/control and that because they have to wait to legally get a refill from their prescribing physician.

Well thought out and put.

"I doubt that the same would apply for "all the other drugs" known as recreational.".

That is a hurdle that legislators will have to work around if they want to do their jobs of protecting children.
If parents do not push them then we will not reap near as much of the benefits.

Legislators should NOT be compelling the medical milieu to deliver scripts of products which have no clinical data supporting their therapeutic properties. Legislators cannot monitor 24/7 300 millions (not even 60 millions my country of origin and citizenship , France) to insure that scripted drugs are secured adequately in any home where such drugs are kept for an adult patient's use.

I would imagine that doctors will have to answer to the insurance people for who they have on medical scripts and who they have on recreational use scripts. I see no problem with this.

I already figured out that you are totally dismissive of the existing reality that the expected role of health care professionals is to deliver scripts that are MEDICALLY justified and more importantly why. I have been very specific and accurate in my choice of words when describing the why of such expectation. But you keep dismissing it.

"The moment we talk about involving the health care industry in drugs prescriptions of any sort, it can only be justified by demonstrating a therapeutic value supported via clinical data.".

With respect for your U.S. systems, your statement has nothing to do with the reality of your experience and modus operandi pf your industry except superficially.

This is not "my experience". Anyone familiar with the conditions to obtain a license to practice medicine should know that under such license, any treatment/procedure/ testing and scripts are to be medically justified via a medical diagnosis and in many cases subsequent prognosis.

I work in the US health care system. I am not aware of licensed physicians liberally delivering prescriptions without a medically supported diagnosis addressing the patient's health status. The only category of such physicians with a trend to be liberal are those who get caught for scripting pain meds to patients who have no medical status indicating a need for pain management.

Your system is so corrupt it shames the free world.

Regards
DL

It is not my system. My health care system is the model in my OWN country of origin and citizenship, France. Single payer. Not hyper privatized like the US. Not a profit centered industry but a vital service to the people and funded by the people. Clear enough?

Let your head shrink to normal size for Christ's sake. You are sounding like a fool.

I guess that you are not aware of a new tool to monitor what you say cannot be monitored.

It is called a computer.

Regards
DL

 

[Sabine Grant]

I don't think they will--there won't be enough money in it. And note that I didn't specify over 18 for an addiction prescription.

Most will disappear as you say, but the designer drug pushers will remain if we let them continue to exist by not placing all the other drugs under medical or prescription restrictions.

That was the finding of the Canadian Royal Commission on Psychotropic drugs.

Yeah, anything that influences mental state should by default go under such rules.

If we are to legalize, then we should include all the psychotropic drugs and not have to do one drug at a time.

I think taking pot first will help--when it's legalized and the sky doesn't fall in people will begin to see we have a point.

Let us pray my friend. Way too many of our young burn out way too early in life.

Regards
DL

Let me suggest you avoid expecting Skeptic members on this board to "pray" at any time as a mean to resolve a variety of issues. "Let us pray" belongs in a gathering of believers, not when addressing the communicated thoughts of non believers.

If even an atheist will not pray and hope for fewer children burning out then they can bite me. They are not worth the air they breathe.

Regards
DL

The expectation that atheists are to pray is totally disconnected from the reality that atheists, contrary to you, do not believe in any deities. Case closed.

 

[Sabine Grant]

By Gnostic Christian Bishop :Most will disappear as you say, but the designer drug pushers will remain if we let them continue to exist by not placing all the other drugs under medical or prescription restrictions.

You then place the expectation on health care providers/professionals to hand out prescriptions WITHOUT a medical justification. If the reliance on therapeutic cannabis is 100% justified under medical scripts for a variety of health related conditions, I doubt that the same would apply for "all the other drugs" known as recreational.

The moment we talk about involving the health care industry in drugs prescriptions of any sort, it can only be justified by demonstrating a therapeutic value supported via clinical data.

