Hard News: The Death of Evidence
179 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 8 Newer→ Last
-
(And OTOH, a government untempered by public opinion would be worse. We had enough of that pre-MMP, thankyouverymuch)
I forgot to say: Word, I/S. I'm a lot happier with a National government that's too chicken to do anything precipitous. It's a hopeless dream that they might actually go through with the tiny bunch of promises they made that I approved of.
I'm certain it will change at some point. Perhaps they're waiting for the right time, the right set of events to enable them.
It could well be that they're just waiting for the economy to turn around, to give them confidence for bold moves. Which is probably wise.
-
It's more like "if you smoked 20 joints a day lung cancer would be the least of your worries".
mmmkay I see what you are saying but somehow you guys seem to have the idea that there is some kind of "safe" tobacco/cannabis consumption with respect to lung cancer. That isn't true. The scareverts on TV saying every cigarette is killing you are right.
But that's not the topic and I didn't really mean to derail.
As for "safe drug" - it's an interesting concept. The whole prohibition policy has prevented anyone doing real research into the possibility of actually designing safe drugs. Part of that is because the science of brain chemistry and brain biology hasn't really been up to the task of figuring out what might be safe. But realistically the random taste stuff and see if it makes you feel good approach that is promoted by prohibition is hardly likely to produce "safe drugs".
Apart from the proven public health benefits of decriminalizing our current drugs - the removal of the stupid puritanical attitude to using drugs to alter your mind would surely foster the development of, if not safe, then at least safer drugs.
-
Apart from the proven public health benefits of decriminalizing our current drugs - the removal of the stupid puritanical attitude to using drugs to alter your mind would surely foster the development of, if not safe, then at least safer drugs.
And yet, the most socially accepted and omnipresent drug in our culture -- alcohol -- is also the most widely abused and the most damaging. Doesn't that suggest that there's a supply angle here as well? People don't automatically do illegal drugs because they're attracted by the frisson of illegality, much as libertarians would like to think otherwise. People use drugs largely because they want to get toasted. The legal aspect is kind of irrelevant in this regard, except to the extent to which it alters supply.
-
People don't automatically do illegal drugs because they're attracted by the frisson of illegality
Have you ever been a teenager?
-
but somehow you guys seem to have the idea that there is some kind of "safe" tobacco/cannabis consumption with respect to lung cancer. That isn't true
I understand that smoking is but one way of ingesting the stuff . I also seem to remember that a previous government decided to criminalise anything that might mitigate the harm smoking it does...
-
I understand that smoking is but one way of ingesting the stuff.
And who doesn't like cake? Mmmm, delicious cake.
-
Have you ever been a teenager?
Of course. But not everyone is a teenager. Which is kind of where the libertarian world view falls down.
-
Dave's not here, man...
David Slack is the bomb?
in my addled state I read that as:
David Slack is the bong!<breathe in>
inspirational
inspired
irrational
</breathe out> -
the most socially accepted and omnipresent drug in our culture -- alcohol -- is also the most widely abused and the most damaging
It's also one of the oldest and because of it's ability to make water drinkable (kills bugs dead) one of the important parts of most civilisations.
The point I was making was that most folks use alcohol to alter their mood. And yet the problem is that alcohol doesn't alter mood very well and it has a nasty tendency to amplify whatever mood you are currently in ... feeling down? have a drink ... good chance you'll feel worse.
It's a crap mood altering drug. But folks really really want mood altering drugs so they use alcohol even though they know it's crap.
With research, we should be able to make really quality mood altering drugs - but because altering brain chemistry with drugs is universally illegal, prohibited, verboten there is stuff all research. Well to be truthful there is some research done by the medical research community but nothing like the amount of research done by the beer companies.
The policy is decided by politicians whose interest is in getting re-elected not in doing what might be best for society.
Now I'm depressed - where is that cider?
-
So, the govt. instantly dismisses, for no given reason, the preliminary findings of a long, expensive, and expert review.
They only way they can possibly get away with this is if they can somehow hold their position until the media* move on to something else. </sarc>
So, will Labour take up the findings of this review when they next come into power? Do they have any intention to do anything about it. Not bloody likely. I know I keep talking about Labour, but if they weren't so incredibly timid then we could have the conversation we need to have.
-
But that's not the topic and I didn't really mean to derail.
It's not really a derailment, it's a valid point. But I do think it's also to that point to show that tobacco consumption is much higher on average amongst addicts than cannabis consumption is. Cigarette smokers are on it all day long, even when they're 'cutting back'.
Part of that is because the science of brain chemistry and brain biology hasn't really been up to the task of figuring out what might be safe.
Especially since it's a definitional argument anyway. The only thing that is truly safe is something that causes no harm whatsoever to anyone, any time. But very little of the things we are actually involved with follow such a high standard.
And yet, the most socially accepted and omnipresent drug in our culture -- alcohol -- is also the most widely abused and the most damaging.
True, but it could be a lot worse. A friend of mine tried making his own spirits and nearly killed a girl who bought some from him. It's a deadly poison if made the wrong way. Being legal, it's not made the wrong way, even if it is consumed the wrong way.
