Prescription Drugs

[S O F I]

Someone who works with drug addicts on a daily basis - because its his job - and hasnt done any drugs in his life, dont you think this person is knowledgable enough to have a proper conversation about the topic?

That person's knowledge only stems from the extreme cases. Nobody works with ME and I have used drugs. See the difference? You're only getting one side of the story and that side is the dark deep side of full-blown addiction.

Also, the difference between you and what would make up a good addiction counselor is that you're passing judgment from the beginning by default.

 

[Sebastian]

That person's knowledge only stems from the extreme cases. Nobody works with ME and I have used drugs. See the difference? You're only getting one side of the story and that side is the dark deep side of full-blown addiction.

Also, the difference between you and what would make up a good addiction counselor is that you're passing judgment from the beginning by default.

Its not necessarily just about getting the know the extreme side of the story. I was giving an example. Maybe the person has worked with all kinds of people. Addicts, people who smoke occasionally and so on.

Point is, you - as in you SOFI - are somewhere in that spectrum. What you have experienced taking whatever drugs. Your experiences are nothing special. Other people have had the same kind of experience.

Now saying someone like Mr. X with all the knowledge coming from his job experience - in this case - can not talk intelligently about the subject, well, thats obviously wrong.

 

[S O F I]

Its not necessarily just about getting the know the extreme side of the story. I was giving an example. Maybe the person has worked with all kinds of people. Addicts, people who smoke occasionally and so on.

Point is, you - as in you SOFI - are somewhere in that spectrum. What you have experienced taking whatever drugs. Your experiences are nothing special. Other people have had the same kind of experience.

Now saying someone like Mr. X with all the knowledge coming from his job experience - in this case - can not talk intelligently about the subject, well, thats obviously wrong.

I never said intelligently. I said by not passing judgment. And yes, it's nothing special. I know that. It's not about that. It's about YOU not having experienced them. Again, nothing special at all. A ton of people who don't. I haven't passed judgment on that and I applaud your lifestyle choices.

It's like...

There's people who read a lot of books and talk with a lot of people about different things in life but they never experience them firsthand. Obviously, they're able to discuss the subjects in an intelligent way, but they lack the experience to back their talk up.

A doctor/biologist can know all the chemicals and inner-workings of the brain on drugs, but unless they've taken the drugs, they don't really know what it's like. And that's that.

 

[Jokerman]

And that's that.

FINISH HIM!

 

[Rukas]

Just wondered how easy it was in your country to get drugs that most countries require a prescription for. In the UK it's difficult to get the drugs even on the black market. But in places like India you can usually buy them over the counter.

When I was in Vietnam I tried to buy Valium and Xanax over the counter. But unfortunately they were strict there too, which was unexpected.

Just curious as to where I should holiday next...

I just got back from Thailand. Go to Phuket.

Not to mention the fact you'd make your money back two fold by stocking up on steroids and HGH and bringing it back to the UK to sell it, considering your laws allow the import of both for "personal use" and they are dirt cheap over the counter in Thailand.

 

[Da_Funk]

Its not necessarily just about getting the know the extreme side of the story. I was giving an example. Maybe the person has worked with all kinds of people. Addicts, people who smoke occasionally and so on.

Point is, you - as in you SOFI - are somewhere in that spectrum. What you have experienced taking whatever drugs. Your experiences are nothing special. Other people have had the same kind of experience.

Now saying someone like Mr. X with all the knowledge coming from his job experience - in this case - can not talk intelligently about the subject, well, thats obviously wrong.

The difference between doing drugs and knowing lots about them is analgous to the difference between living in a foreign country and knowing lots about it.

Unless you've experienced it, you don't really know it. You have such a black and white view on it, and obviously there are many cases of black and white regarding drugs (addicts vs never touched a drug in their life), however no one that i know of on this board falls into that picture (except maybe you). So when you come into here with that attitude people (like myself) get annoyed with you.

 

[Pittsey]

A counsellor usually only sees the extremes of drug use. Who would go see someone for their help if you just took a few pills? Or smoked a bit of weed?

But... Even if I agree that someone who deals with addicts can have a lot of knowledge on the subject. These people are in a severe minority and most people who don't do drugs are only aware of cliché and extreme cases as reported by the media. In the UK if you say Heroin addict people will think of Pete Docherty as he is the one who was mostly reported on. They think of injecting. They think of skinny, pale people. They think of people living in dingy squalor and robbing to feed their habit. Not all the addicts I know are like this. Most aren't.

 

[Ristol]

A counsellor usually only sees the extremes of drug use. Who would go see someone for their help if you just took a few pills? Or smoked a bit of weed?

Plenty of people. Reactionary parents and judges force them into it. It’s impossible to legislate addiction, so many non-addicts/barely-addicts end up in rehab or in front of a chemical dependency counselor. These counselors care, but it’s not the kind of field that attracts the best and the brightest. They work for nearly nothing and periodically see their patients die. There are great ones, but they’re few and far between. Either way, they’re not the problem. The problem is the way the whole field views addiction in the first place.

I've said this to C.D. counselors many times: It’s a logical fallacy to say someone has a disease whose primary symptom is denying it, because that implies that anybody who denies it is no doubt infected. The entire lot of them seem to miss me on this point.

People who smoke a bit of weed or take a few pills end up in treatment every day. Most people—except the people putting them there—know they don’t belong. There isn’t a shortage of moderate cases, but many in the field are conditioned to believe that every case is extreme.

 

[S O F I]

^Understood. Still, that's not the picture Pittsey was painting. It goes back to, basically, everything I said.
Thanks.

 

[Ristol]

^Understood. Still, that's not the picture Pittsey was painting. It goes back to, basically, everything I said.
Thanks.

You're welcome.

You’re saying that if you’ve never done drugs, you don’t understand them. By that logic, you can’t talk about chemical dependency counselors unless you’ve worked as one. This is a very nuanced topic, and it’s no place for your broad, surface-level argument.

Most people have done drugs at some point. People who haven’t are very, very strange and very, very rare. And that’s just among the general population. In the field, lifelong sober people are like fucking unicorns. Do you actually think people get into the field because they’re holy sober angels and they want to proselytize to the unfortunate drug-addled masses? People get into it by and large because they’ve had problems themselves. Not only is your opinion ignorant, but irrelevant to the way things actually work.

 

[S O F I]

You're welcome.

You’re saying that if you’ve never done drugs, you don’t understand them. By that logic, you can’t talk about chemical dependency counselors unless you’ve worked as one. This is a very nuanced topic, and it’s no place for your broad, surface-level argument.

Most people have done drugs at some point. People who haven’t are very, very strange and very, very rare. And that’s just among the general population. In the field, lifelong sober people are like fucking unicorns. Do you actually think people get into the field because they’re holy sober angels and they want to proselytize to the unfortunate drug-addled masses? People get into by and large because they’ve had problems themselves. Not only is your opinion ignorant, but irrelevant to the way things actually work.

Sebastian is a unicorn, then.

Now, first off, I never belittled the work of drug counselors and no where did I say they're unable to do their work right. You're taking what I said and putting it into the wrong context. Sebastian asked if drug counselors could hold an intelligent conversation about drugs. I said, yes, but, and I generalized, yes, by saying that since they work with more extreme cases, they see the more ugly side of addiction. You said they work with ALL cases. OK, that's fine, I'm wrong in that sense. But I am still not wrong in my original point, that Sebastian, as a unicorn, can talk drugs all day long but since he never experienced them, his understanding of the feeling that drugs give is simply not there. Again, this is not about drug counselors. They've been trained to treat addiction. I am saying that people like Sebastian who have skewed views on drug users can suck it, basically, and everyone will hold what they say, with a grain of salt.

Reread my responses to Sebastian. Also, make sure to read what he was saying too.

 

[Ristol]

You know me better than that, SOFI. I read the thread before I responded. Not gonna get into a long, circular argument with you. I respectfully disagree with your logic.

 

[S O F I]

Sounds good, Kevin Arnold.

 

[Ristol]

LOL everyone already knows.

 

[Jokerman]

When you haven't take any drugs or alcohol, and still have no education, a shitty income, and are still living with your parents at 25+

Unless you've experienced this situation yourself, you don't know if it's bad and you can't judge.

 

[S O F I]

LOL everyone already knows.

which makes for an illegal EDouble disqualification from that popularity thread.

 

[Ristol]

Nope. Wood said "everyone who does it from now on" or some such thing. Don't be a snitch, son.

 

[Da_Funk]

You're welcome.

You’re saying that if you’ve never done drugs, you don’t understand them. By that logic, you can’t talk about chemical dependency counselors unless you’ve worked as one. This is a very nuanced topic, and it’s no place for your broad, surface-level argument.

Most people have done drugs at some point. People who haven’t are very, very strange and very, very rare. And that’s just among the general population. In the field, lifelong sober people are like fucking unicorns. Do you actually think people get into the field because they’re holy sober angels and they want to proselytize to the unfortunate drug-addled masses? People get into it by and large because they’ve had problems themselves. Not only is your opinion ignorant, but irrelevant to the way things actually work.

People who haven't done drugs can't talk about them. I mean, they can talk about them, but they have no basis for everything the say. Actually, people who have never done drugs and then go talk about them are ignornant. Its like you work a job for 5 years, and someone who has never done said job before tries to tell you what its all about. Know what I'm sayin sayin?

And to clarify, smoking weed (I don't care how much) does not count as doing drugs.

Unless you've experienced this situation yourself, you don't know if it's bad and you can't judge.

And hopefully I never will experience it (ie. my drug addiction doesn't ruin me )

 

[Ristol]

People who haven't done drugs can't talk about them. I mean, they can talk about them, but they have no basis for everything the say. Actually, people who have never done drugs and then go talk about them are ignornant. Its like you work a job for 5 years, and someone who has never done said job before tries to tell you what its all about. Know what I'm sayin sayin?

I know what you're saying. I understand and agree that experience is generally important. But it only goes so far.

It has very little to do with taking drugs or not taking drugs. An experienced drug addict has significantly less to offer than an experienced drug counselor. Wouldn't you agree?

That’s why the inmates don’t run the institution. Their opinions are tainted by the fact that they’re on drugs/defending their habit. I’d rather have someone with experience treating addicts than someone who is an addict. What you’re saying is, if you want to get sober, go talk to the drunk homeless guy in front of 7-11, because he’s got the experience and he knows what’s up.

 

[Ristol]

And to clarify, smoking weed (I don't care how much) does not count as doing drugs.

Forgot you said that.

I know that's a popular sentiment. "Weed ain't a drug, man! It's NATURAL!"

Strychnine's natural.

"It's not even addictive!"

I wouldn't compare weed to cocaine or heroin, but it's a horrible drug in its own way. In my experience, it generally causes complacency and creative death. As for people who wake up and smoke weed every day, well, if they're not addicted, I don't know what they are.