Further, you have to consider health insurance coverage addressing Rx plans. Of course it is to the advantage of the insurance industry to cover under their Rx plan prescribed therapeutic cannabis considering its low cost compared to pharma manufactured drugs. Take the high cost of pharma origin anti emetics prescribed to manage CINV (chemo induced nausea and vomiting) as one example. With the added benefit of therapeutic cannabis being an appetite stimulant (preventing "wasting"). And its anti anxiety properties which certainly applies to patients diagnosed with catastrophic illnesses. And its anti spasmodic properties which would benefit spinal cord injuries patients and those affected with chronic muscular degenerative ailments. And its therapeutic properties for glaucoma. And those patients affected by neuropathy. Adding the recent passage in Florida of the Charlotte's Web legislation allowing for the prescription of a cannabis derived solution mixed with olive oil and absorbed orally, to manage epilepsy.(project launched by the parents of Charlotte Figi, who was diagnosed when a toddler with Dravet syndrome). Charlotte is now 8 years old.

I am part of the 80% of Florida residents who are optimistic that medical cannabis will be legalized comes November since it is now officially on the ballot. Also a savvy political move on the part of gubernatorial candidate Charlie Crist and the pursued advocacy to get it on the ballot by the Democrat Party loyals Morgan and Morgan (law firm) as it will draw young voters out to vote. Consistently, States who have legalized the recreational use of cannabis had to first take the step of legalizing medical cannabis. And mind you, it is not just young voters, but also older Fl. residents affected by a degenerative condition such as Parkinson's (considering clinical data showing the effectiveness of cannabis on tremors and what we refer to as "parkinsonism episodes"). And of course any Fl. resident affected by a condition the symptoms of which can be managed by reliance on the therapeutic properties of cannabis.

Florida has had a long history (especially Tampa Bay) to fester "pill mills" otherwise known as some pain management clinics flagged by the DEA as prescribing and also dispensing too liberally opiate derived pharma drugs. Resulting in attracting a "pill mill" tourism of folks coming out of state who do not have a medically documented history of chronic pain but are drug addicts and/or traffickers. The response from legislators was to place extremely restrictive conditions regarding how many pain pills a patient may have in his/her possession. Adding to that restricting how much quantity can be prescribed at once by licensed physicians. Add to that mandated sentencing in Fl. which results in putting behind bars folks possessing a quantity above the allowed limit(or multiple prescriptions obtained illegally) by hitting them with a mandated sentence corresponding to trafficking. I have encountered several pain management patients who ration themselves which results in poor pain management/control and that because they have to wait to legally get a refill from their prescribing physician.

Well thought out and put.

"I doubt that the same would apply for "all the other drugs" known as recreational.".

That is a hurdle that legislators will have to work around if they want to do their jobs of protecting children.
If parents do not push them then we will not reap near as much of the benefits.

Legislators should NOT be compelling the medical milieu to deliver scripts of products which have no clinical data supporting their therapeutic properties. Legislators cannot monitor 24/7 300 millions (not even 60 millions my country of origin and citizenship , France) to insure that scripted drugs are secured adequately in any home where such drugs are kept for an adult patient's use.

I would imagine that doctors will have to answer to the insurance people for who they have on medical scripts and who they have on recreational use scripts. I see no problem with this.

I already figured out that you are totally dismissive of the existing reality that the expected role of health care professionals is to deliver scripts that are MEDICALLY justified and more importantly why. I have been very specific and accurate in my choice of words when describing the why of such expectation. But you keep dismissing it.

"The moment we talk about involving the health care industry in drugs prescriptions of any sort, it can only be justified by demonstrating a therapeutic value supported via clinical data.".

With respect for your U.S. systems, your statement has nothing to do with the reality of your experience and modus operandi pf your industry except superficially.

This is not "my experience". Anyone familiar with the conditions to obtain a license to practice medicine should know that under such license, any treatment/procedure/ testing and scripts are to be medically justified via a medical diagnosis and in many cases subsequent prognosis.

