Failed prohibition

Generally an unmoderated forum for discussion of pretty much any topic. The focus however, is usually politics.
Post Reply
User avatar
O Really
Captain
Posts: 11544
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by O Really »

Here ya are, guys - for your holiday dreams...

https://www.psaccess.org/safe-access-palms-springs-menu

On the Gene Autry Trail.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 21438
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Vrede too »

O Really wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 11:10 am
Here ya are, guys - for your holiday dreams...

https://www.psaccess.org/safe-access-palms-springs-menu

On the Gene Autry Trail.
The first cannabis cafe in the United States opens (Los Angeles)

:clap:

An alternative to the self-serving and destructive cop lies with D.A.R.E.:
At the Drug Policy Alliance, we believe accurate, honest, compassionate drug education is a right for all young people. The Safety First: Real Drug Education for Teens curriculum is a comprehensive tool for teachers that allows them to have honest conversations about drugs with their students, equipping them with the skills to navigate their risks.

Safety First: Real Drug Education for Teens

Safety First: Real Drug Education for Teens is the nation’s first harm reduction-based drug education curriculum for high school teachers. The free curriculum consists of 15 lessons that can be completed in a 45- to 50-minute class period.

Each lesson is designed to engage students through interactive activities such as discussions and role-playing. The curriculum is aligned with National Health Education Standards as well as Common Core State Standards so it can be easily integrated into Health classes....
Goodbye DARE — more schools are embracing realistic drug education
Arming students with facts empowers them to educate people around them, whether they choose to use drugs or not.


:---P

Oregon Is Poised to Legalize Shrooms. It’s Just the Beginning
“We see this not only as a template for Oregon but for the rest of the country and the world."


Stunning, I never imagined it possible in the US. 8-)
Speaking of Rudy, WTF?

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 21438
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Vrede too »

Major League Baseball removes marijuana from the list of banned substances

... This development will increase public pressure on the NFL to follow suit, but the NFL has shown no inclination to unilaterally remove marijuana from the substance-abuse policy. The league has pointed out, on numerous occasions, that it’s a subject of collective bargaining. Which means that, if the NFL Players Association wants marijuana to be removed from the substance-abuse policy, the NFLPA needs to make a concession.

And the NFLPA won’t. Because the NFLPA realizes that it’s currently very easy to navigate the annual testing program under the substance-abuse policy. Only a small percentage of players end up being fined or suspended for marijuana use. A much larger percentage of players surely smoke all season long, knowing that if they simply stop by the middle of March (given that it takes roughly a month to clear the metabolites from the system) and refrain until the give their annual sample for testing (the testing window opens, coincidentally, on 4/20), they will have no problems....
8-) :happy-cheerleaderkid:
Speaking of Rudy, WTF?

User avatar
neoplacebo
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 4457
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:42 pm
Location: Kingsport TN

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by neoplacebo »

Vrede too wrote:
Thu Dec 12, 2019 9:19 pm
Major League Baseball removes marijuana from the list of banned substances

... This development will increase public pressure on the NFL to follow suit, but the NFL has shown no inclination to unilaterally remove marijuana from the substance-abuse policy. The league has pointed out, on numerous occasions, that it’s a subject of collective bargaining. Which means that, if the NFL Players Association wants marijuana to be removed from the substance-abuse policy, the NFLPA needs to make a concession.

And the NFLPA won’t. Because the NFLPA realizes that it’s currently very easy to navigate the annual testing program under the substance-abuse policy. Only a small percentage of players end up being fined or suspended for marijuana use. A much larger percentage of players surely smoke all season long, knowing that if they simply stop by the middle of March (given that it takes roughly a month to clear the metabolites from the system) and refrain until the give their annual sample for testing (the testing window opens, coincidentally, on 4/20), they will have no problems....
8-) :happy-cheerleaderkid:
This is good news but I must emphasize the fact that nearly forty years ago, before I even moved to NC, a bunch of us here in east TN used to have softball games among about ten or twelve of us and the wives or girl friends and instead of beer and hot dogs we always had beer and pot. But it's good to see MLB finally coming around after all this time. Play ball.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 21438
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Vrede too »

An abbreviated version of what an honest, effective, "harm reduction" replacement for the decades of LEO lies and "Just Say No" stupidity would look like:
How to Recognize a Drug Overdose

Overdoses and other drug-related medical emergencies are far more common than most people think – but they don’t have to be lethal. Learn the signs of what a drug overdose or medical emergency looks like for some commonly used drugs (alcohol, cannabis, MDMA, heroin/opiates, psychedelics, cocaine and other stimulants) and what actions you can take to help save someone’s life.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
To the extent possible I incorporated these principles in my patient education. I often had to walk a fine line when parents were present, but I was never the pointless authoritarian that they might want me to be.
Speaking of Rudy, WTF?

