Posted on 04/17/2017 10:45:52 AM PDT by LTC.Ret
Quote the article: "Prosecutors in Belgium have recently announced that executives with pharmaceutical companies based in the country will be charged with knowingly providing drug cartels with prescription drugs that were used to manufacture methamphetamine. . . . accused of providing the Mexican drug kingpin Ezio Figueroa Vazquez with several tons of ephedrine . . . seven executives who were charged with crimes . . . company made two shipments of two million pills containing pseudoephedrine in 2006 . . . big pharma drug Adderall is nearly identical to crystal meth . . .the only place to get massive quantities of a substance like ephedrine would be a pharmaceutical company . . . they are making millions of dollars on the deal."
(Excerpt) Read more at thefreethoughtproject.com ...
Whereas alcohol makes it better?
(1) Opposition to marijuana legalization is not an endorsement of alcohol, nor is it a recommendation that schizophrenics take up drinking.
Beside the point, of course. A case for legal alcohol and illegal marijuana falls flat if it cites harms of the latter that are shared by the former.
(2) A serious argument for marijuana legalization ought to demonstrate that the harms of marijuana use will not be amplified by its legalization. That seems implausible though.
A serious argument for marijuana remaining illegal and alcohol legal ought to demonstrate that the harms of marijuana use will be amplified by its legalization more than the harms of alcohol are. That seems implausible though.
A serious argument for marijuana legalization need only point out that, like alcohol criminalization before it, the primary effect of marijuana criminalization is to enrich criminals with all the harms to innocent third parties that this entails.
(3) I have never smoked marijuana, but, like most people these days, I have seen enough of its ill effects to incline me to oppose legalization.
A serious argument for marijuana remaining illegal and alcohol legal is required not only to establish that marijuana is harmful - which, I remind you again, nobody here has disputed - but that its harms exceed those of alcohol. Surely you've seen the ill effects of alcohol?
Unless a case can be made based on first principles, the case for marijuana legalization should fail on pragmatic grounds if it can be shown that legalization and the resulting increased access and use would impose significant new harms and risks on society. The medical evidence indicates that to be the case in the form of the mental illness associated with marijuana use.
For example, in 2013, in Association between cannabis use, psychosis, and schizotypal personality disorder: findings from the National Epidemiologic Survey of Alcohol and Related Conditions, the authors of a major study reported that:
The results indicate that the risk of both psychosis and SPD [schizotypal personality disorder] increases with greater use of cannabis, in a dose-dependent manner. Compared to non-users, greater cannabis use showed significantly elevated risk of having been diagnosed with SPIE [self-reported history of psychotic illness or episode] and elevated risk of all SPD symptoms, even after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4108251/
Similarly, in 2014, in Prognosis of schizophrenia in persons with and without a history of cannabis use, the authors reported that:
In addition to our previous findings of an increased risk of schizophrenia in subjects with history of cannabis use, we now show that schizophrenia patients with a history of cannabis use also have a poorer prognosis, as indicated by longer hospital episodes and more readmissions. Thus, it is of public health as well as clinical importance that, as well as increasing risk of schizophrenia, cannabis may also lead to an illness that is more severe than in non-users of this drug.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4108251/
I note that although marijuana use is apparently responsible for a greater risk of and severity of mental illness, that does not commonly amount to a certainty or probability of mental illness in otherwise healthy individuals. The cumulative effect for society though is for increased marijuana use to impose an increased burden of mental illness.
Do not take my word for any of this. Read my sources and do your own review of the medical evidence. I submit though that, unless you can refute my demonstration with evidence of a similar quality, I have won the point: marijuana legalization must logically be expected to lead to more cases of schizophrenia and an increase in their severity and burden. Within a few years, the experience of the states that have legalized marijuana will offer more definitive proof on this point.
Yup. Gilligan is a prophet.
Save for later reading
From Pakistan, there is this.
Ex-PM Gillani's son charged in ephedrine scandal"
Aamir Jami
A special Anti-Narcotics Court on Friday indicted former prime minister Yousuf Raza Gillani's son, Ali Musa Gillani, and 10 others in the ephedrine case which rocked the PPP government in March 2011.
The long-running case involves two Pakistani pharmaceutical companies, Berlex and Danas, that allegedly used political connections to obtain huge amounts of ephedrine and are suspected of diverting it to people in the drug trade who could have used it to make methamphetamine worth billions of dollars. The companies have denied any wrongdoing.
Along with Ali Musa Gillani, the accused include former health minister Makhdum Shahabuddin, health ministry official Abdul Sattar and Dr Abdul Khaliq.
Despite those accused maintaining their innocence, the judge formally charged the high-profile suspects of culpability in the ephedrine scandal.
Explore: Ephedrine scam: the case that wasn’t there
Ex-chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry had pointed out in early 2012 that Ali Musa Gillani was also a suspect in the case.
The Anti-Narcotics Force (ANF) then issued a notice to Musa Gillani and one of his alleged 'front men' for manipulating the unauthorised allocation.
Today's hearing was preceded by a hearing on April 10, during which judge Irum Niazi expressed her intention to summon the accused to court if they refused to appear.
The next hearing has been scheduled for May 12, in which the accused are expected to present their arguments.
What is ephedrine?
Ephedrine, along with pseudoephedrine, is one of the main ingredients in methamphetamine, a scheduled narcotic substance.
Explore: Europe frets as cartels turn to S. Asia for ephedrine
Drug cartels often look towards countries with weak regulations to facilitate their requirement for ephedrine. According to Matt Nice of the Vienna-based International Narcotics Control Board, cartels look for a country with weak security and regulation “where you can obtain the chemicals because no one is paying attention, or it has never been a problem before.”
According to a UN report, published in 2015, "Increasing methamphetamine seizures and expert perception of high levels of methamphetamine tablet and crystalline methamphetamine use indicate the presence of a large and possibly expanding market in East and South-East Asia."
Methamphetamine, it is said, can be more valuable and addictive than heroine.
Danas looks like it's run by Muslims.
False.
because neither of us recommend that schizophrenics drink alcohol
Who recommends that schizophrenics use marijuana? You continue to fail to establish a distinction.
or that the current mostly permissive legal status of alcohol be changed.
I recommend that laws on mind altering substances consistently reflect the reality of those substances, which pot-illegal-alcohol-legal manifestly does not.
Unless a case can be made based on first principles, the case for marijuana legalization should fail on pragmatic grounds if it can be shown that legalization and the resulting increased access and use would impose significant new harms and risks on society.
It follows from that pragmatism that maintaining the current mostly permissive legal status of alcohol fails if it can be shown that legality and the resulting increased (as compared to making illegal) access and use would continue to impose significant harms and risks on society. You continue to fail to establish a distinction between the proper legal statuses of alcohol and marijuana.
The medical evidence indicates that to be the case in the form of the mental illness associated with marijuana use.
I remind you: "Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is the most common co-occurring disorder in people with schizophrenia." - https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh26-2/99-102.pdf. You continue to fail to establish a distinction between the proper legal statuses of alcohol and marijuana.
I further remind you that alcohol is more addictive than marijuana, more violence-increasing, and the only one of the two that can lead to fatal overdose.
If marijuana is legalized, how do you propose to prevent an increase in its use by schizophrenics and an increase in the mental health burden?
Can you cite to credible medical evidence for your views?
If alcohol remains legalized, how do you propose to prevent an increase in its use by schizophrenics and an increase in the mental health burden?
For the third time: "Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is the most common co-occurring disorder in people with schizophrenia." - https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh26-2/99-102.pdf
Increase, that is, relative to what they would be if alcohol were re-banned.
The extent of alcohol abuse is due in no small part to it being legal and culturally accepted. Making marijuana legal would similarly increase its use and abuse. As demonstrated, this would increase the extent and burden of schizophrenia. This point is based on reliable medical evidence and is not effectively refuted by dogmatic assertions that equate alcohol and marijuana.
The extent of alcohol abuse is due in no small part to it being legal and culturally accepted. Making marijuana legal would similarly increase its use and abuse. As demonstrated, this would increase the extent and burden of schizophrenia.
By the same token, recriminalizing alcohol would decrease the extent and burden.
dogmatic assertions that equate alcohol and marijuana.
Nobody here has equated alcohol and marijuana. But I understand why you'd rather prop up straw men to battle than address the points actually raised.
Alcohol is not at issue because neither of us propose to change its legal status. I urge you to review the medical evidence as to the considerable harm of marijuana.
that is why complaining of pain basically got you any drug you wanted in any amt you wanted....
it was the BUERACACY...
which coincidentally made Mexican meth all the more desirable....
Your conclusion doesn't follow from your premise. I propose that alcohol and marijuana each be legal because their bans are comparably harmful, as are the substances themselves: alcohol is more addictive than marijuana, more violence-increasing, and the only one of the two that can lead to fatal overdose. You propose that alchol remain legal and marijuana illegal based on your unsupported assertion that this disparity is based on mankind's "experience and considered judgement".
I urge you to review the medical evidence as to the considerable harm of marijuana.
To repeat points you never addressed: A serious argument for marijuana remaining illegal and alcohol legal is required not only to establish that marijuana is harmful - which, I remind you again, nobody here has disputed - but that its harms exceed those of alcohol. Surely you've seen the ill effects of alcohol?
"Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is the most common co-occurring disorder in people with schizophrenia." - https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh26-2/99-102.pdf
We simply are not going to agree as to your fundamental premise that marijuana must be legal because alcohol is legal. That makes no sense to me, and especially not in view of the substantial and increasingly well-documented harms of marijuana. And, by the way, the study that you cite does not contend that alcohol use causes schizophrenia.
More of your straw men - that is not my fundamental premise, but as I said is a conclusion based on the following facts: "their bans are comparably harmful, as are the substances themselves: alcohol is more addictive than marijuana, more violence-increasing, and the only one of the two that can lead to fatal overdose."
That makes no sense to me, and especially not in view of the substantial and increasingly well-documented harms of marijuana.
"Harmful alcohol and other drug use, particularly cannabis and amphetamine use, may trigger psychosis in people who are vulnerable to developing schizophrenia. While substance use does not cause schizophrenia, it is strongly related to relapse." - https://www.health.gov.au/internet/publications/publishing.nsf/Content/mental-pubs-w-whatschiz-toc~mental-pubs-w-whatschiz-cau
Call me picky, but an old Australian Department of Health circular quoted out of context is not good evidence. Try PubMed, which indexes medical journal articles.
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.