I work in the US health care system. I am not aware of licensed physicians liberally delivering prescriptions without a medically supported diagnosis addressing the patient's health status. The only category of such physicians with a trend to be liberal are those who get caught for scripting pain meds to patients who have no medical status indicating a need for pain management.

Your system is so corrupt it shames the free world.

Regards
DL

It is not my system. My health care system is the model in my OWN country of origin and citizenship, France. Single payer. Not hyper privatized like the US. Not a profit centered industry but a vital service to the people and funded by the people. Clear enough?

Let your head shrink to normal size for Christ's sake. You are sounding like a fool.

I guess that you are not aware of a new tool to monitor what you say cannot be monitored.

It is called a computer.

Regards
DL

And now ,Ladies and Gentlemen, we have the suggestion that computers could be used to monitor private citizens in their own home as to whether they secure their prescribed drugs safely and away from any potential for them to be stolen. Meanwhile, you are still dismissing existing realities detailed for you.

 

[Sabine Grant]

Speaking of "children" consuming controlled substances : many juveniles need not to be "pushed by black marketers" to have access to opiate derived medically prescribed drugs as they will simply steal them from any adult in their household in possession of legally and medically prescribed such drugs. Either to support their own addiction or sell them to their juvenile peers.

Whichever drug which also carries a recreational effect when prescribed SHOULD be secured and out of view in our homes. The repeated advice given to my geriatric patients under home health care is to pre pour their meds into days of the week and time labeled containers. They can easily keep track of any suspicious missing of pills in the said containers.

Legalizing all drugs under "medical prescriptions or restrictions" is not going to keep juveniles from accessing them outside of black marketers selling them on "the streets".

Further and addressing this :

If we are to legalize, then we should include all the psychotropic drugs and not have to do one drug at a time.

I disagree. There is a vast difference between a psychotropic drug with benign clinical side effects and one inducing clinical side effects susceptible to compromise the health of the user and result in a 911 call. The main reason why cannabis is a SAFE drug to legalize is because there is no possible overdosing. The most side effect one may experience would be an episode of hypo tension (sudden BP drop) which can be resolved without a 911 intervention. No respiratory depression. No emergent dehydration and elevated temperature with the potential to cause a "frying" of the brain and brain damage. No hallucinogenic effects susceptible to induce what would be the equivalent of the symptoms of a psychotic episode.

If you talk with ER medical personnel, they will tell you that patients admitted in ER due to drug use are NOT pot users but other recreational drugs. And for some of them, from ER admittance they will become ICU patients.

Sure some parents are poor guardians of their children. Legislation will not make idiots brighter. What the medical system can do though and does do is monitor consumption. If parents are put on the blocks for losing drugs to their children, hopefully they are not so stupid that they cannot learn with help from medical professionals.

Sure. However, you tend to dismiss the reality that prescriptions all of non OTC drugs delivered by licensed physicians MUST meet a medical justification. You are envisioning here a system involving directly health care professionals in delivering prescriptions on all recreational drugs without any medical justification. If cannabis has been clinically proven to have therapeutic properties (and I cited several of them), that is NOT the case for the vast majority of other controlled substances known as recreational use drugs.

If you are looking for a perfect system, I do not know where you will find it but a system where all drugs get put into the same monitored system is the only way to get ahead of the pushers who can change the composition of drugs to new ones faster than approvals can be done by governments at present.

I will stand firm by my counter argumentation to you envisioning health care professionals writing scripts on all recreational drugs without a medical justification. Are you not aware of the existence of biomedical ethics and how they govern the practice of medicine? I am not sure how and why anyone would place the expectation on licensed physicians as a whole to dismiss The Principle of Nonmaleficence as they would be tasked to deliver prescriptions on a variety of recreational drugs known to have no therapeutic properties and on the top of it all listing severe counter indications to medically prescribed pharma drugs as well as a variety of OTC drugs.

