Quote:
Originally Posted by Qtx
I think we can totally debunk the article quoted. No one should use that as fact or reference. Their definition of addiction would mean that someone who eats a McDonalds or hard boiled sweets more than once is an addict. As you say, the level of harm is a scale and where is the line. Eating something that goes towards rotting your teeth or food that isn't squeeky clean healthy according to someone could be considered as bad as some drugs.
The point being is the drug advisors to the government looked at many drugs and their scientific conclusion was that MDMA was harmless and most drugs should be legalised due to actual harm levels (both to the person and others). Yet once again the PM has ignored that due to personal or political reasons. So very valid point about biased based on media, personal experiences, religion or whatever.
|
The article i quoted just serves to prove how hard it is to find unbiased and accurate info .
I don't agree with the term harmless though ,i think some cause so little harm as to be insignificant but they can cause harm .Lets face it we apply acceptable losses to life every day ,we accept that we could get knocked over by a car but the risk is actually negligible so we don't ban cars but there is still a risk ,the same with just about everything ,It's also why we have different categories for drugs