How much has the taboo against tobacco (and thereby nicotine) hurt the progress of the sciences?
>>7737067
Not notably. A drug dependence won't hurt the progress of science, it'll hurt the progress of the dependent's science.
>>7737067
The taboo against amphetamine and cocaine may have harmed it more.
>>7737067
>taboo against drugs in general
Fixed. Everyone still thinks shit like ecstasy, cocaine and heroin are a boogeyman. When used in moderation, people can actually function normally on these drugs.
>want to take a smoke break
>have to walk off campus else risk 300$ fine
fucking retarded m8
>>7738418
You deserve it you addicted piece of shit. Fuck I wish they made you literally walk to hell and back to just smoke one cigarette. Maybe it would teach fucks like you a lesson.
>>7738665
>caring what other people do to their lungs
>>7738665
le guy who drinks refined sugars and eats like shit pipes up about smoking being unhealthy memey
kill yourself
Nicotine on its own, like in gum or a lozenge, has almost no appreciated negative side effects. It's the worlds best nootropic.
>>7737067
probably doesn't contribute to my work, but I love a quality Habanos
>>7738706
>other people
Actually it stanks up the whole area, fag. Unless you smoke with a plastic bag over your head then stfu.
>>7738054
>heroin
>moderation
>>7738770
>stanks up the whole area,
so it has nothing to do with caring about his being addicted or even your own health, but rather being inconvenienced that it "stanks up the whole area."
All drugs are for degenerates.
>>7738779
>what is caffeine
>what is alcohol
I swer to christ some faglords are conducting a pro-tobacco campaign on here or something.
>>7738772
Point being?
>>7738777
It can be multiple things.
>>7738785
I think it might be a /pol/ thing, actually. Like they've decided that "smoking is bad for you" is a Jewish lie.
>>7738794
2 edgy 4 me
>>7738794
Probably because marijuana is illegal inside and outside and literally anywhere
>>7738789
Obviously his point was that aren't any casual heroin users, ya big idiot.
This does kind of underline the problem with the "drugs are bad m'kay" method of teaching, though. If you tell people things that are obvious exaggerations (like how we were all taught marijuana will ruin our lives) then they'll conclude you're full of shit about everything, and that fucking HEROIN is okay to just fool around with.
>>7738814
It's not in Washington or Colorado, I think it's also decriminalized in a few states and I still don't see marijuana people trying to overturn bans in either place.
>>7738803
It doesn't actually effect people and if it did, the effect would be minimal.
>>7738816
Is it true though? Is heroin that much different from morphine, oxy etc..? Heroin is also used medically, and I don´t believe every user conforms to the junkie stereotype.
>>7738855
But that's wrong you idiot.
>>7738855
Is this b8? Second hand smoke has been shown time and time again to be horrible for your health, at least the primary smoker has the sucky filter.
Do you think it's worth it to start chewing nicotine gum for the nootropic effects, /sci/? I thought it might help when I need to concentrate.
>>7738665
Lol grow up
Nearly all of the studies about harm were done on tobacco, not isolated nicotine
http://www.gwern.net/Nicotine
>>7739025
>[citation needed]
Maybe you should try Wikipedia. Loads of citations here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_smoking
>>7739034
>citing Wikipedia for something that would require studies, data, and objective evidence
Damn, I had to check and see if I was on /pol/ for a second.
>>7739118
It has a reference section, every fact has a citation you can cheek yourself, if it doesn't it'll have an easily noticeable "citation needed".
>>7738054
LSD dosing at work is the reason apple products quality has gone down in the past 3 years
>>7739025
>proving
You're talking about epidemiology. It's still the wrong mindset regardless of the field, but I'd be willing to let it slide if it weren't for this.
It's a dead giveaway you don't actually understand what you're saying.
Have an adult Lain, pointing at you. "You've convinced yourself "this is how the world is", anon."
>>7738853
gee, it's almost like people who smoke weed all the time are unmotivated and too lazy to do anything about anything. strange...
>>7739320
>epidemiology
>not proving
Epidemiology is pretty much the only way to prove and quantify/disprove risks. What else do you expect people to look at when they want to consider the existent or non existent risk level of something in the air?
>>7739378
They were at least motivated enough to talk at length about how weed should be legalized, so there's that.
>>7738665
did a smoker fuck your bitch or something bro
>>7738733
>no appreciated negative side effects
it tastes nasty
>>7739545
you say prove
i say you dont know science
This thread got really gay really fast
>Blowing smoke on other people is for shitheads
>Smoking is bad for you but nicotine is a nootropic
If you're reading my post, the above information is a summary of the thread so far. Save yourself the trouble.
>>7738769
That is a great cigar, I tried it a year ago and still remember what a smooth and complex smoke that was. I might try it again now that my palate is better developed.
>>7738769
i never get cigars...i mean do you get the nicotine high from it? if not.....then why the fuck smoke something for just the flavour?
