|
Nurse Dies Outside P.H.D - Front Page Herald Sun This morning (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Ossie_au |
i agree about the whole link to e.. all it is doing is taking the focus off the real danger and the real reason why the girl died.. so next kids who reads it thinks "ok i havn't had e tonight.. i'm fine to try ghb" or "well since 'e' is shown in the media as being more dangerous then any other drug and i have already had 3.. then a small mouthful of ghb surley won't harm me".
why the author is so obsessed with linking the death to 'e' i have no idea. They don't even know for sure that she went to the car to buy more e.. maybe she just went there to screw the guy and wanted to wash her mouth out after sucking his dick.. .. who cares really when the reason for death was the GHB that she either didn;t know was in the bottle or she did know and didn;t relise how much could kill her. Thats what should be the main focus of the article. The only suprise for me in that article is that they didn't mention anna wood.
anyways i feel for the family.. it's a real tragedy and more should be done to highlight the dangers of GHB rather then try and pass the buck off to e which 9/10 time is not the true cause of death and this case had absolutly nothing to do with it. |
|
|
| narcism |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ossie_au
why the author is so obsessed with linking the death to 'e' i have no idea.
|
i really dont see it as a case of "bashing" E
they have just linked it to the fact that she frist tried it a month before she died, why is it making the news now, my guess is that it was probably from the coroners findings which stated she died from an overdose. All i can really say is as a nurse she should know better ;)
feel for her family though, i know what they are going through. |
|
|
| rez |
Honestly I think the lot of ya are hypocrites...
Most of you are confessed ecstacy users, yet you are so against this GBH? Does that make sense? Oh its ok to try this because its more socially acceptable, but not ok to try this because everyone else says its bad.
Personally I have tried GBH, and I was strictly advised by a friend in regards to a safe dosage. I did not have any problems what so ever, if you take proper precautions then there shouldn't be a problem.
Its just like someone dropping 100 pills and then OD'ing, your not that stupid are you? GBH is just another illegal substance, and it is really a poor show of double standards to hear you guys bitching about it.
Any drug will cause you to OD if you are uneducated and stupid, some more than others. I'm not dumb enough to take something I have no idea about... I'd understand if none of you guys touched anything illegal, then you'd make for a valid point. Sooking because the media is trying to pass this off as E, what did you expect? An illegal substance is an illegal substance, and just because every man and his dog consumes it, doesn't make it any more acceptable. |
|
|
| Renegade |
| quote: | Originally posted by rez
Honestly I think the lot of ya are hypocrites...
Most of you are confessed ecstacy users, yet you are so against this GBH? Does that make sense? |
Yes, because ecstacy and GHB are different substances with different properties. Does it make sense to infer that being "against" a certain illicit substance necessitates being "against" all illicit substances?
| quote: | | Oh its ok to try this because its more socially acceptable, but not ok to try this because everyone else says its bad. |
It's got nothing to do with social acceptability. It's entirely about the risks involved.
| quote: | | Personally I have tried GBH, and I was strictly advised by a friend in regards to a safe dosage. I did not have any problems what so ever, if you take proper precautions then there shouldn't be a problem. |
Sorry, but that's bull. Unless your friend was intimately familiar with your weight, your BMI, how much alcohol you've drunk over the past month (although it's largely impossible to build up a tolerence to it on its own, there is a cross tolerence between alcohol and GHB) and had precise measuring tools at his disposal, he was merely making an educated guess. Fact is, compared with most other drugs, GHB has a fairly steep dose-response curve and - unless you're aware of all these factors and how to best factor these into the dosage - there is a comparatively slim line between feeling virtually nothing and falling into a coma:
| quote: | | An oral dose of 10 mg/kg produces short-term amnesia and hypotonia; 20-30 mg/kg produces drowsiness and sleep. After ingestion of approximately 50-70 mg/kg, profound hypnosis and deep coma rapidly ensue. |
http://emedicine.com/emerg/topic848.htm
In other words, depending on the factors listed above, two individuals could consume exactly the same amount of GHB and one could end up feeling virtually nothing while the other is carted off to ER. There are few other illicit substances (even amongst amphetamines, methamphetamines and opiates) where the margin for error is so slim.
| quote: | | Its just like someone dropping 100 pills and then OD'ing, your not that stupid are you? |
While I'd imagine you'd be in trouble if you took 100 pills, it's certainly comparitively more difficult to OD on E than it is on G. As any moderate ecstacy user will be able to tell you anecdotally, the dose-response curve is much less steep with MDMA - the more pills you take over the course of a night, the less effect each pill has. While ridiculous MDMA consumption will still land you in trouble, the dosage is much easier to work out and the margin for error is much greater.
Secondly, the most major immediate health risks involved with excess MDMA consumption are hyperthermia (overheating) and hyponatremia (complications from overconsuption of water). Even if someone does OD on ecstacy, it's much easier to keep them alive without medical attention (keep them cool, hydrated etc.) than it is with GHB, where even relatively slight overconsumption can lead to a comatose state and serious respiratory problems that are pretty ing difficult to rectify unless you have medical equipment handy.
