Posts by BenWilson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Sorting out our thinking on drugs, in reply to debunk,
That's not really answering Russell's question. He wanted to know what you think this means NZ should do.
My answer to that, as Russell ascertained, was that I think the current rules are far too strict, and that things should be relaxed. But that's caveated by "starting with the least harmful currently prohibited substances first". In other words, I think dope should be legalized, at the very least.
If that is not on the table, then I really don't think it makes much difference at all what we do. Eventually, following the logic of our PSA, we will eventually ban all psychoactive substances, and be back to square one, having solved essentially nothing, other than that one direction for policy did more harm than good, namely trialing unknown substances on that segment of our own population that wants to smoke dope but doesn't want to get busted, or doesn't have a dope connection. Which is a lot of our kids, and a surprising number of adults.
On the stimulants side it could even be worse. To be completely consistent, I think in the long run decriminalizing the biggest ones of those follows much the same logic, but this country is a long, long way from being able to accept that idea. We might get closer if we could ever dare to allow cannabis to be legalized, so that we could actually see what happens. But the harm from strong stimulants can be so much greater than from dope that I'm not even sure how that could be approached. However, I'm pretty sure that banning all these chemicals is just causing people who really want a P effect to just take P. From some gang, probably.
-
Hard News: Sorting out our thinking on drugs, in reply to Russell Brown,
Yes, and my understanding is that MDPV is a drug that has an effect much like P, but with a much more rapid decline in response, leading to redosing becoming imperative. Hence the tendency towards overdose.
It could easily be used by a P dealer who wanted to cut product due to an urgent need for cash. In the long run the users would know it wasn’t P, but if they took some of it with the dealer before the sale, they could be fooled. Anecdotally, I’ve even heard that it’s initial effect is even speedier than P, so they could think they’d had a lucky score of some amazingly pure P (not that this would be rational, I don’t think P works like that at all, whatever Breaking Bad might have implied).
-
Hard News: Sorting out our thinking on drugs, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
In my experience, if you feel like you could be dying, one gets pretty honest pretty quickly with the professionals
You do, but only if you're actually conscious at the time. But on the flip side, if you don't feel like you're dying, are you going to tell them that you used P earlier? You're already in some paranoid freakout, and are probably wondering if they might tell the police, who would only have to search your car to find your stash and paraphernalia, and you'll be in big trouble. So what goes down on the report is that patient has taken synthetic shit #21235908365749, and is experiencing paranoid delusions and elevated heart rate. Nothing about how they took synthetic shit #21235908365749 to take the edge off a bender on P, which they began when they woke up hungover as hell from drinking far too much booze the night before, and caught a cold and had a horrible running nose but can't buy effective cold relief medication.
ETA: Oh and the P might not have been particularly pure. Supply issues meant that the dodgy dealer had slipped 50% synthetic #09385732458 in there too, which is P-like in effect, but of course, has completely unknown side effects.
-
Hard News: Sorting out our thinking on drugs, in reply to debunk,
No-one will do “trials” of these psychoactives because there are too many and changing too fast according to the market.
I understand. So this database is essentially attempting to keep track of effects in the field. It's a very poor substitute for controlled trials, but it might still be the best thing available, and definitely a whole lot better than nothing.
-
Hard News: Sorting out our thinking on drugs, in reply to ,
I could never get my head around smoking dope as any kind of medication, rather than just being a recreational drug.
I can see why some people would want that, but presumably either pills or a vaporizer would be a better way to have it. It would only make sense to me for people who are already smokers. Then they could mix it into their tobacco. Not sure though, whether that might be even more unhealthy, considering that dope hits are usually held in longer, and you'd be doing that with tobacco smoke, potentially increasing the harm from that.
-
debunk, what is that database used for practically? Is it to actually administer emergency treatment, or for the purposes of future research and maybe policy making? Or both?
I ask because the former seems like a very hard ask. Virginia's experience in the A&E mirrors my own, the one time I had to take someone who was in a bad way on synthetic stuff to hospital. They didn't really care what it was that he had - he even had the actual packaging with him, and they scarcely glanced at it. They were more concerned with the usual triage procedures - checking the vital signs, asking about the symptoms, making a decision whether to even do anything at all (considering that in an A&E there are quite often competing concerns, other people with much more serious needs than just to lie down and be monitored for a few hours). I went along mostly on the off-chance that if he took a serious turn for the worse, I'd feel obliged to tell them that there's a good chance with this particular guy that the synthetics he's holding aren't the only drugs he's taken today, and I could probably have guided them about what to look for. It wasn't needed. Nor was it asked for. Nor would I have violated his privacy by telling them anything about it, unless the need suddenly seemed very urgent.
And the experience was quite illuminating. In cases of potentially toxic overdosing, the hardest part for the medical staff (who are in the first place typically triage nurses, then doctors later) is to ascertain any kind of truth about what's actually been ingested. When it comes to exotic rare concoctions, which have potentially been mixed inside the patient into even rarer crossovers, there's very little evidence for them to go on as to what chemicals they might try as an antidote. That's even if the packaging does actually contain the truth. If it's serious enough, and the patient is looking like they're getting worse, I'd think they would do their own blood analysis, rather than trusting anything the patient, or anyone with them, would say. Because they have to know how the drugs are affecting this particular person right now. And that might manifest in different things for different people. Or even just different foods they ate that day.
I guess what I'm saying is that sound medical decisions are typically based on huge trials. Isolated points of evidence for individual reactions aren't going to form the basis of decisions that doctors would want to take, unless they really had nothing else to go on, and the patient is steadily worsening.
I'm not even vaguely saying what Virginia is asking about is a bad idea. It's a very good idea. I'm just asking about the motivation. It would seem to me to be excellent evidence to inform the world about the effects of various chemicals.
-
I really liked that Campbell piece, mostly for the user vox-pops. I'd love to see a follow up. But they struck me as real people with real reasons for their real choice, all of which had been dictated either directly or indirectly, by the guy with the white hair standing there looking scared. One good thing about these products being legal is that you even could have this article, with people speaking honestly about their purposes, reasons, experiences, concerns, right there at the point of sale. The bad part about them being legal when the safer alternative is not, and the number of vendors is shorn down to a minimum, is that wherever an outlet can run, it probably will, and will be a bottleneck of every type of wastoid. Just like what grog shops were like when they were few in number with short hours. Old drunks would line up for their morning drink, then slam it down and wander purposelessly, just enjoying their drunkenness, whether it annoyed other people or not.
-
Hard News: Sorting out our thinking on drugs, in reply to ,
Then Campbell live moved on to Graham Norton doing an infomercial about Kiwi wine.
Wow, true. It's so normalized I didn't even notice the juxtaposition. I'm about to go out on the town, will see if I can find any people acting as "disgracefully" as the guy who was stoned and drunk (he seemed more drunk than stoned). My bet is that it will take me about 1 minute to find some on K Road. But it's Friday night, and getting wasted is a national institution.
Loved the guy who said it got him off the bud. When asked which he'd rather have - "Bud". Instant. Cause Bud is better. Even Peter Dunne knows that, cause he had Bud himself but wouldn't touch legal highs.
-
I recognize that Mark Steyn is a pleonasm. Do I get half a point?
-
Hard News: Jones: The contender leaves, in reply to Sacha,
Oh this is too priceless. Hat tip Virginia McMillan on Twitter. ROFLMAO!
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 260 261 262 263 264 … 1066 Older→ First