[Closed] Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin or crack'....

Bear poo more annoying than pointy hats.

http://www.flatearthnews.net/media-falsehoods-and-propaganda/heroin

Presumably it's the most dangerous because it's the most wide spread in use rather than because of any specific qualities unique to alcohol.
I.e. If crystal meth was used as much as booze by society, the results would be far more catastrophic.

Presumably it's the most dangerous because it's the most wide spread in use rather than because of any specific qualities unique to alcohol.

Exactly.

The most dangerous drugs to their individual users were ranked as heroin, crack and then crystal meth. The most harmful to others were alcohol, heroin and crack in that order

he also adds

"We do need a classification system – we do need to regulate the ones that are very harmful to individuals like heroin and crack cocaine."

EDIT
but I do disagree with this bit

government should now urgently ensure alcohol is made less affordable

1. Education as to the effects of alcohol.
2. More responsible advertising.
3. Look at the reasons why people have such shitty existences that they feel the need to get off their faces.

Oh, and get some of these so-called "experts" and talking heads proper jobs rather than just spouting the results of random research as gospel. Taken responsibly alcohol is not more harmful than crack.

Actually it is also intrinsicly more dangerous as well to the user - alcohol that is. Far more toxic than heroin. Most of the problems around heroin use are as a result of prohibition rather than intrinsic to it. A junkie with a good supply of clean smack that they can afford is not even noticed by society.

No one gets off their face on smack and goes fighting down town - they just sit on their sofa being dull.

However the considered peer reviewed findings of experts in the field must be dismissed in favour of hysterical knee jerking

the way i see it, is that the damage from getting wasted on alcohol is potentially more damaging than getting wasted on cocaine. so you wouldn't do a line after a ride to compensate a single pint; it'd be more like an eight of a line - but who'd do that anyway? like drinking redbull before bed... and anyway, it calls for alcohol to be in the same class as heroin and crack, not for a downgrading of the drugs. 🙄

Oh, and get some of these so-called "experts" and talking heads proper jobs rather than just spouting the results of random research as gospel. Taken responsibly alcohol is not more harmful than crack.

The experts are just that. The journalists reporting on the report, however...

TJs talking sense ( 😯 )

One thing I would point out is that this isn't really news.
Scientific evidence as consistently pointed towards alcohol as being one of the most (if not the most) damaging drugs, both physically and societally, for many years.

However the considered peer reviewed findings of experts in the field must be dismissed in favour of hysterical knee jerking

You heard the interview on the Today programme then? Professor Nutt and a Daily Mail columnist. Utterly shocking.

However the considered peer reviewed findings of experts in the field must be dismissed in favour of hysterical knee jerking

gonfishing - no I didn't. I have just heard this debate repeated so many times its utterly predictable.

This place is like the daily mail sometimes with it's misquotes and information taken out of context.

Actually it is also intrinsicly more dangerous as well to the user - alcohol that is. Far more toxic than heroin. Most of the problems around heroin use are as a result of prohibition rather than intrinsic to it. A junkie with a good supply of clean smack that they can afford is not even noticed by society.

OK. Let's take a responsible drinker and a heroin user. Now let's say that neither can indulge for a month. Which becomes more visible to society?

If prohibition was stopped though, Shirley use of drugs would become greater and addiction & associated problems (to individuals) with it?

Tj a smacked out heroin user loafing on the sofa is a burden to society not s useful member of society. It was the socially debilitating effects of addiction that caused heroin to be made illegal in the first place back in the early part of the last century IIRC.

oh course, none of those people who spend much of the weekend in the pub are addicts are they?

It's very easy to be addicted to the drug that is alcohol and blend in with the norms of western society

Must agree with TJ 100% If heroin is a harmful drug, it is mostly down to what addicts have to do to get it - rob, mug, theive, steal, wh0re themselves out, etc, etc.

I'd rather an addict was sitting on his / her sofa, being a small burden to the state (and my tax) than out on the streets, desperately looking for an opportunity to make £20 for the next hit.

Oh and Coyote, if you'd ever seen anyone 'rattling' (going through withdrawl) you'd know that they're extremely unlikely to be anywhere in the public eye - more likely they'll be moaning under a filthy blanket, hiding from everyone!

