TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Is Alcohol Worse Than Ecstasy? BBC Finds Out

Is Alcohol Worse Than Ecstasy? BBC Finds Out

Recent research has analysed the link between the harmful effects of drugs relative to their current classification by law with some startling conclusions. Perhaps most startling of all is that alcohol, solvents and tobacco (all unclassified drugs) are rated more dangerous than ecstasy, 4-MTA and LSD (all class A drugs). If the current ABC system is retained, alcohol would be rated a class A drug and tobacco class B.

The scientists involved, including members of the government's top advisory committee on drug classification, have produced a rigorous assessment of the social and individual harm caused by 20 of the UK's most dangerous drugs and believe this should form the basis of future ranking. They think the current ABC system is arbitrary and not based on any scientific evidence.

The drug policies have remained unchanged over the last 40 years so should they be reformed in the light of new research? (Excerpt from main website)

http://sprword.com/videos/isalcoholworsethanecstasy/

I'll give it a watch.. thx

its pretty neat but i still dont think the findings are scientific enough.

The amount of lies and bullshit in that documentary is off the charts.

there are more alcohol related deaths per year than ecstacy related...

quote:

Originally posted by Miss. S there are more alcohol related deaths per year than ecstacy related...

Wow.

what a joke

quote:

Originally posted by Miss. S there are more alcohol related deaths per year than ecstacy related...

There is also at least 1000 times more people in the world who drink their entire lives or since they were of age once a week or even daily vs. the amount of people who take ecstasy for a few years or even 5 or 10 years while they are young or in the scene...periodically, once a year, month or every week...

quote:

Originally posted by SPANIARD The amount of lies and bullshit in that documentary is off the charts.

seriously. heroin is the worst drug? pfft.
i love waking up in the morning with a needle in my arm.

quote:

Originally posted by chinamon i love waking up in the morning with a needle in my arm.

so much for trying to keep it a secret....

quote:

Originally posted by Miss. S so much for trying to keep it a secret....

thanks for introducing me to H btw.
<3 u

quote:

Originally posted by chinamon thanks for introducing me to H btw. <3 u

my pleasure.
it was the least i could do, after u showed me how to hit the pipe

quote:

Originally posted by Miss. S my pleasure. it was the least i could do, after u showed me how to hit the pipe

you love it when i lay the pipe and i love it when you hit the pipe.

quote:

Originally posted by chinamon seriously. heroin is the worst drug?

If you think that's the only reason I said their was bullshit in the documentary, let me explain myself and apologize for the misunderstanding. The first thing that is crap about this study is the classifications. For one, any legal drug cannot be compared to an illegal drug. It's just not the fair thing to do as one is a controlled market and the other isn't. Sure, there are tons of drugs that are illegal for consumption to any citizen and are kept for medical testings and mixed in with other medications (cocaine for example). The amount of people that would be able to consume that would not equate to any substantial number, therefore their consumption would be coming from an uncontrolled market and impossible to evaluate. This is purely common sense and I'd expect most people to know this, but just incase...

Second thing I really don't like is the obvious horrible ordering of the drugs and the clear evidence that many of these people have either 1) never done the drugs they are mention or/and 2) They have no analyzed them closely enough to come to a strong conclusion and have a clear bias aside from the obvious clear facts. Any factual reports that have a tone of suspicion, like the reasons given behind cannabis's harms, show a lack of proffesionalism. 'It could' 'Studies indicate'.... why can't you say you just don't know? And how can you defend saying a drug like GHB, which is an extremely dangerous drug on so many different levels, is more dangerous than some drugs that have no fatalities a year?

I know I'm going off so I'll stop here because I could watch the documentary again and this post will never end. Anyways, hope this defends my reasonings more than what I posted before.

quote:

Originally posted by SPANIARD If you think that's the only reason I said their was bullshit in the documentary, let me explain myself and apologize for the misunderstanding. The first thing that is crap about this study is the classifications. For one, any legal drug cannot be compared to an illegal drug. It's just not the fair thing to do as one is a controlled market and the other isn't. Sure, there are tons of drugs that are illegal for consumption to any citizen and are kept for medical testings and mixed in with other medications (cocaine for example). The amount of people that would be able to consume that would not equate to any substantial number, therefore their consumption would be coming from an uncontrolled market and impossible to evaluate. This is purely common sense and I'd expect most people to know this, but just incase... Second thing I really don't like is the obvious horrible ordering of the drugs and the clear evidence that many of these people have either 1) never done the drugs they are mention or/and 2) They have no analyzed them closely enough to come to a strong conclusion and have a clear bias aside from the obvious clear facts. Any factual reports that have a tone of suspicion, like the reasons given behind cannabis's harms, show a lack of proffesionalism. 'It could' 'Studies indicate'.... why can't you say you just don't know? And how can you defend saying a drug like GHB, which is an extremely dangerous drug on so many different levels, is more dangerous than some drugs that have no fatalities a year? I know I'm going off so I'll stop here because I could watch the documentary again and this post will never end. Anyways, hope this defends my reasonings more than what I posted before.

I'm not quite certain that you know what you're talking about either though. For instance, list off some of the extreme dangers of GHB - not anything anecdotal, mind you.

The fact of the matter is, many of the drugs that are currently scheduled have been scheduled with little to NO scientific evidence of detrimental harm to the human body. The analogue system ensures this. It's draconian, and quite frankly, revolved around profit schemes and power mongering, rather than any true "danger or risk to the public".

jesus...


i thought it was a good documentary when i watched it a while back.

quote:

Originally posted by Elendil I'm not quite certain that you know what you're talking about either though. For instance, list off some of the extreme dangers of GHB - not anything anecdotal, mind you.

Not every drug's negative effects are related with the long term damage it causes with excessive use. Using GHB as the example, if the amount of rape that could be connected with GHB was used in this documentary under the fatality category, I guarentee it would be in 1000's; it's extremly dangerous in that sense. And GHB is a always presented in such a subtle way that many mistake it for a strong liquor since its presence in the club scene has made it into a very profitable product for the black market... many end up in the hospital every weekend for internal damage that can cause a coma.

I agree with everything you said in the second part, its been excepted for decades that every classification of any drug is at the convinience of the court rather than the dangers it presents to the citizen.

quote:

Originally posted by SPANIARD Not every drug's negative effects are related with the long term damage it causes with excessive use. Using GHB as the example, if the amount of rape that could be connected with GHB was used in this documentary under the fatality category, I guarentee it would be in 1000's; it's extremly dangerous in that sense. And GHB is a always presented in such a subtle way that many mistake it for a strong liquor since its presence in the club scene has made it into a very profitable product for the black market... many end up in the hospital every weekend for internal damage that can cause a coma. I agree with everything you said in the second part, its been excepted for decades that every classification of any drug is at the convinience of the court rather than the dangers it presents to the citizen.

I'm certainly willing to concede that the possibilities of it's abuse on UNWILLING parties are dangerous. Still, I would say no more so than the amount of people who over-drink every evening, and are forced or engage in acts that are outside of their typical range of behavior.

GHB is dangerous primarily when used in combination with other substances (especially alcohol). Furthermore, many of the health difficulties arising from use of GHB have more to do with shady manufacturing, something that arose more from marginalizing it's access. I don't use it, nor will I, and this is a big reason for that.

Still though, the lesson I suppose all around is: be responsible folks. Don't blindly consider that "legal = safe", but also, consider and research carefully before trying anything

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.