User avatar
O Really
Captain
Posts: 11544
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by O Really »

Seems like good advice.
But wouldn't it generally fall on deaf ears, given that those who use the inherently dangerous stuff aren't too concerned with safe practices regarding their risk-taking?

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 21438
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Vrede too »

O Really wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 11:35 am
Seems like good advice.
But wouldn't it generally fall on deaf ears, given that those who use the inherently dangerous stuff aren't too concerned with safe practices regarding their risk-taking?
Drug use is not "inherently dangerous".
Unlike, say, extreme sports, muscle cars or some hiking and bicycling, the point of drug use is rarely "risk-taking".
Drug use often may not be wise, but the users are rarely suicidal.

The first graphic is Alcohol. Because you relish your beer should I assume that you are "generally ... deaf" to good advice about drinking safely?

For example, one thing I would stress that's mentioned in a couple of the graphics is having a friend that's straight or at least not as high. The 'designated driver' idea has been hugely successful for drinkers while still allowing everyone to party in turn.
Speaking of Rudy, WTF?

User avatar
O Really
Captain
Posts: 11544
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by O Really »

Maybe "drug use" in the broadest sense is not inherently dangerous, but I would contend that use of some drugs is. Those would include at a minimum crack, meth, street fentynal, etc. My point isn't that the advice is bad, or even that there might be other, better advice. Just that good advice gets regularly ignored regarding smoking, drinking, diet, exercise, etc., and might also be ignored regarding recreational drug use.

User avatar
O Really
Captain
Posts: 11544
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by O Really »

Vrede too wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 11:54 am


The first graphic is Alcohol. Because you relish your beer should I assume that you are "generally ... deaf" to good advice about drinking safely?

Change the "are" to "were" and I'd say "of course." Long standing advice is "two drinks a day for men..." Totally ignored. Don't drink more than X amount at one setting. Totally ignored. Don't drink and drive. Ignored fairly often (though not recently).

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 21438
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Vrede too »

For most, the exclusive and silly options presented have been "Don't" and "You're gonna die." Showing people a safer middle ground will reach some. User and layperson access to Narcan, for example, is saving thousands of lives. I have used every one of those categories, sometimes unsafely but mostly safely. It's sure better to adopt strategies that increase the proportion of the latter than it is to continue with utterly failed strategies. Even most "crack, meth, street" fentanyl use does not lead to death, and preventing the most deaths possible creates the opportunity for recovery from addiction.
Speaking of Rudy, WTF?

User avatar
O Really
Captain
Posts: 11544
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by O Really »

Vrede too wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 12:28 pm
For most, the exclusive and silly options presented have been "Don't" and "You're gonna die." Showing people a safer middle ground will reach some.
Agreed.

User avatar
neoplacebo
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 4457
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:42 pm
Location: Kingsport TN

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by neoplacebo »

O Really wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 12:39 pm
Vrede too wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 12:28 pm
For most, the exclusive and silly options presented have been "Don't" and "You're gonna die." Showing people a safer middle ground will reach some.
Agreed.
I myself am a longtime violator of "don't" and am dismissive of "you're gonna die." In the first place, I never was one to do what I was told, so "don't" just doesn't register with me except in the sense that it's out there somewhere in the periphery. As for "you're gonna die" that is correct; it will happen. I say stay away from people who say "don't" to you and take as much risk as you're comfortable with. Otherwise, you'll be hung up and possibly constipated. And in extreme cases some have become Republicans. Just today I've taken several risks and may take one or two more before the night is over. While I do that, I will ponder the sign I have on the wall; it says "You're gonna die." One thing is certain; I won't become a Republican.

User avatar
O Really
Captain
Posts: 11544
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by O Really »

Well the "you gonna die" argument (threat) has never worked very well for anything. Remember when cigarettes were called "coffin nails" even by those lighting them? And how long it took for cancer threats to make much of a dent? And that ultimately it was the social engineering more than the threats that cut down the smoking rate? Don't people know they're killing themselves for being obese? Or putting down a fifth a night? Sure they do. But they also all know people who are fat, drink like a fish, smoke like a 47 Ford, and live to be 90. Or they know people who ate well, exercised and either got some awful disease or got run over by a truck. Or whatever.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 21438
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Vrede too »

O Really wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 9:10 pm
Well the "you gonna die" argument (threat) has never worked very well for anything. Remember when cigarettes were called "coffin nails" even by those lighting them? And how long it took for cancer threats to make much of a dent? And that ultimately it was the social engineering more than the threats that cut down the smoking rate? Don't people know they're killing themselves for being obese? Or putting down a fifth a night? Sure they do. But they also all know people who are fat, drink like a fish, smoke like a 47 Ford, and live to be 90. Or they know people who ate well, exercised and either got some awful disease or got run over by a truck. Or whatever.
The point is evidenced based "harm reduction", not unrealistic harm elimination.

ESPN reporter Edward Aschoff dies of pneumonia on 34th birthday

Wow, that sucks.
Speaking of Rudy, WTF?

User avatar
O Really
Captain
Posts: 11544
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by O Really »

How does that even happen?

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 21438
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Vrede too »

O Really wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 9:48 pm
How does that even happen?
I don't know the factors in this case, but things that can influence such a tragic outcome include:

PPP - piss poor protoplasm (a genetic failure) - I had a 28 year old, non-drug using patient come in dead and we could not save her. Autopsy showed coronary artery disease and an MI like she was 80.
A temporarily susceptible victim - exhaustion, existing minor illness, etc.
Undiagnosed condition making the victim chronically susceptible - HIV, earlier lung damage, etc.
Antibiotic resistant pathogen
Lack of early care
Substandard care
And, who knows?
Speaking of Rudy, WTF?

User avatar
Ulysses
General
Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 11:57 pm
Location: The Left Coast

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Ulysses »

Vrede too wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 9:35 pm
O Really wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 9:10 pm
Well the "you gonna die" argument (threat) has never worked very well for anything. Remember when cigarettes were called "coffin nails" even by those lighting them? And how long it took for cancer threats to make much of a dent? And that ultimately it was the social engineering more than the threats that cut down the smoking rate? Don't people know they're killing themselves for being obese? Or putting down a fifth a night? Sure they do. But they also all know people who are fat, drink like a fish, smoke like a 47 Ford, and live to be 90. Or they know people who ate well, exercised and either got some awful disease or got run over by a truck. Or whatever.
The point is evidenced based "harm reduction", not unrealistic harm elimination.

ESPN reporter Edward Aschoff dies of pneumonia on 34th birthday

Wow, that sucks.
The implication being that Aschoff's pneumonia and death were a result of vaping? I did a Google search on Aschoff vaping and couldn't find any links. But I agree it's possible... considering how many seem to have contracted severe lung disease from vaping.

Me, never vaped. I came around about three decades after I quit any form of smoking. I have briefly been around people who were vaping. In some cases they acted rather furtive but I didn't pry into why. But it was in a locale - hilltop gathering spot to watch the often spectacular sunsets over the SF Bay - where people often toke on pot joints and I don't give a shit about that. For various reasons I hardly visit that spot any more, but now I'm wondering if any of them have experienced lung issues. It sucks... using a new technology to try to avoid harm and instead getting even worse.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 21438
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Vrede too »

Ulysses wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:05 pm
The implication being that Aschoff's pneumonia and death were a result of vaping? I did a Google search on Aschoff vaping and couldn't find any links. But I agree it's possible... considering how many seem to have contracted severe lung disease from vaping.

Me, never vaped. I came around about three decades after I quit any form of smoking. I have briefly been around people who were vaping. In some cases they acted rather furtive but I didn't pry into why. But it was in a locale - hilltop gathering spot to watch the often spectacular sunsets over the SF Bay - where people often toke on pot joints and I don't give a shit about that. For various reasons I hardly visit that spot any more, but now I'm wondering if any of them have experienced lung issues. It sucks... using a new technology to try to avoid harm and instead getting even worse.
Actually, I was just commenting on O Really's "got run over by a truck. Or whatever." Vaping did not occur to me. Vaping-associated pulmonary injury did not become a thing until after I retired. Also, it can be mistaken for pneumonia at first, but it's not pneumonia. Otoh, it might make one more susceptible to pneumonia.

