Ecstacy, class A- are politicians mad?

[donkey]

 

I know you also know the extent of the current researches

.

 

You obviously don't - telling us that the body gets rid of alcohol. Sure it does, after it's massacred a few million brain cells and had a pop at the liver.

 

You seem to be implying you are scientifically in the know. Sorry to burst the bubble, but it's common knowledge ecstasy isn't good for the brain or body.

 

Just because things are harmful is not a reason to ban them. Exhaust fumes aren't too good either, and what about junk food? I could go on. No-one lives forever, and the choices we can make between the onset of adult life and the grave should - where there is no significant harm to others - be left to the individual.

 

Anyway, it's been proved time and again, that when those who appoint themselves role of moral guardians try to come between the people and their fun, they fail dismally every time.

[mrteabag]

alchohol smoking and even just accidents in your own home kill more people a year than E's do.

[chem1st]

alchohol smoking and even just accidents in your own home kill more people a year than E's do.

 

Except barnsley...

 

Most die with an 'E by gum' (my time has come)

 

[mrteabag]

May I ask you some personal questions? At any point in time that you took an E, did you ever get defensive at others, or got into a situation whereby you wanted to fight someone? In all the occasions that you took an E, did you have a big downturn in your mood after the euphoria from the E went away?

my time on E had me happy euphoric when a fight kicked off i thought why whats the point then carried on with my night.

i have never been down whilst under the influence

and when the Efects start to go i just sleep and donnt eat for the day.

i get up next day and back to normal looking forward to the next saturday

[mrteabag]

Except barnsley...

 

Most die with an 'E by gum' (my time has come)

 

ha ha ha i like

[Bago]

I'll take the four examples I gave then. Water, cannabis, E and heroin. Knowing your Chinese I'll also include soy sauce.

 

Water:

 

.... snip...

You're a chemist, and you are telling me that you do not find water more natural than a synthetic compound like ecstasy?

 

I may expect an average joe to say that, but omit the contamination of anything. Water is naturally occurring, and it is one of the product which is necessary for a body to survive, you know that. Is the synthetic compound which makes up Ecstasy a necessary chemical for the brain to function? No. You know that it is classed as a psychotic drug, and that it is not a nurturing compound which exists and is needed in our body. Why is something classed as a drug, it is because it is harmful to the body. why does the government rule this area? Because they do not want the population to be drugged up, or to have chemicals which affects their health. To me, that is socially responsible.

 

The image that these drugs are somehow "recreational" is the downfall of the governing policies over the past years, which allowed the drug to be seen as a socially acceptable and marketable product. I am glad that Ecstasy remains a class A drug. I just fear that if people cannot see something wrong with taking a drug which alters your mind, then they are really desensitised to the fact that it is a harmful substance.

 

Your comparison is quite unethical, as it the person who claimed that "There is not much difference between horse riding and ecstasy."

 

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/world/5306613/ecstasy-worse-horse-riding/

 

It is socially irresponsible as a scientist! If I was on the board, I would seriously pull him up on this. He should know his remit as an advisor on the board. I think he's fallen off the wagon, he if wrote something as damaging as that.

Edited February 17, 2009 by Bago

[Bago]

You obviously don't - telling us that the body gets rid of alcohol. Sure it does, after it's massacred a few million brain cells and had a pop at the liver.

 

You seem to be implying you are scientifically in the know. Sorry to burst the bubble, but it's common knowledge ecstasy isn't good for the brain or body.

I don't understand why you do not find it as incredulous as I am to find that mind-altering drugs, is not a good thing. Some people don't like taking drugs which changes their brain's chemistry even if they are depressed. Maybe they still care for their own bodies. So I don't understand why you think that it is okay to digest something which changes the chemistry of your brain.

 

Just because things are harmful is not a reason to ban them. Exhaust fumes aren't too good either, and what about junk food? I could go on. No-one lives forever, and the choices we can make between the onset of adult life and the grave should - where there is no significant harm to others - be left to the individual.

What if they are socially harmful to others? Don't you think about others, but yourself? What if they are attacking, all in the way of being defensive, or bullying, all in the argument in their defence of their own usage? Or what if they affect the chemistry of your brain and that it may have an after even in the future to come, yet this is not yet discovered?

 

You don't seem to understand that when something alters your brain, then this is biologically harmful. A lot of people go about their days without thinking what they are doing. Maybe taking Es is one of these accepted social action. As is drinking, or smoking, and overeating. However, when you look at the scientific side of the drug, and how it affects the body, and the prolong exposure to this, are you saying to me that you will encourage people to take it, despite this?

 

If you get ill from taking too much Es over the course of your lifetime, then who will foot this bill? Don't you care if your loved ones would want you to be safe, than to see you harm your own body like that?

 

Anyway, it's been proved time and again, that when those who appoint themselves role of moral guardians try to come between the people and their fun, they fail dismally every time.

I thought that this is a land where people can express their opinions, or are you batting me into this social hole which you expect me to follow, even though you do not seem to be on the same opinion as myself?

 

To be honest, I do not give a crap whether people take it or not. I thought that this thread was started because we are discussing a currents affair here. If you are seeing this as a personal thing, then I am sorry to disappoint you. It would be nice, if there are those who are users and are not going to come here and be defensive. I guess that cool age has been and gone, and now we are left with people who are just on a bad comedown, or something.

[donkey]

 

To be honest, I do not give a crap whether people take it or not. I thought that this thread was started because we are discussing a currents affair here. If you are seeing this as a personal thing, then I am sorry to disappoint you. It would be nice, if there are those who are users and are not going to come here and be defensive. I guess that cool age has been and gone, and now we are left with people who are just on a bad comedown, or something.

 

It's ironic that you seem to end each of these shrill outbursts with the accusation that other people are being personal and defensive.

[Bago]

It's ironic that you seem to end each of these shrill outbursts with the accusation that other people are being personal and defensive.

 

Right. Okay, I will take that back. Does it mean that you will also retract your personal retort which was aimed at me? You know, the part which described me as "those who appoint themselves role of moral guardians try to come between the people and their fun ".

 

I thought that this was just a social discussion... oh how wrong I seem to be.

[chem1st]

You're a chemist, and you are telling me that you do not find water more natural than a synthetic compound like ecstasy?

 

I may expect an average joe to say that, but omit the contamination of anything. Water is naturally occurring, and it is one of the product which is necessary for a body to survive, you know that. Is the synthetic compound which makes up Ecstasy a necessary chemical for the brain to function? No. You know that it is classed as a psychotic drug, and that it is not a nurturing compound which exists and is needed in our body. Why is something classed as a drug, it is because it is harmful to the body. why does the government rule this area? Because they do not want the population to be drugged up, or to have chemicals which affects their health. To me, that is socially responsible.

 

The image that these drugs are somehow "recreational" is the downfall of the governing policies over the past years, which allowed the drug to be seen as a socially acceptable and marketable product. I am glad that Ecstasy remains a class A drug. I just fear that if people cannot see something wrong with taking a drug which alters your mind, then they are really desensitised to the fact that it is a harmful substance.

 

Your comparison is quite unethical, as it the person who claimed that "There is not much difference between horse riding and ecstasy."

 

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/world/5306613/ecstasy-worse-horse-riding/

 

It is socially irresponsible as a scientist! If I was on the board, I would seriously pull him up on this. He should know his remit as an advisor on the board. I think he's fallen off the wagon, he if wrote something as damaging as that.

 

I quote all of your post but respond by asking you one question....

 

What do you think of my views upon making consumer products SAFE?