Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

If you drink alcohol, yet you are against other drugs...

145679

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    you need to read the posts carefully, I said, you cant compare them because they are so unlike each other. I may have used a very hard drug to make an example of. but likewise, Id be more worried about any type of drug over alcohol. I absolutely hate drugs. Be them soft or hard.

    also, I just took heroin as an example, didnt mean to focus on it, ffs. so relax there.
    I read that bit, but then commented because you actually did compare them.

    If you hate drugs why don't you hate alcohol, the drug that is responsible for filling up our hospital A+Es every weekend, is the cause of family break ups and traumatised children, and is directly or indirectly responsible for many many deaths.
    Alcohol is a very strong and physically addictive drug, there should be no lines drawn between it and all "other drugs", unless you also hate alcohol you personally cannot say "I hate drugs" but you can say "I hate most drugs", or "I hate certain drugs".


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 730 ✭✭✭gosuckonalemon


    I really want to throw the word idiot out there, but Id rather not get an infraction. Take it from someone who has family members who work in rehabilitation. Casual Heroin usage nearly always leads to dependency. And cold turkey unless it is managed by a professional in a rehab centre can lead to death, simply because if the addict is a serious addict, their body rejects whats happening to them. actually idiot is the right word. :rolleyes:


    Holy fcuk this girl is completely clueless and has no idea what she is on about.

    Long story short...

    If you lock a heroin addict in a room for 3 days and allow them to detox there is no risk of death. A truly horrible experience, both physically and mentally, all the same.

    Put a serious alcoholic in a room and try get them to detox without medical attention...significant risk of death a la Amy Winehouse.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,389 ✭✭✭mattjack


    I really want to throw the word idiot out there, but Id rather not get an infraction. Take it from someone who has family members who work in rehabilitation. Casual Heroin usage nearly always leads to dependency. And cold turkey unless it is managed by a professional in a rehab centre can lead to death, simply because if the addict is a serious addict, their body rejects whats happening to them. actually idiot is the right word. :rolleyes:

    Where are you getting this from ? The only two drugs that can kill during withdrawal are alcohol and benzos . Withdrawal from heroin and most opiates almost never causes death.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 730 ✭✭✭gosuckonalemon


    Methadone is about 60% more addictive than heroin though. But Its a nice drug with a copyright?
    Also the most addictive drug on the market legal or illegal is nicotien and cold turkey can kill you.
    :eek:

    What a load of bollix...where do these nutjobs come up with these stats?

    OK Temptamperu, please provide a link to show

    1) Methadone is more addictive than heroin

    2) Nicotine withdrawl can kill you

    Imagine genuinely thinking giving up fags cold turkey could kill you? People would be dropping like flies.

    Jesus, nobody can be this thick, gotta be a troll.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,227 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    jimpump wrote: »

    heroin being smoked is as safe as a pint or smoke of a spliff

    wouldn't believe that - if nothing else , the fumes and toxins from the foil will and have, destroyed lungs very quickly - smoking heroin can also rapidly turn into addiction , much faster than a weed smoker or casual pint drinker


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,861 ✭✭✭IrishEyes19


    Holy fcuk this girl is completely clueless and has no idea what she is on about.

    Long story short...

    If you lock a heroin addict in a room for 3 days and allow them to detox there is no risk of death. A truly horrible experience, both physically and mentally, all the same.

    Put a serious alcoholic in a room and try get them to detox without medical attention...significant risk of death a la Amy Winehouse.

    Dont be such a d*ck and call me that. Im not clueless. You don't even know me. I don't agree with some points made in this thread. I never said alcohol wasnt bad. I just hold a different opinion regarding drugs. but dont fking call me clueless. Boards is supposed to be a forum for difference of opinion and ideas, not a forum to get nasty and be insulting. You dont know me. so cop the fcuk on with your assuming.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,861 ✭✭✭IrishEyes19


    I read that bit, but then commented because you actually did compare them.

    If you hate drugs why don't you hate alcohol, the drug that is responsible for filling up our hospital A+Es every weekend, is the cause of family break ups and traumatised children, and is directly or indirectly responsible for many many deaths.
    Alcohol is a very strong and physically addictive drug, there should be no lines drawn between it and all "other drugs", unless you also hate alcohol you personally cannot say "I hate drugs" but you can say "I hate most drugs", or "I hate certain drugs".

    and I agree with you, Cu Giobach, everything you wrote there is true. I didn't obviously outline what I meant properly.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 730 ✭✭✭gosuckonalemon


    Dont be such a d*ck and call me that. Im not clueless. You don't even know me. I don't agree with some points made in this thread. I never said alcohol wasnt bad. I just hold a different opinion regarding drugs. but dont fking call me clueless. Boards is supposed to be a forum for difference of opinion and ideas, not a forum to get nasty and be insulting. You dont know me. so cop the fcuk on with your assuming.

    You are entitled to your own opinion. But when you talk shi.t about dying from going cold turkey on heroin then you need to be pulled up on it. Making nonsense up in your head is no way to defend your argument.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,250 ✭✭✭lividduck


    Holy fcuk this girl is completely clueless and has no idea what she is on about.

    Long story short...

    If you lock a heroin addict in a room for 3 days and allow them to detox there is no risk of death. A truly horrible experience, both physically and mentally, all the same.

    Put a serious alcoholic in a room and try get them to detox without medical attention...significant risk of death a la Amy Winehouse.
    Pretty obvious who the clueless one is!
    Do some actual research (watching Trainspotting doesn't count).


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 730 ✭✭✭gosuckonalemon


    The way I look at it is that while one E or shot of heroin etc could kill you, one drink is very unlikely to unless you mix it with drugs or are allegric or something. Personally I wouldn't touch them.

    If you wish to do drugs and are ok with the risks then that's your business but do not lable me a hyprocrit because I choose not to.

    One E could NOT kill you unless you have some undiagnosed underlying medical condition. The same as one drinking session could kill you if you had some undiagnosed condition.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,250 ✭✭✭lividduck


    mattjack wrote: »
    Where are you getting this from ? The only two drugs that can kill during withdrawal are alcohol and benzos . Withdrawal from heroin and most opiates almost never causes death.
    Which is it, if it is almost never causes death then you accept that it sometimes does cause death . Make your mind up.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 730 ✭✭✭gosuckonalemon


    lividduck wrote: »
    Pretty obvious who the clueless one is!
    Do some actual research (watching Trainspotting doesn't count).

    Links to discount what I said please.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,287 ✭✭✭✭ntlbell


    R But if you have a history of mental illness in your family, smoking joints ect....can trigger it with awful effects. That's fact.

    As can alcohol.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭foxyboxer


    What all this boils down to is common sense.

    It is common sense to refrain from cigarettes because it causes lung cancer.
    It is common sense to refrain from narcotics as they are proven to be addictive.

    I may be labelled a sheep because I enjoy a drink (but don't enjoy being drunk) but at least I'm a sheep with common sense. If a day came where alcohol became a problem (affecting family, work or health), I'd like to think I'd have the common sense to seek help for it too. Baa.

    Alcohol is a major problem because it's availability is saturated in the market. It's 10am now on a Thursday morning. I'm sure I could buy a naggin of whiskey or vodka within the next 10-15 minutes if I choose to. Coke, heroin et al are a little harder to come by. To suggest that they would not be as problematic as Alcohol if widely available is short sighted.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 730 ✭✭✭gosuckonalemon


    foxyboxer wrote: »
    What all this boils down to is common sense.

    It is common sense to refrain from cigarettes because it causes lung cancer.
    It is common sense to refrain from narcotics as they are proven to be addictive.

    I may be labelled a sheep because I enjoy a drink (but don't enjoy being drunk) but at least I'm a sheep with common sense. If a day came where alcohol became a problem (affecting family, work or health), I'd like to think I'd have the common sense to seek help for it too. Baa.

    It is common sense to refrain from alcohol as it causes cirrhosis/liver failure.

    I may be labelled a sheep because I enjoy a joint (but don't enjoy being stoned) but at least I'm a sheep with common sense. If a day came where weed became a problem (affecting family, work or health), I'd like to think I'd have the common sense to seek help for it too. Baa.

    (See what I did there?)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭foxyboxer


    It is common sense to refrain from alcohol as it causes cirrhosis/liver failure.

    You are mixing up use with abuse.

    There are guidelines available on alcohol use (though these are generally ignored. Some people are stupid, what can you do). The guideline states that you should not regularly drink more than the daily unit guidelines of 3-4 units of alcohol for men (equivalent to a pint and a half of 4% beer) or you risk cirrhosis, liver damage etc. That's the choice you make. If you decide to drink more it's your own choice.

    I don't think I need to elaborate on the health effects of Cigarette use.

    I'm not condoning drug 'use'. That's a personal choice. The problem is the abuse part including alcohol.
    We see guidelines for alcohol but what are the guidelines for narcotic use?
    Would it be wise to suggest a guideline as opposed to a 'Say no to Drugs' campaign?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,156 ✭✭✭srsly78


    foxyboxer wrote: »
    You are mixing up use with abuse.

    There are guidelines available on alcohol use (though these are generally ignored. Some people are stupid, what can you do). The guideline states that you should not regularly drink more than the daily unit guidelines of 3-4 units of alcohol for men (equivalent to a pint and a half of 4% beer) or you risk cirrhosis, liver damage etc. That's the choice you make. If you decide to drink more it's your own choice.

    I don't think I need to elaborate on the health effects of Cigarette use.

    I'm not condoning drug 'use'. That's a personal choice. The problem is the abuse part including alcohol.
    We see guidelines for alcohol but what are the guidelines for narcotic use?
    Would it be wise to suggest a guideline as opposed to a 'Say no to Drugs' campaign?

    So you don't refrain from narcotics at all, good lad.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭foxyboxer


    srsly78 wrote: »
    So you don't refrain from narcotics at all, good lad.

    Unfortunately I do. Rich man's aspirin like.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 730 ✭✭✭gosuckonalemon


    foxyboxer wrote: »
    You are mixing up use with abuse.

    There are guidelines available on alcohol use (though these are generally ignored. Some people are stupid, what can you do). The guideline states that you should not regularly drink more than the daily unit guidelines of 3-4 units of alcohol for men (equivalent to a pint and a half of 4% beer) or you risk cirrhosis, liver damage etc. That's the choice you make. If you decide to drink more it's your own choice.

    I don't think I need to elaborate on the health effects of Cigarette use.

    I'm not condoning drug 'use'. That's a personal choice. The problem is the abuse part including alcohol.
    We see guidelines for alcohol but what are the guidelines for narcotic use?
    Would it be wise to suggest a guideline as opposed to a 'Say no to Drugs' campaign?

    The reason there are no guidelines for drugs other than alcohol is that they are not legal. If something is not legal what group/authority would publish safe guidelines?

    If alcohol was still illegal today, as it was in the past, would official guidelines still be drawn up do you think?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    foxyboxer wrote: »
    I'm not condoning drug 'use'. That's a personal choice. The problem is the abuse part including alcohol.
    We see guidelines for alcohol but what are the guidelines for narcotic use?
    Would it be wise to suggest a guideline as opposed to a 'Say no to Drugs' campaign?

    In Canada (Vancouver I believe) they had a huge heroin problem, after years of simply enforcing stricter and stricter laws they decided to take an alternative approach. They opened needle exchange programs as well as clinics for users to shoot up in. They essentially decriminalized heroin use.

    They saw a drop in crime, a drop in HIV/AIDS, a drop in addicts overdosing, and a drop in the number of addicts in general. Users had direct access to nurses who worked in the clinic and had direct access to rehab facilities and programs. Money was saved in not prosecuting users who shot up in the clinics and because of clean syringes and water the hospitals weren't full of users who had gotten infections or were being diagnosed with diseases.

    Politicians didn't like it of course, they see it as condoning drug use, but the objective facts are there. Regulating and monitoring drug use is better for everyone involved. It saves money and it saves lives.

    So, "Would it be wise to suggest a guideline as opposed to a 'Say no to Drugs' campaign?"

    Yes. But people don't like to think it would be. People are blinded by opinion and bias. The biggest problem with drug use is not the users, it's the public and the lawmakers.

    Edit - Links
    The project even has a website.
    A brief write-up on it.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    Seachmall wrote: »
    In Canada (Vancouver I believe) they had a huge heroin problem, after years of simply enforcing stricter and stricter laws they decided to take an alternative approach. They opened needle exchange programs as well as clinics for users to shoot up in. They essentially decriminalized heroin use.

    They saw a drop in crime, a drop in HIV/AIDS, a drop in addicts overdosing, and a drop in the number of addicts in general. Users had direct access to nurses who worked in the clinic and had direct access to rehab facilities and programs. Money was saved in not prosecuting users who shot up in the clinics and because of clean syringes and water the hospitals weren't full of users who had gotten infections or were being diagnosed with diseases.

    Politicians didn't like it of course, they see it as condoning drug use, but the objective facts are there. Regulating and monitoring drug use is better for everyone involved. It saves money and it saves lives.

    So, "Would it be wise to suggest a guideline as opposed to a 'Say no to Drugs' campaign?"

    Yes. But people don't like to think it would be. People are blinded by opinion and bias. The biggest problem with drug use is not the users, it's the public and the lawmakers.

    Edit - Links
    The project even has a website.
    A brief write-up on it.

    Same result in Portugal.
    The government in Portugal has no plans to back down. Although the Netherlands is the European country most associated with liberal drug laws, it has already been ten years since Portugal became the first European nation to take the brave step of decriminalizing possession of all drugs within its borders—from marijuana to heroin, and everything in between. This controversial move went into effect in June of 2001, in response to the country’s spiraling HIV/AIDS statistics. While many critics in the poor and largely conservative country attacked the sea change in drug policy, fearing it would lead to drug tourism while simultaneously worsening the country’s already shockingly high rate of hard drug use, a report published in 2009 by the Cato Institute tells a different story.


    Glenn Greenwald, the attorney and author who conducted the research, told Time: “Judging by every metric, drug decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success. It has enabled the Portuguese government to manage and control the drug problem far better than virtually every other Western country."


    Back in 2001, Portugal had the highest rate of HIV among injecting drug users in the European Union—an incredible 2,000 new cases a year, in a country with a population of just 10 million. Despite the predictable controversy the move stirred up at home and abroad, the Portuguese government felt there was no other way they could effectively quell this ballooning problem. While here in the U.S. calls for full drug decriminalization are still dismissed as something of a fringe concern, the Portuguese decided to do it, and have been quietly getting on with it now for a decade. Surprisingly, most credible reports appear to show that decriminalization has been a staggering success.

    The DEA sees it a bit differently. Portugal, they say, was a disaster, with heroin and HIV rates out of control. "Portugal's addict population and the problems that go along with addiction continue to increase," the DEA maintains. "In an effort to reduce the number of addicts in the prison system, the Portuguese government has an enacted some radical policies in the last few years with the eventual decriminalization of all illicit drugs in July of 2001."


    However, as Glenn Greenwald, the author of the Cato study, concludes: "By freeing its citizens from the fear of prosecution and imprisonment for drug usage, Portugal has dramatically improved its ability to encourage drug addicts to avail themselves of treatment. The resources that were previously devoted to prosecuting and imprisoning drug addicts are now available to provide treatment programs to addicts."



    Under the perfect system, treatment would also be voluntary, but as an alternative to jail, mandatory treatment save money. But for now, "the majority of EU states have rates that are double and triple the rate for post-decriminalization Portugal," Greenwald says.


    For those looking for clues about how the U.S. government can tackle its domestic drug problem, the figures are enticing. Following decriminalization, Portugal eventually found itself with the lowest rates of marijuana usage in people over 15 in the EU: about 10%. Compare this to the 40% of people over 12 who regularly smoke pot in the U.S., a country with some of the most punitive drugs laws in the developed world.



    Drug use of all kinds has declined in Portugal: Lifetime use among seventh to ninth graders fell from 14.01% to 10.6%. Lifetime heroin use among 16-18 year olds fell from 2.5% to 1.8%. And what about those horrific HIV infection rates that prompted the move in the first place? HIV infection rates among drug users fell by an incredible 17%, while drug related deaths were reduced by more than half. "There is no doubt that the phenomenon of addiction is in decline in Portugal," said Joao Goulao, President of the Institute of Drugs and Drugs Addiction, at a press conference to mark the 10th anniversary of the law.


    http://www.alternet.org/drugs/151635/ten_years_ago_portugal_legalized_all_drugs_--_what_happened_next

    Sense.

    Awaits "But, but Ireland is different.......... won't somebody think of the children.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,303 ✭✭✭Temptamperu


    mikom wrote: »
    Same result in Portugal.



    Sense.

    Awaits "But, but Ireland is different.......... won't somebody think of the children.
    They will only think of the children when the chidren are users by then they are filthy junkies and no-one cares.
    Everyone who has a bad opinion on heroin should watch that documentery three pages back. You will realise its te lawmakers creating a black market with no quality control, no laws and ultimitley the death of our friends and family who get stuck in this hole.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,287 ✭✭✭✭ntlbell


    foxyboxer wrote: »
    What all this boils down to is common sense.

    It is common sense to refrain from cigarettes because it causes lung cancer.
    It is common sense to refrain from narcotics as they are proven to be addictive.

    I may be labelled a sheep because I enjoy a drink (but don't enjoy being drunk) but at least I'm a sheep with common sense. If a day came where alcohol became a problem (affecting family, work or health), I'd like to think I'd have the common sense to seek help for it too. Baa.