In other words, compared to GHB, overdoses on ecstacy are much less likely and much easier to deal with if / when they happen.
| quote: | | Any drug will cause you to OD if you are uneducated and stupid, some more than others. I'm not dumb enough to take something I have no idea about... |
Agreed. As Paulie said, education is the key.
I'm not trying to pretend that E is completely safe here, but - at the same time - the risks associated with moderate, short-term ecstacy use are fairly ing low, especially compared with substances like GHB.
| quote: | | I'd understand if none of you guys touched anything illegal, then you'd make for a valid point. Sooking because the media is trying to pass this off as E, what did you expect? An illegal substance is an illegal substance, and just because every man and his dog consumes it, doesn't make it any more acceptable. |
Like I said, different illegal substances have different properties so it's wrong to speciously conflate them, especially when you have a responsibility (as journalists do) to report the facts. Are you saying the the risks involved with heroin use are the same as the risks involved with marijuana use? Do you think it would be fair if the media tried to intimate that the consumption of marijuana was as risky as the conumption of the consumotion of heroin just because they both happen to be illegal? If not, then why should a report on the dangers of GHB be conflated with the completely unrelated dangers of MDMA, as though MDMA was in any way related to the GHB overdose they're cynically trying to stir a moral outrage over? |
|
|
| rez |
Name me any GBH OD account where the patron followed the common rule of thumb.
With GBH the safe dosage is 2mL per 2 hours, regardless of bodyweight. You are copying and pasting facts from an internet site which tests a certain mixture of GBH, their providing possible symptoms from an already ridiculous dose of 10mL. If your that stupid to consume 10mL, then I'm sorry but an overdose seems deserved.
The same arguments could be brought up with ecstacy or any other drug for that matter.
Run through the coroner reports of all the past GBH od victims, all the deaths were a result of massive consumption or mixing with alcohol. It all comes down to education...
Although I do agree that an Ecstacy overdose isn't as serious as a GBH overdose, patrons should not consume a substance they know nothing about.
You see Renegade, you seem fairly intelligent... I'm not going to argue over something I'm sure you know alot about. But there in that sentence holds my point. You know alot (more than the average person) about the substances you consume, hence you can argue that ecstacy is alot more safer than GBH. If every GBH user knew about the substance they consume, there wouldn't be any need bodybags.
And your heroin comparisant (again credit to your intelligence for picking it up) is indeed valid. But the media does draw similarities from marijuana, they do this with every drug. Do I think its unfair? Of course not. Because illegal substances are not socially acceptable and that to the media is all they care about. Do they care that alcohol is more damaging than the occasional toke of marijuana? Of course they don't. Until the government finds a way of placing taxes on illicet substances, then the media will continue to bash any drug whenver possible. If connecting the dangers of GBH with the dangers of ecstacy causes a 'moral outcry', then so be it. A Public outcry would push for further education on substances, which in my opinion would be alot more beneficial to the idiots who are unlucky to OD. |
|
|
| Paulie |
| quote: | Originally posted by rez
A Public outcry would push for further education on substances, which in my opinion would be alot more beneficial to the idiots who are unlucky to OD. |
Good points with merit from both of ya's. Good point here rez, but the point we were trying to make was that public outcry means more education, it only means more education if the media outlets report the facts, and dont try to mix n match them to suit there agenda. |
|
|
| Sly_Guy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Paulie
it only means more education if the media outlets report the facts, and dont try to mix n match them to suit there agenda. |
but isn't that what's invariably gonna happen anyway? The backlash against something like this is always negative towards the pro-choice people. |
|
|
| DaveBegic |
| yes because at the end of the day. it doesnt matter which one is more severe, they're both illegal substances. |
|
|
| narcism |
| quote: | Originally posted by DaveBegic
yes because at the end of the day. it doesnt matter which one is more severe, they're both illegal substances. |
about time someone said that ;) |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by DaveBegic
yes because at the end of the day. it doesnt matter which one is more severe, they're both illegal substances. |
i think the status of their legality is pretty irrelevent. the damage they cause is much more important imo. i dont think anything should be judged *purely* on whether its a legal activity or not. that doesnt make much sense. just becoz something is illegal has nothing (in and of itself) to do with whether its evil or not. ie there are all kinds of laws all over the world which dont make any rational sense.
the media should be reporting the news accurately, not scare-mongering to sell papers or tv shows. i think by making constant \"all drugs are equally evil\" commentary, everyone is ignoring the fact that almost everyone tries something at some stage. if you lump them all in the same category it lessens the warnings for more serious drugs. pharmacy's have a \"grading system\" for drugs, i dont see the diff tbh.
i dont see what benefit \"linking\" ghb & e (in this article) achieves. |
|
|
| narcism |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
i dont see what benefit \"linking\" ghb & e (in this article) achieves. |
can someone highlight to me where exactly they are blaming e for this death? |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by narcism
can someone highlight to me where exactly they are blaming e for this death? |
theyre not. she apparently died from a ghb overdose, thus i dont see any relevance for mentioning anything else at all. hell, maybe she was morbidly obese. thats dangerous. but it didnt kill her. would that have made the article? i dont think so. |
|
|
|
|