All drugs, psychotropic or not should be under medical control.

Anything less is not too intelligent.

Regards
DL

You keep dismissing the reality that all FDA approved drugs obtained via a medical prescription are justified due to their therapeutic properties. They were tested via clinical trials and evaluated for how successful/efficient their therapeutic qualities are as well as tested for their side effects. Care to detail for me the clinically tested and demonstrated efficient therapeutic properties addressing health conditions, of recreational drugs other than cannabis? Opiates have been approved for the sole reason that there is ample clinical data supporting their ultimate therapeutic property for pain management. Same with morphine prescribed under the medical justification of pain management and specifically addressing a variety of medical DIAGNOSIS with symptoms related to the medical need to manage the patient's pain.

Your joking right?

Non.

You would like a list of all the testing done on psychotropic drugs eh. try google. Or read the LeDain Royal Commission Report on Psychotropic Drugs.

Your proposed plan is to rely on prescriptions for the delivery of ALL recreational drugs. Reality check being that prescribed drugs by health care professionals have to be justified via a medical diagnosis. The challenge presented to you is to show equal justification relying on a medical diagnosis to expect health care professionals to script all recreational drugs.

That aside. The real research not corrupted by your government agencies will happen after all drugs come under prescription restriction. People who fear the law make damned poor research subjects.

Detail what you mean by "real research" addressing ALL recreational drugs. What type of data do you have to determine what "real research" ought to be regarding ALL recreational drugs?

As to doctors writing scripts for recreational drugs. Do you believe that doctors care so little of what their patients consume in terms of drugs that they would prefer not to know and monitor for those drugs?

Again and again : doctors do not script drugs without a medical/clinical justification to do it. Again and again, if cannabis has ample clinical data to support its therapeutic properties (which I have already detailed several of them), therapeutic properties applied to a variety of diagnosed conditions, what makes you *think* that all other recreational drugs should be scripted when they do not have therapeutic properties applied to a medical diagnosis? Are you expecting health care professionals with a license to practice medicine and prescribe drugs to dismiss medical bio ethics and as I earlier specifically mentioned :

The Principle of Nonmaleficence as they would be tasked to deliver prescriptions on a variety of recreational drugs known to have no therapeutic properties and on the top of it all listing severe counter indications to medically prescribed pharma drugs as well as a variety of OTC drugs.

How come you are not addressing it? Is it a lack of understanding or knowledge on your part as to the role of health care professionals?

Further and to educate you a tad about prescribing any drugs the patient will self administer. Three important terms : route, dosage and timing. Are you going to expect a prescribing physician to detail on a script for any recreational drug "take as needed"? If not, explain how route, dosage and timing would be detailed on scripts for all recreational drugs.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If even an atheist will not pray and hope for fewer children burning out then they can bite me. They are not worth the air they breathe.

Regards
DL

Praying is a religious act that most of us consider at best a waste of time.

It's not a matter of not wanting to help, it's a matter of not wasting time on things which are completely useless.

 

[Jarhyn]

If even an atheist will not pray and hope for fewer children burning out then they can bite me. They are not worth the air they breathe.

Regards
DL

Praying is a religious act that most of us consider at best a waste of time.

It's not a matter of not wanting to help, it's a matter of not wasting time on things which are completely useless.

This. Praying is not doing... Doing is doing. And doing is the thing that gets things done. Do you want to throw platitudes and words at people, or give them real help?

Even witches generally do more. The magic is just as bullshit, but at least it is generally directed as a motivation to act, look, see, and be aware of opportunity. Prayer is an excuse, specifically, to not act. Fuck prayer.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Speaking of "children" consuming controlled substances : many juveniles need not to be "pushed by black marketers" to have access to opiate derived medically prescribed drugs as they will simply steal them from any adult in their household in possession of legally and medically prescribed such drugs. Either to support their own addiction or sell them to their juvenile peers.