Anyone got a link to the report?

[i]back in the early part of the last century IIRC. [/i]

how old are you exactly?

legalise and tax the lot of them

and stop pretending alcohol is good for you, contributing factor in obesity, cancer, heart disease etc etc

[i]and stop pretending alcohol is good for you, contributing factor in obesity, cancer, heart disease etc etc[/i]

So's sitting in front of a PC all day.
Trying to micro-categorise whether things are good and bad and then project individual experience onto society as a whole, or vice versa is an exercise in futility.

The term 'good for you' is quite tenuous.

What is this 'goodness'?

The effects of a recreational drug could well enhance someones life - just as medical drugs can do. The fact that it may be better if they had no need for the drug is neither here nor there....

If it's only the user who feels the benefit is it any less beneficial? Or do their views not count?

cynic al - thats not the experience in countries where a harm reduction / decriminalise approach has been tried.

Geetee - you don't die of heroin withdrawal - you do of alcohol withdrawal.

The non chaotic heroin users are forgotten about because thy don't come to public attention.

Queen Victoria took morphine as did much of society then. You could buy heroin injecting kits to send to the soldiers at teh front in WW1

Don't get me wrong - I believe heroin is nasty and dangerous and needs to be controlled. i simply believe it is better dealt with as a harm reduction approach rather than a criminal justice one. Teh Netherlands has done this very satisfactorily -and used the police time saved from harassing junkies to go after the big dealers big time.

I'd rather an addict was sitting on his / her sofa, being a small burden to the state (and my tax) than out on the streets, desperately looking for an opportunity to make £20 for the next hit.

So how do we decide who gets the priviledge of spending their days at the tax payers expense, smacked out of their head on their sofa then?

Tell you what, I'll agree to just spend my days doing whatever I want at the tax payers expense and i'll just forgo the heroin, which will actually save money. How does that sound?

Just to clarify, I do agree that there is a problem with alcohol I just don't think that the many of the recent reports offer any useful solutions. Whack up the price? The alco's will just make sure that they afford it by either letting their families go without or resorting to "other" methods of income. Evidence for this comes from at least one practicing alcoholic in the family, possibly two, and a friend who is a recovering alcoholic. I am more than aware of the problem. However the resonsible drinker will just be hit with higher prices. Don't see that punishing the majority for the sins of the few is fair or useful.

The most visible effects are down to people feeling the need to get completely off their heads in order to have a good time. Witness any town centre on a Saturday night or the pile of blue plastic White Lightning next to the trails on a Sunday morning. This is the part of the problem that needs to be addressed. A culture change if you will. However this is a little harder to approach than pleasing soundbites about minimum pricing etc.

#Edit: Also agree that a review of our approach to drug legislation is more than overdue.

Queen Victoria took morphine as did much of society then. You could buy heroin injecting kits to send to the soldiers at teh front in WW1

Exactly, its use was widespread and prevalent in the early part of the last century, which when combined with the powerful effects of addition is what caused it to be banned.

What is interesting though is that chemically speaking, it's quite hard to become addicted to heroin. Most longitudinal studies conducted in the mid 80s actually found users were 'socially' addicted long before they were chemical dependent. Social addiction referrs to their use of the drug in conjunction with friends, social circles etc.

Similarly, coming off is not quite as hard as staying off for the same reasons. It's a similar story with alcohol in so much as it's wide spread use makes it very hard to be tee total.

I think the headline from this story shouldn't be 'Heroin less damaging to society than alcohol' it's actually 'alcohol more damaging to society than Heorin'.

This place is like the daily mail sometimes with it's misquotes and information taken out of context.

+1

OP in willfull misreading of news report shocker.

coyote - minimum pricing would not affect you or me 50 p a unit I pay far more than that for my drink anyway. But it would stop the aivailability of cheap industrial "ciders"

it does seem that most of these arguments are comparing "responsible drinkers" with stereotyped "smackheads". I'm not going to get involved in the argument as I have nothing to gain by it, but find an alcoholic who hasn't drank for 18 hours, you'll usually find them fitting, vomiting blood, severe abdo pain, confused, sweaty and not entirely different from heroin withdrawal.