    Alcohol is a major problem because it's availability is saturated in the market. It's 10am now on a Thursday morning. I'm sure I could buy a naggin of whiskey or vodka within the next 10-15 minutes if I choose to. Coke, heroin et al are a little harder to come by. To suggest that they would not be as problematic as Alcohol if widely available is short sighted.

    why is it not common sense to stay away from alcohol when it causes

    liver damage

    that's the number one most harmful drug beating heroin and crack cocaine?

    the problem with common sense is it's not very common


    he Most Harmful Drugs

    Here are the scores each drug received for overall harm caused on a scale of 0 to 100:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,389 ✭✭✭mattjack


    lividduck wrote: »
    Which is it, if it is almost never causes death then you accept that it sometimes does cause death . Make your mind up.

    I used the term "most opiates" in my post . Methadone , not heroin can cause fatalities very rarely.I,ve never specifically heard of anyone dying from heroin withdrawal.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭DyldeBrill


    I'd disagree with your initial statement.It all depends on the person themselves and the drug.

    John could go out and get hammered most nights, yet he may disagree with weed and all it does...ok I'd call him a hypocrite.It would be different if he had a few social drinks every now and again

    I wont' even comment on coc, heroine and stuff like that because they are all filthy drugs! they shouldn't be brought into this argument whatsoever.

    I would have no problem with someone disagreeing with me on those drugs.I'd be more open to Acid , DMT and what not.Drugs that could have a hidden cause


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 730 ✭✭✭gosuckonalemon


    DyldeBrill wrote: »
    I'd disagree with your initial statement.It all depends on the person themselves and the drug.

    John could go out and get hammered most nights, yet he may disagree with weed and all it does...ok I'd call him a hypocrite.It would be different if he had a few social drinks every now and again

    I wont' even comment on coc, heroine and stuff like that because they are all filthy drugs! they shouldn't be brought into this argument whatsoever.

    I would have no problem with someone disagreeing with me on those drugs.I'd be more open to Acid , DMT and what not.Drugs that could have a hidden cause

    Heroin is not a filthy drug. It is one the best drugs ever discovered. Has an absolutely brilliant effect on the body, with NO side effects. If you have a clean supply of heroin, along with the money to support it, you could take it all day everyday for the rest of your life. Look at The Rolling Stones.

    The only problem is that it is so addictive..people spend all they have on it until they are left with nothing, sharing needles, contracting HIV/AIDS/Hep.B and robbing their own grandmother to get their fix.

    Pure cocaine is also a brilliant drug. As in the quality that you can get easily enough in Bogota for 3-4€ a gram of 70-80% purity.

    NOT the shi.te you buy here for €80 or so which has, at most, a purity of 2-3%.


  • Site Banned Posts: 2,037 ✭✭✭paddyandy


    The Headshop Crowd are here in force trying at another effort to sell their destruction and there is little point in argument with them ;if they get their way then Ireland is on to a new road to resembling parts of the third world that you would'nt take a holiday in .


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    paddyandy wrote: »
    The Headshop Crowd are here in force trying at another effort to sell their destruction and there is little point in argument with them ;if they get their way then Ireland is on to a new road to resembling parts of the third world that you would'nt take a holiday in .

    Was never in a Headshop in my life.
    Pure muck in there.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 730 ✭✭✭gosuckonalemon


    paddyandy wrote: »
    The Headshop Crowd are here in force trying at another effort to sell their destruction and there is little point in argument with them ;if they get their way then Ireland is on to a new road to resembling parts of the third world that you would'nt take a holiday in .

    The headshop crowd off loaded all of their stock to the drug gangs before the government made them illegal.

    The drug gangs then used said drugs to sell on or to manipulate batches of speed and coke.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭DyldeBrill


    Heroin is not a filthy drug. It is one the best drugs ever discovered. Has an absolutely brilliant effect on the body, with NO side effects. If you have a clean supply of heroin, along with the money to support it, you could take it all day everyday for the rest of your life. Look at The Rolling Stones.

    The only problem is that it is so addictive..people spend all they have on it until they are left with nothing, sharing needles, contracting HIV/AIDS/Hep.B and robbing their own grandmother to get their fix.

    Pure cocaine is also a brilliant drug. As in the quality that you can get easily enough in Bogota for 3-4€ a gram of 70-80% purity.

    NOT the shi.te you buy here for €80 or so which has, at most, a purity of 2-3%.

    Well I was talking about the effects really it had on the person.Just as you said, people get hooked to it and rely on it on a daily basis.Coc and heroine Just aren't for me.Coc doesn't suit a lot of people, makes a lot of people fairly aggressive but then again that could be down to the ****e coc thats around these parts

    For me hallucinogenics are the best drugs such as Acid, and DMT.I cannot really comment on DMT as I have not tried it yet but Acid is nothing but positive experiences that is non addictive.Ok there are dangers to them but its all down to wether the person can handle it or not.


Advertisement
Advertisement