Whichever drug which also carries a recreational effect when prescribed SHOULD be secured and out of view in our homes. The repeated advice given to my geriatric patients under home health care is to pre pour their meds into days of the week and time labeled containers. They can easily keep track of any suspicious missing of pills in the said containers.

Legalizing all drugs under "medical prescriptions or restrictions" is not going to keep juveniles from accessing them outside of black marketers selling them on "the streets".

Further and addressing this :

If we are to legalize, then we should include all the psychotropic drugs and not have to do one drug at a time.

I disagree. There is a vast difference between a psychotropic drug with benign clinical side effects and one inducing clinical side effects susceptible to compromise the health of the user and result in a 911 call. The main reason why cannabis is a SAFE drug to legalize is because there is no possible overdosing. The most side effect one may experience would be an episode of hypo tension (sudden BP drop) which can be resolved without a 911 intervention. No respiratory depression. No emergent dehydration and elevated temperature with the potential to cause a "frying" of the brain and brain damage. No hallucinogenic effects susceptible to induce what would be the equivalent of the symptoms of a psychotic episode.

If you talk with ER medical personnel, they will tell you that patients admitted in ER due to drug use are NOT pot users but other recreational drugs. And for some of them, from ER admittance they will become ICU patients.

Sure some parents are poor guardians of their children. Legislation will not make idiots brighter. What the medical system can do though and does do is monitor consumption. If parents are put on the blocks for losing drugs to their children, hopefully they are not so stupid that they cannot learn with help from medical professionals.

Sure. However, you tend to dismiss the reality that prescriptions all of non OTC drugs delivered by licensed physicians MUST meet a medical justification. You are envisioning here a system involving directly health care professionals in delivering prescriptions on all recreational drugs without any medical justification. If cannabis has been clinically proven to have therapeutic properties (and I cited several of them), that is NOT the case for the vast majority of other controlled substances known as recreational use drugs.

If you are looking for a perfect system, I do not know where you will find it but a system where all drugs get put into the same monitored system is the only way to get ahead of the pushers who can change the composition of drugs to new ones faster than approvals can be done by governments at present.

I will stand firm by my counter argumentation to you envisioning health care professionals writing scripts on all recreational drugs without a medical justification. Are you not aware of the existence of biomedical ethics and how they govern the practice of medicine? I am not sure how and why anyone would place the expectation on licensed physicians as a whole to dismiss The Principle of Nonmaleficence as they would be tasked to deliver prescriptions on a variety of recreational drugs known to have no therapeutic properties and on the top of it all listing severe counter indications to medically prescribed pharma drugs as well as a variety of OTC drugs.

All drugs, psychotropic or not should be under medical control.

Anything less is not too intelligent.

Regards
DL

You keep dismissing the reality that all FDA approved drugs obtained via a medical prescription are justified due to their therapeutic properties. They were tested via clinical trials and evaluated for how successful/efficient their therapeutic qualities are as well as tested for their side effects. Care to detail for me the clinically tested and demonstrated efficient therapeutic properties addressing health conditions, of recreational drugs other than cannabis? Opiates have been approved for the sole reason that there is ample clinical data supporting their ultimate therapeutic property for pain management. Same with morphine prescribed under the medical justification of pain management and specifically addressing a variety of medical DIAGNOSIS with symptoms related to the medical need to manage the patient's pain.

Your joking right?

Non.

You would like a list of all the testing done on psychotropic drugs eh. try google. Or read the LeDain Royal Commission Report on Psychotropic Drugs.

Your proposed plan is to rely on prescriptions for the delivery of ALL recreational drugs. Reality check being that prescribed drugs by health care professionals have to be justified via a medical diagnosis. The challenge presented to you is to show equal justification relying on a medical diagnosis to expect health care professionals to script all recreational drugs.

That aside. The real research not corrupted by your government agencies will happen after all drugs come under prescription restriction. People who fear the law make damned poor research subjects.