Also concider the "responsible" drug users, saturday night in, smoke some opium, chill out. listen to dire straites and go to work on monday as a normal people. If you're going to compare class A drugs with alcohol, at least compare the users at the same level of use.

Good point TJ.

OK. Let's take a responsible drinker and a heroin user. Now let's say that neither can indulge for a month. Which becomes more visible to society

geetee1972 - Member

So how do we decide who gets the priviledge of spending their days at the tax payers expense, smacked out of their head on their sofa then?

Tell you what, I'll agree to just spend my days doing whatever I want at the tax payers expense and i'll just forgo the heroin, which will actually save money. How does that sound?

The current system involves addicts making themselves known to their GPs who then put them into pointless, unworkable and humiliating methadone programmes which have minimal success rates.

My mate (a high-functioning addict with a successful business and three well looked after kids) went through all this but dropped out. There was a three month wait to get onto the prog - some wait much longer than that - and that's after they've admitted they have a problem and asked for help. Sadly, that help simply does not exist.

Tell you what, I'll agree to just spend my days doing whatever I want at the tax payers expense and i'll just forgo the heroin, which will actually save money. How does that sound?

Geetee - you don't die of heroin withdrawal - you do of alcohol withdrawal.

You dont die of alcohol withdrawal either do you ???

Im sure most of us have taken alcohol and are sitting here quite happily feeling no withdrawal effects and more important we not additivity craving it.

The only people who die of alchohol withdrawal are those who have been drinking alcohol every day of their lives probably since childhood.

Im sure if someone had been taking heroin everyday of there lives since they were 12 would also die if you took it away suddenly. However people like this are probably dead already.

The fact that people can drink alcohol everyday of their lives every lives and become addicted to what is essentially a non addictive substance and still live 50-60 in someways shows it isnt that harmful a substance.

In 50 years time we may have people who are 50 and have taken heroin everyday of their lives since they were 12 but I doubt it because I think they'll all be dead.

you don't die of heroin withdrawal - you do of alcohol withdrawal

So how do you explain the survival rates amongst recovering alcoholics?

alcoholics can and do die from the effects of withdrawal - it's very dangerous and harmful for them to just stop drinking.

Portugal; that's an interesting place with a thing or 2 for us to learn.

You can have alcohol withdrawal treated fairly easily. I have looked after both alcoholics and junkies in acute withdrawal.

n 50 years time we may have people who are 50 and have taken heroin everyday of their lives since they were 12 but I doubt it because I think they'll all be dead

We have these already. The famous one was William Burroughs. Heroin addiction does not kill. Alcohol addiction does.

The Netherlands maintains its long term junkie population with heroin. they continue for decades until they grow out of it eventually

If anyone doubts that alcohol is addictive: several hospitals that MrsGrahamS worked at have had problems with alcoholic patients drinking the alcohol gel from the hand sanitisers!

OP in willfull misreading of news report shocker.

It was the easy headline I was drawing attention to. For no particular higher purpose.

If anyone doubts that alcohol is addictive: several hospitals that MrsGrahamS worked at have had problems with alcoholic patients drinking the alcohol gel from the hand sanitisers!

But surely this depends on the definition of addictive. You can become addicted to any substance if you take it every day your body will eventually start to crave it.

But some things are clearly more addictive than other, alcohol is a lot less addictive than nicotine for example.

It just depends where you start the bar for something being an additive substance. Personally I wouldnt see alcohol as addictive as if you take it once or twice you dont start craving it and having withdrawal symptoms you really got to work to become addicted to it.

So how do you explain the survival rates amongst recovering alcoholics?

Do you people not think to google before giving your view on a subject you know nothing about _ holds hand up admits I did not know alcohol withdrawl could kill BUT [url= http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=active&&sa=X&ei=ep7OTPzYKpe8jAfAguzYBw&ved=0CBgQvwUoAQ&q=does+alcohol+withdrawal+kill&spell=1 ] I DID GOOGLE BEFORE POSTING[/url]

scu98rkr

Unfortuatly thats not how it works. You have to work quite hard to get addicted to heroin. Similar to alcohol.

You don't get addicted to "any substance". MDMA is a good example of a non addictive drug.

