Quote:
Originally Posted by Traci
Let me play devils advocate. Heroin was invented to be a safer, less addictive pain killer opposed to morphine. With that in mind, I don't think it's realistic for people to invent "healthier" addictive, recreational drugs. Alcohol in particular is fine in moderation. Why can't we just tell people to, uh, drink less?
|
Because it clearly doesn't work. Despite increasingly strict alcohol consumption measures, alcohol is an increasing problem. Young adults in their 30s getting liver damage, etc, etc. I'm not saying not to bother trying to curb drinking. I was drinking ridiculous amounts for several years, and last year I decided to sort it out, and got drunk less times in the year than I used to get in a month. I feel better for it, but harm reduction is undeniably a tool we need to consider. Like needle exchange programs for those who inject drugs. Where we can't stop a behaviour completely, we can make it less harmful.
Also, we have better scientific understanding of how these things work than in the late 1800s... and for him to be able to succeed, he'd probably have a higher burden of proof toward its safety than many prescription drugs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BDF
It's what I've noticed to be general capitalist economics. If something new is released, aim it at the wealthy first, squeeze out as much cash in return for as few products as possible, even if manufacturing costs are minimal anyway. Once the competition takes up the idea... then the prices drop, because they have to to stay in business. I've not really studied this in detail, just observation.
|
This is where my issue is. He is acting like its about harm reduction, but your very point makes it seem profit driven. Fair enough if its profit driven, but I think he should be more up front about it, as its not obvious considering his history in drug research.
Quote:
|
The problem is with patents... and with respect to pharmaceuticals and drugs in general I don't think they expire for 20 or so years. I'm not sure though. Maybe it's 10 years.
|
He wouldn't be releasing it as a pharmaceutical drug, so perhaps it would be a different patent. Though I think this is where he'll struggle the most, being allowed to release it as a recreational drug.
Quote:
|
I generally speaking support capitalism, but this is an ugly downside that I'm personally ashamed off. When we're talking about TVs and luxury cars, fine. When we're talking about drugs and medicines which some people might desperately need... it's not really.
|
This is why you should have universal healthcare 
Quote:
|
This is somewhat of a half-way case. I wouldn't say this substance sounds like a "basic need". Water is. Food is. Certain drugs are sometimes. But it comes down to how people define "basic needs" which is a different topic. I don't want to divert this.
|
Well yes, this isn't intended to be a treatment option, and so recreational wants are not needs. though, in the long run, if alcohol could be more broadly replaced with a safer alternative, societies with alcohol problems would benefit.