Detail what you mean by "real research" addressing ALL recreational drugs. What type of data do you have to determine what "real research" ought to be regarding ALL recreational drugs?

As to doctors writing scripts for recreational drugs. Do you believe that doctors care so little of what their patients consume in terms of drugs that they would prefer not to know and monitor for those drugs?

Again and again : doctors do not script drugs without a medical/clinical justification to do it. Again and again, if cannabis has ample clinical data to support its therapeutic properties (which I have already detailed several of them), therapeutic properties applied to a variety of diagnosed conditions, what makes you *think* that all other recreational drugs should be scripted when they do not have therapeutic properties applied to a medical diagnosis? Are you expecting health care professionals with a license to practice medicine and prescribe drugs to dismiss medical bio ethics and as I earlier specifically mentioned :

The Principle of Nonmaleficence as they would be tasked to deliver prescriptions on a variety of recreational drugs known to have no therapeutic properties and on the top of it all listing severe counter indications to medically prescribed pharma drugs as well as a variety of OTC drugs.

How come you are not addressing it? Is it a lack of understanding or knowledge on your part as to the role of health care professionals?

Further and to educate you a tad about prescribing any drugs the patient will self administer. Three important terms : route, dosage and timing. Are you going to expect a prescribing physician to detail on a script for any recreational drug "take as needed"? If not, explain how route, dosage and timing would be detailed on scripts for all recreational drugs.

Health care professionals will do as the law tells them to do.

You seem to think we are so stuck with our present systems that we cannot change. How droll.

Health care workers you describe do not exist. They are now generally just in it for the money.

I don't know about where you live but where I do, my pharmacist and doctor know of all the drugs they prescribe and what quantities I should be going through. You think they cannot do what they already do.

Regards
DL

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

If even an atheist will not pray and hope for fewer children burning out then they can bite me. They are not worth the air they breathe.

Regards
DL

Praying is a religious act that most of us consider at best a waste of time.

It's not a matter of not wanting to help, it's a matter of not wasting time on things which are completely useless.

If atheists are to get that hung up on language then they are no brighter than foolish believers and are not into idiocy.

Regards
DL

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

If you atheists are going to get bent out of shape for my casual use of the word pray then I recant it.

I see you as getting as fundamental as theists.

Regards
DL

 

[Sabine Grant]

Speaking of "children" consuming controlled substances : many juveniles need not to be "pushed by black marketers" to have access to opiate derived medically prescribed drugs as they will simply steal them from any adult in their household in possession of legally and medically prescribed such drugs. Either to support their own addiction or sell them to their juvenile peers.

Whichever drug which also carries a recreational effect when prescribed SHOULD be secured and out of view in our homes. The repeated advice given to my geriatric patients under home health care is to pre pour their meds into days of the week and time labeled containers. They can easily keep track of any suspicious missing of pills in the said containers.

Legalizing all drugs under "medical prescriptions or restrictions" is not going to keep juveniles from accessing them outside of black marketers selling them on "the streets".

Further and addressing this :

If we are to legalize, then we should include all the psychotropic drugs and not have to do one drug at a time.

I disagree. There is a vast difference between a psychotropic drug with benign clinical side effects and one inducing clinical side effects susceptible to compromise the health of the user and result in a 911 call. The main reason why cannabis is a SAFE drug to legalize is because there is no possible overdosing. The most side effect one may experience would be an episode of hypo tension (sudden BP drop) which can be resolved without a 911 intervention. No respiratory depression. No emergent dehydration and elevated temperature with the potential to cause a "frying" of the brain and brain damage. No hallucinogenic effects susceptible to induce what would be the equivalent of the symptoms of a psychotic episode.

If you talk with ER medical personnel, they will tell you that patients admitted in ER due to drug use are NOT pot users but other recreational drugs. And for some of them, from ER admittance they will become ICU patients.