-
3410,
So, will Labour take up the findings of this review when they next come into power? Do they have any intention to do anything about it. Not bloody likely. I know I keep talking about Labour, but if they weren't so incredibly timid then we could have the conversation we need to have.
Not disagreeing with you, George.
-
Yes, no one banned BZP in exactly the same way that he did it.
You mean, experimenting over an extended period with its legal distribution -- creating an unprecedented new legal class for novel recreational drugs -- and only banning it on the basis of evidence? No, no other countries have done that.
There were degrees of opinion on BZP -- and Auckland Hospital didn't see nearly the same level of acute problems as Christchurch did -- but Anderton did actually solicit and act on advice.
Everyone bangs on about BZP, but if you were choosing a stimulant to be made legal, it's just not the one you'd pick.
Ironically, a side-effect of the wielding of the ban-hammer has been that all the surplus stocks of BZP are being blended into re-pressed MDMA pills. I've heard from both official and not-so-official sources that nearly all the E currently available here has been adulterated (at up to 100%) with BZP. Yuck.
-
And even then there was aboslutely zero evidence to suggest that the harms of banning BZP were less than the harms of consuming it.
-
And even then there was aboslutely zero evidence to suggest that the harms of banning BZP were less than the harms of consuming it.
To be fair, I don't think they're seeing anywhere near the level of ED admissions now. When it's sold as E it's too expensive to overdose on ...
You know what would be a good candidate for a legal recreational stimulant? Ritalin.
-
While I'm for decriminalisation, I'm not so keen on smoking as a delivery method for medical treatment. It's imprecise and it damages the lungs. I'm sure THC could be extracted into pill form or some other safer delivery method. Given that opium and cocaine have pharmaceutical applications, I'm not sure what the impediment to THC in pill form would be.
-
You know, I was listening to Key mumbling on this morning and I suddenly had a thought.
I may be wrong. It's a bit of a shock when that happens.
Over the last few years it's become very difficult to do something because criticising is so much easier than constructing.
So maybe it's easier to say "we're going to do [insert opposite of what you want]" then wait for the banshees to wail.
Then you turn around and say "in our lovely proportional system we've listened to the feedback etc. and will now be doing [what you originally wanted]".
The MSM do all the legwork finding the rational people who would normally be ignored.
Witness what's happened with GST (the alternative to which is CGT or land tax). I can see a back-down coming: everyone's salivating about their tax cuts, GST won't cover the cost... so now he can tell the Rotary club that if they want the cuts they're going to have to cop for the CGT...
Maybe I'm being too generous :p
-
You know what would be a good candidate for a legal recreational stimulant? Ritalin.
Combined with Viagara I thought it already was (in the Rotary club... I'm getting obsessed. And that other great bastion of Middle Class swinging - the Salvo's)
-
Lot of that going about
-
Craig's not gonna be happy you're stealing his lines.
I'm quite happy to be open source on this, Lucy. Otherwise, have a nice weekend.
-
Lot of that going about
Um, generosity, not the swinging subset of it
-
Maybe I'm being too generous :p
Sadly, yes.
Personally, I blame The West Wing for making me hope for more.
-
Personally, I blame The West Wing for making me hope for more.
<chuckle>
I keep that bit to hand where POTUS takes down some god-botherer in front of a room full of people.
I can dream.
And of course that's what people were doing when they voted for Obama...
-
I suddenly had a thought.
.. and it's a good one. It's a strategy that has been identified with the Nat'l govt for a while now; I think I first read it being proposed by Bomber@Tumeke. In general it goes something like:
1. Make a public pronouncement that you're planning to do something that will generally outrage masses of people, but which you really have NO INTENTION of doing.
2. Wait a while.
3. Announce that you've listened to what the people want, and you've modified the plan to suit.
4. While the people are slapping each other on the back and cheering about their newly-reenergised democratic power, rush through something that is still generally unpleasant/unwanted.
5. Repeat ad nauseum.See.. ACC levy charges for motorcycle riders.
Bomber actually touched on it in his post today Gerry and his Magic Beans, albeit in his customary hyperbolic manner:
The spin line National will use is the following. The survey will "find" a precious mineral under a national treasure they have no intention of mining and have John Key move against it immediately to declare our environment is precious, blah blah and demand that the national treasure is preserved and with much fan fare and photo ops will open the "John Key Memorial National Park" all the while the fine print enables them to throw the rest of the conservation lands to the baying jackals of the multinational mining corporates.
Whoever is spinning National deserve their bonus this year.
-
Scott nails it, channelling Power:
Indeed, I will not rest until the use of evidence in formulating governmental policy has been cut to zero. I know this is an ambitious target, but, like the Prime Minster, I am ambitious for New Zealand and its people, especially when those people happen to be me.
Evidence is all around us. It is all pervasive. Most of us will know someone who is using evidence, and will have seen the destruction evidence causes, particularly to the chances of those people voting for my party.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.