Skip to comments.
Treating Doctors as Drug Dealers: The DEA's War on Prescription Painkillers
CATO.ORG ^
| JUNE 5, 2005
| Ronald T. Libby
Posted on 06/06/2005 8:17:01 PM PDT by CHARLITE
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101 next last
To: slowhandluke
There's a book, called something like "The good old days weren't so good". It covers some of the gritty details your history books apparently did not
And there is also the "History of Prohibition" that gives the facts that the "good old days" leaves out. Fact: Prohibition caused teen use of alcohol to skyrocket. Teen deaths from alcohol overdose and bad hooch reached epidemic proportions. Prohibition did not save kids, it killed them!
We are in the same situation today.
Has the drug war succeeded in reducing teens access to drugs?
Since 1975, the federal government has been asking high school seniors how easy it is for them to obtain marijuana. In 1975, 87% of youths said it was very easy or fairly easy to obtain marijuana. That number has risen to 89.6% even after the millions of arrests since 1975.
Has the drug war reduced the supply of drugs and raised their price?
According to the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the price of heroin has instead dropped significantly over time, while its production has risen greatly. The price of cocaine has similarly dropped from $275 per gram in 1981 to $90. Despite massive investments in border patrols, overseas crop eradication efforts, Department of Defense involvement and arrests of drug smugglers and drug dealers, the drug war has not reduced the supply of drugs nor made them more costly to obtain.
...
41
posted on
06/06/2005 10:35:11 PM PDT
by
mugs99
To: ellery
We humans love our intoxicants, and no war on some drugs is going to stop that.
Bears repeating.
42
posted on
06/06/2005 10:38:00 PM PDT
by
augggh
(Music is the Best....thanks Frank!)
To: A CA Guy
It's all over the net from different sources and studies
ROTFLMAO!!!
Your "source" is John P. Walters, the drug czar. It is 99.44% pure propaganda. This claim was first made in 1937 and "a new study" discovers it again every year since. Post a real science source that I can verify, and please don't waste my time with a bogus religious school "study". I check and verify every source when they're given to me. I follow every link and read every review. I've been doing this a couple of years now, on FR, and not one single poster has ever came up with a legitimate scientific study the connects pot and scizophrenia. Just more albino alligators in the sewers of New York City!
...
43
posted on
06/06/2005 10:50:54 PM PDT
by
mugs99
To: mugs99
Prohibition, both alcohol and drugs, has always been based on religious morality. Exageration, myth and dogma has always trumped truth, science and fact. That was true then and it's true today. I don't get your point. The point I was making was that there was lots of drunkeness at the time; are you saying it was a sober period? The argument was the big effort to reduce the problem. Some went overboard in arguing for prohibition, somewhat like today's conjured obesity problem (where they want to draw the line below that level corresponding to max life span).
Are you calling the problem of alcoholism itself a myth, or the idea that it was rampant back in the early to mid 1800s? It was one of the few escapes from a grinding life in that part of the industrial revolution.
Or did you mistakenly think I was advising prohibition? My point is only that there wasn't any libertarian nirvana in the first part of the 19th century. Lot's of people drank without discipline, but they (and their children) paid for it directly, no gov't subsidy. And most historians paid them little attention.
If you argue to change the drug laws to those of 1860, the historians among your opposition will pay a lot of attention to the problems of Demon Rum back then.
To: mugs99
Can't say I've read
"History of Prohibition", but the title suggests it might have an agenda. But judging something by it's title is probably a bad idea.
By the time prohibition rolled around (1920s), we were past much of the troubles of the 1860s, which was the time the original post was arguing about. Prohibition came after the problems of the early industrial revolution had already been resolved, mostly by more wealth due to the industrial revolution, some by moral persuasion.
I'm not arguing for or against prohibition. My point was that using the 1860s as an argument for legalized drugs might be shooting yourself in the foot. Your comments on Prohibition are from 60 years later.
To: mugs99
Yep, that was a good beginning for you to go read. You can find others on google, but this one would be the one the government probably relies on stating where the studies come from and all.
Figured it's a good place for you to start.
46
posted on
06/07/2005 12:12:51 AM PDT
by
A CA Guy
(God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
To: CHARLITE; Abram; Annie03; Baby Bear; bassmaner; Bernard; BJClinton; BlackbirdSST; blackeagle; ...
Libertarian Ping! IMO our drug laws are a violation of the separation between church and state. Since we own our bodies, not the government, we therefore answer to God, not the government, for whatever good or ill WE decide to do with our bodies.
47
posted on
06/07/2005 3:18:28 AM PDT
by
traviskicks
(Temporarily filling in for freepatriot32 w/ the Libertarian Ping list.)
To: Jaysun
Same with insulin and heart medication.