Sure some parents are poor guardians of their children. Legislation will not make idiots brighter. What the medical system can do though and does do is monitor consumption. If parents are put on the blocks for losing drugs to their children, hopefully they are not so stupid that they cannot learn with help from medical professionals.

Sure. However, you tend to dismiss the reality that prescriptions all of non OTC drugs delivered by licensed physicians MUST meet a medical justification. You are envisioning here a system involving directly health care professionals in delivering prescriptions on all recreational drugs without any medical justification. If cannabis has been clinically proven to have therapeutic properties (and I cited several of them), that is NOT the case for the vast majority of other controlled substances known as recreational use drugs.

If you are looking for a perfect system, I do not know where you will find it but a system where all drugs get put into the same monitored system is the only way to get ahead of the pushers who can change the composition of drugs to new ones faster than approvals can be done by governments at present.

I will stand firm by my counter argumentation to you envisioning health care professionals writing scripts on all recreational drugs without a medical justification. Are you not aware of the existence of biomedical ethics and how they govern the practice of medicine? I am not sure how and why anyone would place the expectation on licensed physicians as a whole to dismiss The Principle of Nonmaleficence as they would be tasked to deliver prescriptions on a variety of recreational drugs known to have no therapeutic properties and on the top of it all listing severe counter indications to medically prescribed pharma drugs as well as a variety of OTC drugs.

All drugs, psychotropic or not should be under medical control.

Anything less is not too intelligent.

Regards
DL

You keep dismissing the reality that all FDA approved drugs obtained via a medical prescription are justified due to their therapeutic properties. They were tested via clinical trials and evaluated for how successful/efficient their therapeutic qualities are as well as tested for their side effects. Care to detail for me the clinically tested and demonstrated efficient therapeutic properties addressing health conditions, of recreational drugs other than cannabis? Opiates have been approved for the sole reason that there is ample clinical data supporting their ultimate therapeutic property for pain management. Same with morphine prescribed under the medical justification of pain management and specifically addressing a variety of medical DIAGNOSIS with symptoms related to the medical need to manage the patient's pain.

Your joking right?

Non.

You would like a list of all the testing done on psychotropic drugs eh. try google. Or read the LeDain Royal Commission Report on Psychotropic Drugs.

Your proposed plan is to rely on prescriptions for the delivery of ALL recreational drugs. Reality check being that prescribed drugs by health care professionals have to be justified via a medical diagnosis. The challenge presented to you is to show equal justification relying on a medical diagnosis to expect health care professionals to script all recreational drugs.

That aside. The real research not corrupted by your government agencies will happen after all drugs come under prescription restriction. People who fear the law make damned poor research subjects.

Detail what you mean by "real research" addressing ALL recreational drugs. What type of data do you have to determine what "real research" ought to be regarding ALL recreational drugs?

As to doctors writing scripts for recreational drugs. Do you believe that doctors care so little of what their patients consume in terms of drugs that they would prefer not to know and monitor for those drugs?

Again and again : doctors do not script drugs without a medical/clinical justification to do it. Again and again, if cannabis has ample clinical data to support its therapeutic properties (which I have already detailed several of them), therapeutic properties applied to a variety of diagnosed conditions, what makes you *think* that all other recreational drugs should be scripted when they do not have therapeutic properties applied to a medical diagnosis? Are you expecting health care professionals with a license to practice medicine and prescribe drugs to dismiss medical bio ethics and as I earlier specifically mentioned :

The Principle of Nonmaleficence as they would be tasked to deliver prescriptions on a variety of recreational drugs known to have no therapeutic properties and on the top of it all listing severe counter indications to medically prescribed pharma drugs as well as a variety of OTC drugs.

How come you are not addressing it? Is it a lack of understanding or knowledge on your part as to the role of health care professionals?

Further and to educate you a tad about prescribing any drugs the patient will self administer. Three important terms : route, dosage and timing. Are you going to expect a prescribing physician to detail on a script for any recreational drug "take as needed"? If not, explain how route, dosage and timing would be detailed on scripts for all recreational drugs.

Health care professionals will do as the law tells them to do.

You are liberally assuming that legislators would place the burden on health care professionals to dismiss medical bio ethics( factor you never addressed) while they would be compelled by law to prescribe all recreational drugs without a medical diagnosis to justify those scripts. A scenario only worthy of a cheap paper back fiction novel.

You seem to think we are so stuck with our present systems that we cannot change. How droll.

Non. I am specifically addressing your proposal of compelling the medical corp to dispense prescriptions for all recreational drugs without a medical diagnosis to support them. So far you have failed to demonstrate how all recreational drugs would meet the condition to offer clinically supported therapeutic properties designating them as medicines.

Health care workers you describe do not exist.

Since I work in nursing I am well aware of how prescribed drugs are labeled when it comes to self administration and more importantly why route, dosage and time are of ultimate importance. I am also well aware of the principles governing medical bio ethics which so far you have demonstrated total ignorance about those principles. I have asked you specifically if you expect health care professionals to word their scripts for all recreational drugs as "take as needed". That relating intimately to the principle of Nonmaleficience. Need I to detail why it would be unconscionable for health care providers to word their scripts under "take as needed" for all recreational drugs considering the extremely high risk of overdosing which applies to them versus cannabis where it does not? Considering that route, dosage and timing CANNOT apply to all recreational drugs as they would be scripted to support addictions and for individuals suffering of addictions. Are you not aware of the reality that the body develops resistance to such drugs thus the trend for addicted persons to increase their intake and frequency of their intake in order to experience the recreational effects they are seeking? I suppose all those important and clinically supported details are to also be dismissed.

They are now generally just in it for the money.

In the US, medical students will accumulate astronomical student loans debts up to the completion of their degrees with extended time for those who specialize into specific branches of medicine. Whether such graduates who also have to complete their internship start practicing medicine for the sole purpose of being "just in it for the money" or because they consider their profession to be a vocation, it is totally irrelevant to the realities I have fully detailed which challenge your proposal to compel health care professionals into assuming the burden and responsibility( and liability) to prescribe all recreational drugs.

I don't know about where you live but where I do, my pharmacist and doctor know of all the drugs they prescribe

I live in Florida. Like anywhere else in the US, our pharmacists are not authorized to write scripts or deliver scripts. Checking on what the role of pharmacists is in Canada (your profile indicating you live in Canada) :

http://www.pharmacists.ca/cpha-ca/assets/File/cpha-on-the-issues/PPPharmacistPrescribing.pdf

I will task you to read the entire content of the above link and explain how the defined role of Canadian pharmacists would be compatible with delivering scripts (again) without a medical diagnosis established in cooperation with other health care professionals (doctors).

and what quantities I should be going through. You think they cannot do what they already do.

What governs/directs which specific meds are being prescribed, how often they are to be self administered, which route and which dosage is which medical diagnosis was established. Again, without a medical diagnosis supporting all those, you are advocating the irresponsible and harmful dispensation of drugs.

Regards
DL

Your "regards" in view of your insulting remarks targeting atheists in general hold no water on this board.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Here is a quarter.

"So far you have failed to demonstrate how all recreational drugs would meet the condition to offer clinically supported therapeutic properties designating them as medicines.".

And I will not as it is not required as doctors script what they are told to by business and the law.

Regards
DL

 

[Jarhyn]

Praying is a religious act that most of us consider at best a waste of time.

It's not a matter of not wanting to help, it's a matter of not wasting time on things which are completely useless.

If atheists are to get that hung up on language then they are no brighter than foolish believers and are not into idiocy.

Regards
DL

Hung up on language? It is LITERALLY a psychological tool to do nothing and still feel alright with yourself afterward! So apparently being critical of not doing anything except telling yourself it's ok that you did nothing is being 'hung up on language'.

If you are going to pray for anyone, pray to see changes in yourself, namely that you have the courage and recognize opportunities to DO.