You want flavour? chew tobacco faggot
>>7738770
>getting pissed off about smokers
>calling people "fags"
>mfw
>>7738858
Listen, it's fun to chill with friends and do weed or try LSD and write underground comix, but heroin has fucked so many people up in ways you couldn't begin to imagine. The whole D.A.R.E program and anything like it is anti-weed because it's supposedly a gateway drug. If that's true or not, I dunno, but let me tell you this: You don't take heroin recreationally.
>>7739747
There is a slight nicotine high.
You smoke it for the flavour, which ranges from simple to complex depending on the cigar.
Going for a cuban cigar straight away is a mistake as its usually too complex to appreciate.
From what I understand, chewing tobacco doesn't have the same complexity of flavours as a cigar. But then again I may be wrong since I've never chewed tobacco and don't plan on doing so.
>>7739314
any proof for that ?
>>7739600
I know that multiple studies have shown it isn't bad, and most tobacco analysts don't think so either with a few exceptions (that I disagree with).
>>7739756
>you don't take heroin recreationally
Except for the people who ended up doing so successfully. William Burroughs seemed fine.
People take cocaine recreationally too, and methamphetamine is prescribed to children in certain medical situations.
>>7738781
Why did you list two of some of the MOST plebeian/degenerate drugs in response to someone claiming all drugs are for degenerates?
Psychedelics certainly aren't FOR degenerates as they can potentially amplify any pre-existing stupidity, they are also not for average people for the same reason, they are for intelligent people.
>>7739378
Is that really an ordinary case for cannabis users?
It has the opposite effect on me, strange...
>>7739756
>weed
>gateway drug
So hilariously wrong, why are you on /sci/ to begin with?
>>7740396
I've done cocaine recreationally, as well as many other things, with the right resistance and persistence, you can be fine. But I am very close with someone who would do oxy recreationally. They decided to step if up to do heroin recreationally. This person I knew had a much stronger will than me, and they were addicted within weeks of starting.
Maybe you have an extremely small handful of people who can resist that, and the person you reference is one in a billion, but save a few cases, no one does heroin recreationally, not if they've done it more than once that is.
>>7741291
>cocaine
>with enough resistance and persistence you'll be fine
How many people actually have that resistance though? I'm assuming a ton of people in Hollywood, maybe.
>>7740396
>methamphetamine is prescribed to children in certain medical situations
>conveniently omits the fact that this is only done in severe cases of ADHD and in nowhere near the dosage range of recreational meth use
>>7742011
>So you're just a lawful, rightful, intelligent guy who just happens to waste his time taking psychedelics and acting retarded?
I'm not wasting my time and I'm not acting retarded.
>>7742038
Severe cases? I live in southern ontario and doctors prescribe that shit like candy... I know so many people who said they couldn't concentrate in class in high school and voila, instant script.
I do cocaine once every calendar month on a big party night. Don't know if that counts as recreationally.
If you want nicotine, snus is a good option.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snus
>>7742272
>Severe cases? I live in southern ontario and doctors prescribe that shit like candy
>I know so many people who said they couldn't concentrate in class in high school and voila, instant script.
amphetamine != methamphetamine
meth is the fun version of amphetamine
just like heroin is the fun version of morphine
one has medically valuable effects, the other one has mostly recreational effects
Why should we assume that evolution has optimized our brains for scientific works? This is a silly assumption.
If we can adjust some parameters of our cognition by taking drugs, which increase cognitive performance, then it becomes a moral imperative to do said drugs. Increase cognitive performance means science gets done faster, which means better technology is invented faster, which means less people are suffering in the world.
I vape pipe tobacco and it's good as another stimulant.
>>7742011
>fuck off junkies
Confirmed as having never experienced drugs or understands them at all.
>>7738816
>Obviously his point was that aren't any casual heroin users, ya big idiot.
But there are.
>>7738054
>Normally
>Not optimally
Choose both you degenerate.
>>7742841
Well normally kind of supported my point more, I was ultimately trying to say that people can do their normal jobs and live normal lives while on these drugs (or while using them recreationally) without hurting anyone directly or indirectly.
>>7742640
spoken like a true junkie
>>7742644
Can confirm, am casual heroine user. Sometimes when I'm out with my buddies at a bar I like to go outside by the smokers and inject a little heroine.
You can literally snort, smoke, eat, insert in your anus as a pill tobacco. There is no great taboo against it except a universal idea that it's harming the user health and people around the smoker suffer from it as well.
>>7739118
You need citations?
Start here.
>>7738054
The same thing is said of legal drugs like alcohol and cigarettes.
Look how that turns out. It seems most of humanity can't handle even that shit.
>>7738772
>>7738816
>aren't any casual heroin users
People are so ignorant...During the Vietnam war heroin use was RAMPANT among the soldiers overseas. People thought they would come back once the war ended and be huge addicts. Guess what? They quit using completely once the war ending and there was no epidemic.
The fuck you think a morphine drip is? People are using medical grade heroin everyday and not becoming addicted. Addiction is behavior, the whole muh diseases argument is nonsense.