My experience of a bit of work with people with drug and alcohol problems is alcohol is a far nastier addiction with far worse withdrawal

I didn't know that alcohol withdrawal could kill either but it's something new I've learned today from this very debate. The question I asked was a genuine question, nothing more. However I could JUST SHOUT AT PEOPLE TO USE GOOGLE rather than participating in an on-line conversation and learning from the experiences of others.

TJ, what are your thoughts on the arguement that some people are more susceptible to becoming addicted than others, a personality trait as it were?

now... I like heroin... and I like alcohol.. but which one is better..?

there's only one way to find out...
FIIIIIIIIIIIGGGHHHTT!

Coyote - Member

...........................
TJ, what are your thoughts on the arguement that some people are more susceptible to becoming addicted than others, a personality trait as it were?

Agnostic basically. Unproven theory IMO

There might well be some actual biochemical difference as well that makes people susceptible - IIRC there is some evidence in this direction.

I have only done a bit of work in this field - I am no expert just have some knowledge

TandemJeremy: You don't get addicted to "any substance".

Really?

But it would stop the aivailability of cheap industrial "ciders"

Who drinks these drinks, that's what confuses me? I mean even at school age no-one bought the cack cheapo stuff, even the poor kids, they'd just save up until next week. The practicing alcoholics I've met have used drinks that would fall outside the minimum pricing threshold.

It just seems a tad misguided and likely to hit those looking for a good deal on cheaper mixing alcohol (cheaper vodka/rum for mixing into 'tails).

Bluebird. Yes. Really.

As i stated last time this argument raged, im currently sat not 10 minutes away from an industrial grade of uncut stash, yet i dont use it every day, am not tempted to use it all, it's there to enhance special nights out.

Same with beer, there is a kitchen full of real ales at home. They wont get touched until a gathering of freinds for a meal on december the 16th.[b]

U31, that's not what I asked. TJ stated you don't get addicted to any substance.

I appreciate there are many people who can take or leave drugs (incl alcohol) as and when they like, but some people clearly have a problem controlling their intake. I was just asking are these people genuinely not addicted.

I'm open to the idea that's its not addiction to the substance but a way of escaping a miserable life.

its the peer encouraged nature of alcohol that causes a lot of the direct problems
the going out getting smashed mentality
if anyones been near A&E on a friday/saturday night youll have seen how grim it is

at the same time heading down the boozer and knocking back 6 pints while watching the game a packet of fags and a kebab on the way home is doing your body no favours

smoking now makes you a social outcast, why doesnt drinking alcohol

I'm saying the kind of person that gets addicted, will get addicted. It doesnt matter the poison, weather its chemical or internet porn.
As you stated, its escapism, a reason to blame anyone but yerself.

I also cant understand this "go out with the sole intention of getting smashed" mentality.

I drink / partake only to enhance my night, always with the wife, usually with very good freinds. to go over the top would ruin the night.
You wouldnt drink 8 pints of Tea or Pepsi on a night out, youd feel like shite, so why do folk drink that amount of booze?

It's like the 'more people are killed by toasters than sharks' thing. but duh we don't keep a shark in the kitchen for everyday use! 🙄
Then again would you prefer a bath with a toaster or shark?

Bluebird - we are slightly at cross purposes. I was answereing this

scu98rkr
You can become addicted to any substance if you take it every day your body will eventually start to crave it.

What I meant was you only get addicted to addictive substances not any substance

Coffeking - many of the alcoholics I have met drink the cheap industrial "cider" or tenents special brow of cheap vodka

Some of the ciders are a few pence a unit of alcohol

Then again would you prefer a bath with a toaster or shark?

Er... neither thanks.

TJ, yes, I've just re-read your post again and I think you're right – I've taken it out of context.

U3 - I agree. I don't get the lets get completely F'up for the sake of it mantra. But then again I don't eat twice as much as I need to, or try to ride my bike for 48 hours at a time.

Of course, that's not to say I don't over do it every once in a while.

Bluebird - when I re read it I could see why you did.

Prohibition doesn't work, it never has.

30 years ago how prevalent was illegal drug use? How prevalent is it now. The war on drugs just isn't working.

So why do we continue with it? Most of the illegal drugs do no more harm (or less) than the legal ones.

Isn't one of the definitions of madness doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?