I tobacco vaped for a few months to quit smoking, did not get ill. I've never THC vaped, and now probably never will.
Speaking of Rudy, WTF?

User avatar
Ulysses
General
Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 11:57 pm
Location: The Left Coast

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Ulysses »

Vrede too wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:13 pm
Ulysses wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:05 pm
The implication being that Aschoff's pneumonia and death were a result of vaping? I did a Google search on Aschoff vaping and couldn't find any links. But I agree it's possible... considering how many seem to have contracted severe lung disease from vaping.

Me, never vaped. I came around about three decades after I quit any form of smoking. I have briefly been around people who were vaping. In some cases they acted rather furtive but I didn't pry into why. But it was in a locale - hilltop gathering spot to watch the often spectacular sunsets over the SF Bay - where people often toke on pot joints and I don't give a shit about that. For various reasons I hardly visit that spot any more, but now I'm wondering if any of them have experienced lung issues. It sucks... using a new technology to try to avoid harm and instead getting even worse.
Actually, I was just commenting on O Really's "got run over by a truck. Or whatever." Vaping did not occur to me. Vaping-associated pulmonary injury did not become a thing until after I retired. Also, it can be mistaken for pneumonia at first, but it's not pneumonia. Otoh, it might make one more susceptible to pneumonia.

I tobacco vaped for a few months to quit smoking, did not get ill. I've never THC vaped, and now probably never will.
Well, apparently the severe lung disease and/or deaths from vaping are all related to cannabis vaping: the culprit apparently is vitamin E acetate, which I have read is only added to CBD/THC vaping mixtures. So I'm assuming the tobacco related vapes don't have Vit E acetate and therefore are not resulting in the same level of harm.

And vitamin E acetate is harmless in therapeutic dosage when taken orally. But when subjected to the high temps of vaping, apparently it forms a toxic compound that injures lung tissue. Since I have a 44 year old chemistry degree, I'm surmising that the Vitamin E is added to the CBD/THC oil as a preservative, and nobody anticipated the formation of the toxic end product. Just an educated guess.

I did take a CBD oil pill about a year ago. A co-worker gave me a little packet of them. It caused repeated belching for hours, so I returned the unused capsules to her the next day.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 21438
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Failed prohibition

Unread post by Vrede too »

Ulysses wrote:
Fri Dec 27, 2019 5:33 am
Well, apparently the severe lung disease and/or deaths from vaping are all related to cannabis vaping: the culprit apparently is vitamin E acetate, which I have read is only added to CBD/THC vaping mixtures. So I'm assuming the tobacco related vapes don't have Vit E acetate and therefore are not resulting in the same level of harm.

And vitamin E acetate is harmless in therapeutic dosage when taken orally. But when subjected to the high temps of vaping, apparently it forms a toxic compound that injures lung tissue. Since I have a 44 year old chemistry degree, I'm surmising that the Vitamin E is added to the CBD/THC oil as a preservative, and nobody anticipated the formation of the toxic end product. Just an educated guess.

I did take a CBD oil pill about a year ago. A co-worker gave me a little packet of them. It caused repeated belching for hours, so I returned the unused capsules to her the next day.
I don't have any direct, professional knowledge.

If Aschoff was a vaper I suspect we would have heard about it, but perhaps not.

The Wiki article I linked says that Vit E is strongly suspected but not yet confirmed as the culprit. Nor has it acting in conjunction with other substances been ruled out.

It also says:
... Of the 2,051 cases reported to the CDC, information on substance use is known for 867 cases in the three months prior to symptom onset as of October 15, 2019. About 86% reported using THC-containing products; 34% reported exclusive use of THC-containing products. About 64% reported using nicotine-containing products; 11% reported exclusive use of nicotine-containing products....

Medical officials in continental Europe have not reported any serious medical problems related to vaping products except one early case related to e-cigarettes documented in Northern Spain in 2015. Since many of the cases in North America were traced to THC-cartridges as well as the use of e-cigarette vape products, but THC remains illegal in European countries, the disease burden related to vaping has been significantly lower in Europe despite the prevalence of e-cigarette use....
Speaking of Rudy, WTF?

Post Reply