>>7742965
Smoking is the best way to get the affect, and it only harms the user to a small extent if you're lucky, it doesn't harm the people around you. Secondhand smoke is the dumbest thing ever.
>>7743085
morphine isn't heroin.
Heroin would degrade into morphine though.
>>7743244
>morphine isn't heroin
my sides anon, pls
>>7743211
>Secondhand smoke is the dumbest thing ever.
This is the 10th time I've seen this meme on here in less than a week. Before that, never. Go away.
oy vey
>>7743451
he decribes how a company like apple works
>>7743451
>fled socialist germany
>advocates socialism
>>7743261
yup
totally the same
>>7743539
> he believes national socialism / fascism is the same as democratic socialism / social democracy
>>7743555
Nice trips but it is.
Wealth redistribution is INHERENTLY totalitarian. Unavoidably. Always.
>>7743562
it's not and you are retarded.
>>7743562
Oh so Denmark is a totalitarian state gotcha
>>7743635
it will be in a few decades. remember where you first read this
>>7743635
It will be. When they run out of oil money or creditors or whatever else keeps their deficit-driven economy propped up.
>>7743647
>Denmark
>When they run out of oil money
Wrong country m8
>>7743541
You know the base for heroin is morphine HCL before acetic anhydride is added, right? Did you flunk Chemistry?
Nicotine is a pretty crap nootropic, because tolerance builds too quickly.
>>7744437
It's also probably detrimental for cognition in the long term, especially if you're under 21.
http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnsyn.2012.00003/full
>>7744435
You know the base for water is Diatomic Oxygen before Diatomic Hydrogen is added, right?
>>7744448
It's amazing what passes for science these days...
>>7744489
What's wrong? Does it hurt your feelings?
>>7744474
Diacetylmorphine is formed...still morphine...
>>7744495
Yes. I don't smoke, but pseudoscience does generally hurt my feelings. It makes me sad in the brain, and gives me uncomfortable stressed feelings in the gut and butthole.
>>7744512
Where's the pseudoscience? I don't see it.
>>7744506
They're two distinct chemical entities, fuckhead.
This argument is fucking retarded anyway because hospitals in the UK give diacetylmorphine as a painkiller, and that's probably what the original guy who said that hospitals gives people morphine/heroin meant.
Regardless, you don't understand chemistry even vaguely if you thing sharing a common base or a word in a name makes two chemical compounds identical even when they're constitutionally different.
>>7744514
There been pseudoscience in the anti-smoking/anti-tobacco crowd for decades, son. How can you not?
>>7744560
Whatever /pol/ nonsense you're talking about has nothing to do with the validity of that paper, retard. Go to school.
>>7737067
omg the 7000 chemicals in smoke!!
If cigarette smoke had that much compunds in it, wouldn't it be a heavy as fuck gas you'll choke inhaling?
>>7738779
>Benzocaine 15mg
>Caffiene 65 ~ 200mg
>degenerate
You're pushing too far, mate.
>>7744588
It certainly has something to do with the false ideas being spread about nicotine, which is a vital ingredient in cigarettes and tobacco.
>>7744632
If you have no argument, then don't reply at all. Nobody cares about your vague ramblings.
>>7744666
>So all science suggesting bad things about nicotine or tobacco is pseudoscience, regardless of methodology or your own ability to interpret it?
I said there was pseudoscience in the anti-smoking/tobacco crowd, not that all science on tobacco was pseudoscientific. Try again.
My argument is that smoking risks have been vastly overstated, not that there aren't any risks. Secondhand smoke causing any health problems at all is mostly a false idea designed to let the state and government control public and private locations. While I'll concede that secondhand smoke is probably harmful to people with predisposed conditions or ailments, I find it hard to believe that average healthy people can suffer from exposure, especially when you have women smoking throughout their pregnancies and their kids turn out fine.
>>7744435
shoot up a dose of morphine IV
then shoot up a dose of heroin IV
tell me if it feels the same
>>7745667
Have done both and can confirm that heroin just feels stronger for the same dose. Can't speak for the length of effects because I always redosed like the filthy junkie I was.
Does /sci/ take a "nicotine" labeled (general) drug thread much better than a straight-up general drug thread that doesn't even try to hide its true nature?
It seems so.
>>7745667
>shoot up
Chemically, when Heroin hits the brain it immediately decays into morphine.
>>7737067
>How much has the taboo against tobacco (and thereby nicotine) hurt the progress of the sciences?
It hasn't.
>>7745806
>when Heroin hits the brain it immediately decays into morphine
which still doesn't mean that heroin is morphine, just that heroin is a derivative/modification of morphine
the structural difference to morphine make it capable of instantly crossing the blood barrier, which produces the intense rush junkies crave so much and that morphine alone lacks
this isn't even about splitting hairs over vague definitions
it's about 2 distinct chemical compounds not being equal to one another(even if one will be metabolized into the other or whatever chemical reactions may occur during its use)
Thalidomid is a good example for how important this rigorous differentiation really is
>>7743244
In the UK we use it
>Under the generic name diamorphine, heroin is prescribed as a strong pain medication in the United Kingdom, where it is given via subcutaneous, intramuscular, intrathecal or intravenous route. Its use includes treatment for acute pain, such as in severe physical trauma, myocardial infarction, post-surgical pain, and chronic pain, including end-stage cancer and other terminal illnesses. In other countries it is more common to use morphine or other strong opioids in these situations.
Heroin wiki page
>>7739545
>talk at length
Do stoners talk any other way?
>>7738795
I browse /pol/ sometimes (2*4chan's, not 4cuck's)
while its riddled with conspiracy tier fags that have zero appreciation for or understanding of academic rigor in making theories / proofs, that really isnt true
a bunch of people make the jump and blame jews for things that arent jews responsiblity, thats not representative.
there are things that are fact, as in existince:
hollywood is dominated by jews. used be pretty much exclusively.
all the media (in the us) is jewish owned and/or directed
porn originates from jews and the industry i.e. studios today is/are dominated by them
they control us foreign policy -- check it out, not even lobbys, like half the position are straight up filled with jews/israelis
there is selective censorship -- like facebook not censoring revolutions in egypt, but will censor antisemitism -- google have been censoring their stuff and using youtube as platform to push certain plitical agendas -- etc
there is tons of evidence of nepotism, and the religious writings are very explicit about doing just that.
heavily in involved in 'multiculturalism' -- yes I know multiethnicy works good in academic settings -- even officialy, because 'jews have historically prospered in societies that were tolerant' => anti multiethnic society = antisemite
very serious holes in the whole holocaust thing, as well as the actions of nazi germany and depiction of hitler (Im german, thats why I care, not because natsoc weeb or whatever)
the dubious founding of israel
the now documentated (check luois theroux and vice for 'ultraorthodox') practises of 'legally' and 'peacefully' removing palestinians from their homes -- basically they buy the stuff, but not after putting them under serious and direct economic pressure and poor living conditions by controlling & witholding key things
a bunch questionable organisations are funded by certain jews (black lives matter, by george soros, also funded a bunch of pro refugee stuff
etc
>>7738858
>Is heroin that much different from morphine
chemically they are prettty much identical
>used medically
and as a last resort. not casually at all. many patients who get it nontemporary sufer an addication
>why is it so addictive
opiats are dangerous as fuck. instead of getting addicted to the feel good / dopamin rush, like browsing the web or eating chocolate, body will get addicated to the actual substance.
basically it thinks: why should I produce x chemicals when I can get them much better via this external substance. and then it will go haywire if you deny it. because its biologically hardwired to require the substance for survival, and now thinks the best (only) way is to do the drug.
thats why doing heroine is a bad idea.
if youre the kindof person that never procastrinates, never eats sweets, not regular cofee user and casually decides not to browse 4chan or other sites, not excited about new tv series and generally not any addiction or affinity for dopamine based habits nor a family history of them, then you will be fine.
otherwise its a bad idea. you might be to get away get with a couple annoying days of cravings, you might not.
cocaine is different btw
if you want to do drugs go to erowid.org and inform yourself
>>7743635
it is authoritarian, whose limes condition is totalitarian
if you dont pay taxes they will send armed state employees after you and throw into prison
thats not authoritarian?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcb9bKSZ2VU
>>7745582
smoke is carcinogenic
so any amount is a bad idea
>>7738054
>ecstasy, cocaine and heroin
These are three very different drugs. Heroin and cocaine are really addictive, doing them regularly pretty often leads to dependence. Sure, you can get away with trying them, but people who start doing them regularly or with friends become addicted. Especially heroin, its addictive qualities aren't immediately obvious to users the way they are with ecstasy or cocaine, so people often won't realize their dependence until it's too late.
>>7739378
gee, it's almost like you've lived a sheltered life and are talking out of your ass. strange...
>>7738777
If I were addicted to pissing on the floor of whatever room I walked into should you tolerate that? Cigarette smoke stinks, and it stays in a room forever. Also I can say from personal experience that it's a pain in the ass for people that have asthma. Smoke if you want, but don't bitch if the law says that you shouldn't be doing in closed spaces around people.
>>7746063
>smoke is carcinogenic
So is eating meat, standing near microwaves, breathing in flame retardants, absorbing aluminum into the skin, breathing in car pollution, eating food laced with chemicals, etc. do you never do anything, or is smoking somehow worse than what most people expose themselves to daily?
>>7746133
>So is eating meat, standing near microwaves, breathing in flame retardants, absorbing aluminum into the skin, breathing in car pollution, eating food laced with chemicals
People can buy products without flame retardants, not eat meat, not stand near microwaves, not touch aluminum, and decide what food to eat. Emission standards for cars exist in most countries. Most of the things you listed are unavoidable, or things people can choose to avoid. You don't NEED to smoke around people, and your smoking isn't an eternality of some useful product. It's your shitty decision that you're imposing on people around you.
>>7746127
>using a very specific set of circumstances as general proof that addiction isn't real
oh my what a trainwreck of logical reasoning
the soldiers used heroin because it was easily available and one of the only ways of feeling good in an otherwise completely abnormal surrounding filled with the horrors of war
gee, billy, I really wonder why they didn't continue the habit of shooting up in their freetime when they came back into the organized and caring surroundings of their home
and let's completely ignore the fact that they probably didn't live the junkie livestyle 24/7 because they still needed to do soldier things
totally comparable with progressive addiction creeping up on the average joe who gets his hands on smack for the first time in the 21st century
those who manage to keep it a well-constrained recreational thing are a dime a dozen
very few people possess enough impulse control to not fall victim to the appeal of instant gratification in a syringe
don't act like you can project your own supposed invincibility against it onto others
>>7746133
>standing near microwaves
actually no
even light from a regular lightbulb or computer screen will do more damage
>meat is carcinogenic
only red meat is 'linked to'
suddenly a 'linked to' becomes a real condition.
honestly its probably the smoke from BBQing. its just a not super well documentated or explained link after all
besides, if you eat meat you dont afect the people around you not eating it
>other stuff is carcinogenic too
yeah of course I avoid carcinogenic stuff.
its pretty stupid to say 'all things are (vaguely) carcinogenic so I might as well not select at all'
p.s. you forgot sunlight (the uv section anyway)
>is smoking worse
yes it actually is, assuming normalish doses for other things
>>7746157
>didn't live the junkie livestyle
>denying reality
>muh disease
Do you know where fucking Vietnam is on the map? They were in the literal heart of the Golden Triangle, surrounded by cheap high-grade heroin. Addiction is the biggest meme ever, it's entirely behavioral.
>40% of all Vietnam soldiers used Heroin
>20% addicts
>5% relapsed upon returning to the U.S.
>95% eliminated their addiction over night
http://jamesclear.com/heroin-habits
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3403100469.html
>>7740393
well you seem to have fallen for the tobacco companies lobbying strategies wich is twofold
1. find some medical professionals willing to say its harmless, publish some bogus studies wich everyone in the field discredits but are sufficient to fool a bunch of people who either google to find it on some site where anyone can publish wich doesnt pay any attention to peer reviews and then just read the abstracts OR just believe some bs claims made in some unsourced infograph or whatever
2. spread the rumor that there is discourse among the scientific community about this thing, when there really isnt
theyre doing the same thing with global warming right now.
appearantly, in some cases its even the exact same lobbyists.
>>7737067
Hot pockets are the new scholar's pipe.
>>7746172
>focusing on the least important point of the post
>completely ignores the point that going from a shithole filled with charlie to the safety of your own civilized society is completely outside of any normal situation that could serve as a valid proof
>Addiction is the biggest meme ever
meanwhile opiate addicts puke and shit their guts out while stuck in full scale delirium during withdrawal
and don't even get me started on benzo withdrawal, compared to this getting off of smack suddenly sounds like a fucking family vacation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzodiazepine_withdrawal_syndrome
>Catatonia, which may result in death
>Convulsions, which may result in death
>Delirium tremens
>Mania
>Hallucinations
>Psychosis
>Neuroleptic malignant syndrome-like event (rare)
>Coma(rare)
all these symptons are of course entirely behavioral, and are not in any way linked to the fact after some time the body completely relies on injections to get dopamin/endorphin and goes into shutdown mode if the demand isn't met
>>7746214
There were roughly 8.5 million Vietnam veteran(9.2 million originally, 8% died). Let's say roughly 20%, 2 million were addicted to Heroin by any means of the definition of addiction. Total addicts, who would go through withdrawal. How do you continue to push the meme of muh disease when 95%, 1.9 MILLION PEOPLE quit their ADDICTIVE Heroin use over night? You can't, shill harder for dem programs.
>>7746235
>quit their ADDICTIVE Heroin use over night
yeah they just stepped off the plane, said "fuck that shit I guess" and BAM! the addiction was gone!
no cravings, no withdrawal at all
just magical instantaneous rehabilitation
sounds legit :^)
>>7746235
So addiction is a meme because most soldiers addicted to heroin during wartime were not addicted when they returned to the US? Hmm, couldn't have anything to do with the drastic change in environment and occupation huh? Must be that addiction is a lie. Oh and just ignore all those homeless Vietnam vet junkies, they're only 5% so they don't count.
>>7746170
>even light from a regular lightbulb or computer screen will do more damage
Still supports my point that people expose themselves to things but single out smoking as a potential danger to themselves, even though no sound evidence has concluded that nonsmokers can or have been harmed.
>besides, if you eat meat you dont afect the people around you not eating it
Only people with asthma or who are really unhealthy can be affected by smoking, and smoking doesn't cause asthma in nonsmokers. Asthma has been linked to other problems.
My point was that, for most people, this stuff is pretty impossible to avoid.
>>7746294
That supports the idea of addiction being a habit, dude. If a small number of people in sad situations are addicts and others aren't, then the actual source (I.e. the drugs) isn't the problem, it's people.
>>7746181
>well you seem to have fallen for the tobacco companies lobbying strategies wich is twofold
I don't think I'm falling for anything. While it's true that smoking can be bad for you, it's not really that simple. There are people who never get sick from smoking, or if they do suffer they never get cancer. There are pregnant women who smoke and drink and their kids, who are likely raised in smoking households, turn out fine. Big tobacco has agreed to the many provisions put on it, including the surgeon general warning. Why would they continue to lie when their biggest hurdles have already been and gone? I'm not even that fond of tobacco myself but I don't believe that there's a gigantic conspiracy.
>find some medical professionals willing to say its harmless, publish some bogus studies [....]
So you're just going to discredit any objective studies (that can also be funded by tobacco on occasion - just because a group you don't like funds a study doesn't discredit the study) that support the idea that smoking in certain situations (genetics, being resilient) and smoking affecting nonsmokers is harmless?
>spread the rumor that there is discourse among the scientific community about this thing, when there really isn't
Sure there isn't just look at all the scientists who agree that smoking is bad for others oh wait, that's bullshit. Go look on google and you'll find people at Stanford and people all across scientific community who argue it's overblown.
>theyre doing the same thing with global warming right now.
appearantly, in some cases its even the exact same lobbyists.
Well you've made it clear where your bias lies. Anthropogenic global warming is a myth. Climate change certainly exists but it's not anything we can stop.
>>7746879
>uses "go back to X" meme on a board about science and facts
>>7739314
[Citation Needed]
>>7746181
>tobacco lobbying strategies
You mean the alleged leaked emails made up or exaggerated and taken out of context by anti-smoking activists?
The left leaning scientific community never ceases to amaze me, you could make the exact same arguments about Monsanto that are made about he tobacco industry, yet when that happens people scream at anti-GMO people. Newsflash: Monsanto does the same thing. They lobby, they manipulate (by using sock puppets online and getting scientists to blindly parrot Monsanto company talking points), they control the narrative, and while I don't mind GMOS or weed killer, the idea of either being harmless is ludicrous. Yet the left only attack big tobacco with these fallacious accusations, never anyone else (especially if they don't fit the narrative).
There is a special place is hell for people who pretend cough near smokers
>>7748061
There was nothing disjointed in that post.
>>7739773
dip/chewing tobacco is 99% nicotine high, a whole lot stronger than a cigarette. Flavor is just there to offset the natural taste of tobacco.
>>7738795
Nah, nu/pol/ hates smoking because Trump doesn't smoke.
>>7739753
>posting an image of a literal fag
>>7743637
On 9gag amirite lol :)
I don't really care about people doing drugs.
But generally, the kind of people who thinks that doing drugs are cool and then call other people childish for not agree with them are retarded as hell.
The same goes for the anti-drug party, they keep spouting shit without anything to back them up.
Anyway, if you think that you don't get addicted, you are wrong. Of course there are people who can quit easily, but it is because they had a strong will gain from heavy training (in military). If you think you are the exception then you are pretty retarded. Just look at the drug industry, if people can easily quit, it would have never become this big.
>>7738785
Don't say 'faglord' you fucking degenerate millennial piece of shit.
>>7748379
>thatsthejoke.jpg
>>7748429
>Anyway, if you think that you don't get addicted, you are wrong
This is only with the addictive drugs. You can't say that when talking about drugs in general. Or would you solely call addictive drugs "drugs" and everything else just "psychoactive chemicals"?
>>7748021
>You mean the alleged leaked emails
no I dont
>The left leaning
Im not left leaning (at all actually)
perhaps you can reread your post and realize its pretty much exclusively projections + some rambling about how people treat you unfairly
>>7748429
>but it is because they had a strong will gain from heavy training (in military)
>>7748925
>this is only with addictive drugs
No drugs are inherently addictive, some people just can't handle their habits. This was discussed to death already with the heroin use in Vietnam. They also did studies on cocaine users and proved that people in poor situations who took cocaine stopped if they were given a choice between cocaine and some kind of reward (money).
>>7748951
>no I dont
Then If your not referring to leaked tobacco documents and emails, what do you mean by tobacco lobbying?
>Im not left leaning (at all actually)
Sorry, left leaning people typically spit venom on tobacco and tobacco companies, is all.
>perhaps you can reread your post and realize its pretty much exclusively projections + some rambling about how people treat you unfairly
If you could actually read into what I'm saying I was just pointing out the logical fallacies, double standards, and unanswered questions about tobacco use that still make people skeptical about how bad it actually is compared to how bad governments and special interest scientists say it is. I don't see how it's projecting or rambling.
>>7737088
This, probably.
>>7739773
dipping is the greatest. dip in the shower, dip in lecture, dip while studying, dip before bed, dip when you wake up, basically always have a lip in.
>>7737067
>the progress of the sciences
>>7746145
>Most of the things you listed are unavoidable, or things people can choose to avoid.
People can choose to not go into a building with smoke in it either dude. And if all of those things are unavoidable why stress over secondhand smoke?
>guys heroin isn't addictive
you guys ever check out the opiates board on 420chan? it's really fucking sad. literally nothing but a bunch of guys complaining about how addicted they are while yelling at people to not tell them to stop.
>>7749996
Before the ban on indoor smoking it was pretty difficult to avoid actually.
>tfw no studies done linking video game playing in adolescence to drug addiction in adulthood
this thread is fucking retarded
herion is like some natural shit
you just need to scratch the poppy bulb bro
the white shit comes out of it, it dries and turns into black sticky shit
this is called opium bros
you are not supposed to slam it
you drink it in tea, or maybe smoke a little
its very mellow and not a strong addiction which starves your brain
its so mellow and chill.. it feels like you are in a black and white movie, and you can take a little more if you want to feel more, its ok
you become floaty and everything just feels all good inside, real smooth
you feel naturally relaxed and pleasant,
opium is totally natural like weed n shit.. but weed is more addictive
have fun with opium
its legal to grow is most places in the united states, but scratching the bulb is a felony
>>7737067
this same fucking guy posting about his cigarette bias for all time
you're insane deal with it
>>7743211
go look up some nootropics you fucking degenerate
>>7739726
> I might try it again now that my palate is better developed.
I heard that's a special time in a boy's life.
>>7749527
quickest way to mouf cancer there is degenerate
>>7748021
>left leaning
What? what is right or left wing about science? its more right wing than any other organization possible - your results are your onus and make or break your career pleb.
>>7748021
>the lobby
there is much more money to be made selling cigarettes so therefore - you're insane and delusional.
Good for you!
>narrative + attacking big tobacco
Do you think that big tobacco didn't fight back? It was a 5 decade struggle before they stopped publishing outright statistical lies.
What is your deal man? Go do some meta analysis on your computer you can download the raw data and do the analysis until you cherry pick it so well that it'll look like smoking barely does fuck all to your body.
Then you can just link us to your 'paper' over and over again like the rest of you crackpot know it all autists.
>>7750149
Do you have proof of this? I'm pretty sure nonsmoking places started opening up to draw specific crowds.
>>7750259
>natural having anything to do with the chemical
>natural implying we didn't have a muchshorter life span before the advent of modern society
> natural isn't chemical
GTFO faggot. Cry about GMOs somewhere else you aren't wanted here.
>>7750282
>implying further experience doesn't change your mindset - addendum
Yep, confirmed for conserva-fag republicunt autist.
>>7750290
>started isn't a small portion of the business cycle of a new model
Yeah, its like saying there was a subset of peeps at the first few vape lounges and that there was never any growth after that. Or smoke shops... or alcohol stores
fuck this thread is cancer and i will derail it into hell. sci mods the most noncaring fucks so this thread will never burn
>>7746608
>overblown
Reducing harm is reducing harm is reducing harm. You can still smoke as it isn't illegal. What exactly are you complaining about?
>>7750293
>reducing harm
From what, exactly? There are people who smoke until they're ninety years old and suffer no ill effects. There is likely another explanation for why this stuff is bad aside from "it's bad and causes cancer 'mkay?"
>>7750703
The only reason they're "healthy" is because smoking increases the chances of someone getting cancer, it doesn't guarantee that they will. Therefore out of the millions of people that smoke, some of them, no matter how few, will live healthy lives into their old age because of genetics. It does not change the fact that smoking is unhealthy and dramatically increases your chances of getting cancer or other smoking-related illnesses, and it also increases the chances that people other than the smoker are exposed to the unhealthy smoke, and who are also put at risk due to someone else's bad habit.
>>7750703
>There are people who smoke until they're ninety years old and suffer no ill effects.
>literally using 'but my grandpappy smoked and he was fine' anecdote as an argument on a science board
>>7750703
do you even fundamentals of statistics bro
on /sci/ no less
>>7740396
>William Burroughs seemed fine.
I mean aside from moving to Mexico to flee the government, shooting his wife while intoxicated, being a shitty father who let his son drink himself to death, and basically only existing to do heroin and writing about doing heroin, I guess he was fine.
The majority of people who try heroin don't try it again. But some continue using, and with continued use it will, without fail, take over your life. I love reading all the crazy shit Burroughs wrote, but I know close family members who have been royally fucked by having it take over their life. Same with coke and meth. Trying it once is fine, but a depressed person or someone with an addictive personality can get fucked, especially if they do it more than once.
>>7738708
Not that guy (Paleoanthropology major here, maybe out of their element) but I don't smoke anymore (used to for seven years) and acknowledge a probably sub-par diet, however I am not a wealthy but I make decent decisions and cook probably 80% of my meals or eat things like fruit that I get from the local store. It's not a whole foods or anything and if it was I don't think I could afford it or even care that much. But I still think we can both admit that smoking, drinking drugs and alcohol are not necessary for proper scientific research and discovery to be accomplished. Yeah they can keep you "sane" but I have found through my experience with pretty much every kind of drug there is (hallucinegen, opioid, amphetamine, alchohol, pills, blah blah blah) that it is easier to abstain from them and use tried and true self discovery using art music and emotional exercises (meditate on mortality and the loss of each person you know) and practice simulating how you want to live and die than just blindly pretending your dead using drugs. A lack of understanding of love for yourself and your fellow lifeforms is what is holding science back. Even in its coldest and most real corners love can still be found and must be respected. This won't make sense so don't pretend it will and don't pretend like I think it will.