Perhaps if some of the no-drugs-ever crowd found themselves with chronic pain, they wouldn't be so glib about pain medication.
48
posted on
06/07/2005 3:53:12 AM PDT
by
SoVaDPJ
To: A CA Guy
"has connections to schitzophrenia"
One, it's spelled "schizophrenia."
Two, please cite a source for that information.
49
posted on
06/07/2005 3:58:59 AM PDT
by
SoVaDPJ
To: A CA Guy
For many, weight loss would help a bunch. Some who have real spine damage really don't have lots of alternatives to drugs. One of my friends is an orthopedic surgeon who was rather prominent here in California, then his back ended his career. Nothing can be done, he has severe spine damage from being required to help remove patients from the operating table. It's a tortured life, and I don't envy people in that condition. I had a broken neck once by a drunk driver that ruined me for several years of recovery, though I used no drugs, I am familiar with the pain. I don't believe you. I don't believe you didn't use any drugs through recovery of a broken neck.
50
posted on
06/07/2005 4:02:48 AM PDT
by
SoVaDPJ
To: A CA Guy
Never mind citing the source for which I asked. I just remembered you're the guy who uses "My mom worked with inmates" as a source.
51
posted on
06/07/2005 4:11:39 AM PDT
by
SoVaDPJ
To: Nachoman
And what pain killer would that be?
To: SoVaDPJ
"has connections to schitzophrenia" One, it's spelled "schizophrenia." Two, please cite a source for that information.Three, I knew some crazy people who smoked pot once. Four, I knew some ignorant people who insisted wet sidewalks cause rain.
53
posted on
06/07/2005 4:15:47 AM PDT
by
FreeKeys
(Running Condi in '08 will destroy the anti-American moonbat wing of the DemocRAT party for good.)
To: marty60
Have you tried Palladone?
54
posted on
06/07/2005 4:26:39 AM PDT
by
SC DOC
To: SoVaDPJ
He's probably referring to a recent "study" from New Zealand, the methodology of which wouldn't get you a passing grade in an 8th grade science course.
Psychosis, Hype, and Baloney
55
posted on
06/07/2005 4:33:29 AM PDT
by
Wolfie
To: Wolfie
I'm not sure why people don't get this but--people who have medical or mental health issues frequently self medicate. That doesn't mean the substance or behavior they use caused the problem.
56
posted on
06/07/2005 4:45:48 AM PDT
by
SoVaDPJ
To: SoVaDPJ
Its worse than that. If you read the methodology of the study, they simply asked pot smokers if they ever felt, for example, paranoid. If they said yes, that was one for the "Pot Causes Psychosis" column. No actual diagnoses of mental illness were made.
57
posted on
06/07/2005 4:48:53 AM PDT
by
Wolfie
To: Wolfie
I've spent a little time with young people--IMO, most of them think the world is against them and that other people are watching them. Women have that reaction all the time to being in a bathing suit.
58
posted on
06/07/2005 5:02:32 AM PDT
by
SoVaDPJ
To: SoVaDPJ
For many, weight loss would help a bunch. Some who have real spine damage really don't have lots of alternatives to drugs. One of my friends is an orthopedic surgeon who was rather prominent here in California, then his back ended his career. Nothing can be done, he has severe spine damage from being required to help remove patients from the operating table. It's a tortured life, and I don't envy people in that condition. I had a broken neck once by a drunk driver that ruined me for several years of recovery, though I used no drugs, I am familiar with the pain. I don't believe you. I don't believe you didn't use any drugs through recovery of a broken neck.
As well you should not believe a line of crap like that. I would encourage everyone who thinks "A CA Guy" is credible to read his statement above and wonder "What color is the sky on his planet?"
People like this are what the Drug Warriors are like. Deluded, cruel, ignorant, filled with hate, and leading lives of misery themselves. If there is any class of people worth grinding into the dust of history, it is these. They are no better than Stasi or Pol Pot's goons.
To: SC DOC
No, I take Lipitor(600 cholesterol), Welchol (to help Lipitor), Arthritec,(arthritis in spine), Soma (muscle spasms from torn ligiment in back) Lortab, (the one that makes me sick) for pain, Ultram (pain)(keeps the Soma from putting me to sleep). And on nights when none of it works Lunesta so I can sleep.
I have tried getting rid of some of the meds, I hate taking pills. But who wants to be unable to function. I can't even think straight from the pain if I don't do something about it. When I reached 3000mgs of aspirin a day, I gave up and went to the Doc. Oh I forgot, I have a herniated (inoperable) disk in my lumbar area, which is pushing on my sciatic nerve.
But according to the DEA, I'm a druggie.
60
posted on
06/07/2005 6:33:33 AM PDT
by
marty60
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson