2017-10-30 14:58 GMT+01:00 PGC <[email protected]>: > On Sunday, October 29, 2017 at 6:40:53 PM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> Right. >> >> >> >> In acute, severe pain they are often the only thing that works, and >> denying them to a suffering patient is inhumane. In chronic pain, their use >> is more controversial. Perhaps not widely known is that in a way they are >> very safe drugs in that they do not cause end organ damage, unlike, say, >> alcohol or tobacco. >> >> >> Note that tobacco would be much less dangerous if people were informed, >> and could have more choice. Since tobacco exists, it has been used orally >> by many people, and today, studies shows that this mode of consumption is >> far less dangerous than smoking it. >> >> >> >> >> Elephant-killing doses of fentanyl are used in cardiac surgery, and as >> long as respiration is supported, the patient wakes up fine. The problem is >> that some people (not all) enjoy the euphoric effect so much that they >> misuse them, leading to tolerance, dose escalation and risk of overdose. >> >> >> That is right, but seems to be an effect of its prohibition. >> > > Then next time a person requires that kind of surgery, they can thus > inform the doctor that a small salvia infusion and some chewing tobacco > suffices for their analgesic needs before a scalpel is reached for? The > efficacy of opiates is not merely an effect of prohibition. > > Assuming something severe like heart surgery, a work related accident, a > soldier being exposed to an IED and losing a limb in a war zone... anywhere > where high levels of pain are a clear matter, I know why most humane > doctors today turn to opiates. Efficacy at pain management. Stathis is > correct. > > In addition to their utility in surgery, it is a fact that said soldier > with a lost limb, supplied with an appropriate dose of morphine, fentanyl, > or one of its equivalents may not have their mortifying/traumatic level of > pain disappear completely; i.e. the pain is still there but somehow, from a > subjective point of view, *it matters much less than before the opiate > was administered*. If pain is assumed to be nature's "argument of > authority", then opiates are the best local god atm. This property is > remarkable, useful, and well established. You could argue that some of the > dynamics of prohibition are due to opiates' efficacy: they are so effective > at relieving pain that people have waged war over their control/use. > > >> In the city of Liege, in Belgium, they have made (two times) a three year >> experience of legalizing heroin. You need a medical prescription. This has >> confirmed that the best medication to quit heroin is ... heroin itself, >> when cheap and medically prescribed. heroin then loose completely its >> appeal for "beginners", and old consummers, not only get fine, got the time >> to search a job, diminish by themselves the consumption, and eventually >> most have stopped. Obviously, this is helpful for getting clean needles and >> preventing AIDS. Despite this success, heroin is still illegal in Belgium, >> for pure insane political reason. >> > > What's so insane about the usual social dynamics of loosing face or being > in office? Assuming you had a sizable bit of political reputation to > uphold, would you risk it by switching sides on something that is clearly > not decidable in public? Betting on your aesthetic preference for > everything minimalism, you'd choose the path of minimal risk and uphold the > very prohibition you flatter yourself denouncing. > > Because it's much easier to yodel conspiracy from the outside than to face > the practicalities and admit the tension of two opposing facts: > > 1) Opiates are the most effective tools for pain management known, and > their usefulness in surgery is well established, so we need them for now. > 2) With chronic pain, it is often impossible to distinguish between those > that are "truly suffering from consistent and/or worsening pain" and those > that want access to the drug for whatever reason (which the Christians > demonize because they loose subscribers). All copies state that they are in > severe pain for true reasons in their history. Unfortunately, interviewing > them in a thought experiment sheds no light on the matter. Some of them > will die of overdose and respiratory failure. > > >> >> Note that heroin was first sold in Germany to cure young infant cough. >> > Its illegality is one of the most source of finance of terrorism, and in >> this case there are proof that the CIA have organized traffic. It seems >> also that it is part of the reason the american have gone to Afghanistan >> (to protect the field of Opiate-plant (Pavot, in french). I have verified >> this, but it does not obvious to interpret all data; need to pursue the >> research. >> > > By all means do so with a bit more rigor. This list is a place where > wishful thinking is shared most liberally, but I do know that some folks > read and interpret it literally and when I saw "Analgesic effect of opiates > is a result of its prohibition" >
Hi, I will only answer to this, as I think that's not what Bruno said, if you reread the sentence here: > The problem is that some people (not all) enjoy the euphoric effect so >> much that they misuse them, leading to tolerance, dose escalation and risk >> of overdose. >> >> >> That is right, but seems to be an effect of its prohibition. >> > I think "seems to be an effect of its prohibition" refers to the misuse and dose escalation, and not to the analgesic effect which would be false of course... Quentin > today, then somebody should beg to differ because this wishful thinking > could be mistaken for medically sound advice. Concerning management of > acute and severe pain, it is not only useless but may result in people > suffering needlessly: If you are in Belgium and are faced with the > misfortune of having to choose how to manage acute severe pain, I would be > skeptical/unconvinced of using cannabis, hallucinogens, or salvia; I'd go > with something like Piritramide and get some recovery and rest. Inform the > CIA they have to be quicker and less obvious. > > >> >> In Russia, they have try to eradicate heroin in a large part of the >> country. the result is the apparition of the drug Krokodil. That one is >> total poison, in horrible pain and always leading to long agony and death >> ... >> >> No medication at all should be demonized. >> > > You just demonized Krokodil. One line above. > > >> To use a drug/medication concerns only you and/or you shaman/doctor. >> > > Well if said doctor advises you to chew tobacco before heart surgery, then > I think it should be clear what kind of shaman that is. PGC > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
