Legal and illegal drugs?
Why are there illegal drug laws in the states? What I'm getting at is this: If you have spent any time in front of the tele, you will see massive amounts of prescrption drugs being advertised. And all of them have some very nasty side effects. For instance, I saw an ad for a drug for depression.... And one of the side effects were anal leakage. Makes one wonder what is worse. Being depressed about life in general, or being depressed because you soiled yourself in public and have no control over it.
Another ad for a drug for womens plumbing had a side effect of death.
And yet another drug for depression had a side affect of a "Sense of impending doom".
It seems like no matter what side affect goes along with any drug, it is always worse than the reason people are taking them.
So why not regulate them via government, tax and monitor them, and make them as safe as possible for the users?
This is directed towards Barry.
First of all, thanks for your observations towards my question. Saying that your "psychologist" girlfriend and yourself stared at each other incredulously makes me wonder if your "psychologist" girlfriend had the higher education that one needs to be a psychiatrist which prescribes the meds that I am talking about, would you actually be looking at each other with such skepticism.
A couple more questions I have for you. How long did you and your "psychologist" girlfriend blankly stare at each other? And did your skepticism turn to lestful passion after a while?
Just one more question to Barry....
How can a question be labeled as rhetoric?
"lestful passion" should have been lustful passion...
My spelling is terrible at times.
Actually, all of the time.
- Barry CLv 71 decade agoBest Answer
> And yet another drug for depression had a side affect of a "Sense of impending doom".
That one made me and my psychologist gf turn towards each other and stare incredulously when we saw it :)
Still, having done the statistical analysis of her dissertation dealing on part with side effects of certain psychotropic drugs in certain populations, I can tell you your overall rhetoric is all wrong.
The short answer as to why that is is this: the risks of side effects are small enough to be considered acceptable considering the benefits.
Not everyone gets the side effects and no one gets all the side effects.
What they can't say on a short commercial is that it is generally known what the risks factors are for each side effect, and that is why they tell you to talk to a doctor. the doctor may be able to tell you based on your medical history that you are at a too high risk for increased blood pressure for example, and so that drug is not appropriate for you.
There might be better arguments for making some illegal drugs legal, but worrying about the side effects of legal drugs is not part of any of them.
If you want to go that way, then argue that their should be the same large scale testing of the illegal drugs, and that somehow they should be subject to all the same regulatory aspects of manufacturing and marketing and delivery as well, and that the researched side effects would then be acceptable by the same reasons the ones you mentioned above are acceptable risks.
If you started that today, expect it to take 15-20 years at least to do the proper studies for each and every drug you are concerned about.
Maybe you could then explain how you would regulate the manufacturing and distribution channels - I can imagine running tests, but how can you be sure that coke or meth or E heroin or weed or whatever was of pharmaceutical grade? Will the illicit, well funded, and well-armed manufacturing and distribution channels simply go away, or simply comply with new regulations? I somehow just don't see that happening, but I would love to hear via PM any reader's opinions on how that would work.
- Jolly GreenLv 41 decade ago
If any symptom is reported during the clinical trial, it has to be reported in the advertising and through the labels and warnings. This is one of the governmental regulations on such items.
They are taxed, they are heavily monitored, and they are, for the most part, as safe as possible.
Even if it is one person out of 300 who experience said "anal leakage" it has to be reported as a possible side effect, even if it is from a juicy cheeseburger they had during the trial period :P
Now, despite having said this, there are exceptions, and there are some side effects (sometimes horrible side effects) that go on unfound, partly because they are from long-term use, and partly because not everything is tested for in a trial.
Look at all the class-action lawsuits against drug manufacturers for heart conditions as a result of drug use.
While there are a lot of illegal drugs out there that are by far less damaging than some of the legalized drugs out there, the difference is government regulation. If the government actually had a say in the production of marijuana and cocaine, they would probably be legal as well. The only difference is that they by-pass the government stage and that pissed someone off.
- EmilyLv 44 years ago
illegal drugs ...there is a reason why they are illegal legal drugs are being studied by FDA and other labs to find all the negative effects on human health and yes...I agree that most of the drugs can be very bad for you but for some people they are necessary in order to fight the illness. Legal drugs always come with a long list of side effects which are closely studied, but illegal drugs don't.Many people mistakenly still think that marijuana is not bad for their health.
- northernhickLv 71 decade ago
I do like your observations. I have my own scepticism about the pharmaceutical industry in general...
However, what you're forgetting is that these are all 'possible' side effects, and that they all treat very real medical problems. From a utility calculus point of view, you have to ask what's more important to you: Correcting the problems with your 'plumbing', or avoiding a one in ten thousand chance of dying. It can be a rational choice either way.
The reason why some drugs are strictly illegal (rather than regulated prescription drugs) is because they aren't recognized as serving any beneficial medical purpose - i.e. there's no reason to prescribe them - or else because the risks are far too great to balance against the benefits. (For instance, morphine is legal and regulated as a painkiller, despite the risk of addiction. Heroin, on the other hand, is not used as a painkiller, because its risks are far greater.)
There is, however, a great deal of debate surrounding possible medical uses for marijuana.