>>7751961
So there's no such thing as a recreational heroin user, similar to someone who drinks a couple of beers every third weekend to wind down?
>>7751961
I meant fine in a functional sense. He was a writer. His writing didn't get worse while on heroin, his intellect still seemed intact.
This is a board with some interesting anecdotes of people using stuff like heroin occasionally and still being fine.
http://www.bluelight.org/vb/archive/index.php/t-512401.html
>>7743085
So why are so many Vietnam vets such crazy assholes? I feel like those drugs did something funny with their brains.
>>7752034
Drugs, as well as the Communists/hippies/proto-SJWs treating them like monsters and being massively discriminated against when they came back from the war.
>>7743204
>I don't do drugs, I study them.
Not that I believe you, but this is just retarded. People who study drugs, without taking them, are not limiting their understanding of the drug. I'm not implying that you need to be a pro drug researcher to study drugs, but that by not taking the drug you are leaving yourself up to manipulation by others experiences. You need to experience the drug to compare to your test subjects experiences.
>>7746587
>If a small number of people in sad situations are addicts and others aren't, then the actual source (I.e. the drugs) isn't the problem, it's people.
Well of course it's people. They're the ones taking the drug. Everybody is born into different lives, grow up in different environments, and eventually try to make it on their own using the different skills and learned routines.
What >>7746157 said holds true. The drug only leads to a serious addiction when the environmental factors contribute. War is a great example because once it ends, the soldiers are back in their original life. Some may have been very comfortable before and so they find it easy to kick the habit, while others may have hated their life back home so the drug is a way to continue escaping reality.
Drug users have different reasons for using, a couple examples being the 'partier', looking to take anything that will make the party last, and the 'escaper', looking to take anything that will remove them from their reality. The partier is most likely living a life of luxury, could be that he/she came from wealth or maybe landed the high paying job young and never experienced poverty. He/she enjoys letting loose and will take anything to help them achieve their good time. They are able to cope with their normal life and the drugs because they enjoy their normal life, and the drugs only enhance it. The escaper has nothing to fall back on. They may have started innocently with pot, and after enjoying their time on it, became dependent on it and alcohol to feel good. Eventually they try other drugs and fall even further down the addiction hole. They are trapped in this lifestyle because even if they were to kick the drugs, they feel like their life is still meaningless and there is no way to make it better. The drug to them is a way to make life worth living, as opposed to enhancing it.
So drugs, and the people taking those drugs, are both directly related to the addiction.
>>7750703
>no ill effects
>smoking into his 90s
I've seen those fuckers. They are hooked up to oxygen tanks and when they cough, you'd think the Earth just stopped turning.
>>7748021
There are plenty of left leaning scientists attacking Monsanto. Basically any big company out there has people attacking it, looking for reasons to make them 'pay'. Many claims and rumors are false and perpetuated because they are based off a true fact, though they become diluted and misinterpreted along the way. But there are true claim put forth against many of the products sold by companies, and these claims (scientific papers) are put through peer reviews which give them some credibility.
The internet has helped and hindered the general populations ability to 'learn the facts' because of the misinformation and basic nature of online content.
>>7751974
Essentially, no. You could find edgy contrarians that might find a person or two but, scientifically, that's cherry picking the data. They are literally statistical outliers.
The thing with heroin is that it's insanely addictive. It's very efficient at stimulating the reward centre of the brain, it feels very good. It's so efficient that very few things even come near it. It's more pleasurable than anything you might ever regularly experience. As a result it messes with the reward cycle, having it adjust to the unprecedented surge of endorphins, which results in tolerance. Other things become less pleasurable, both objectively and "fading in comparison" , which drives you back to it, however the chemical tolerance requires a larger dose or a more efficient delivery system (ie intravenous). It becomes exponentially harder to resist the compounded differential of everything being shitty and heroin being so pleasurable. This is why heroin gets you pretty much hooked after only a handful of uses.
Most of the damage is societal (ie not just the addict), destroying the family and community along with the retard. Heroin is expensive, hence the junkie thief stereotype. Young liberal would say the solution is easy, just legalise it and make it ultra cheap. However, the issue is bigger than that, removing legal stigma has an impact on social stigma in the long run. 10% increase in alcohol use is far more manageable due to less immediate effects (few people go from never drinking to a hardcore alcoholic in a month) but 10% increase in heroin creates immediate problems for everyone.
Tl;dr heroin a shit and while banning it isn't ideal, until we have much better mechanisms for dealing with societal effects of severe addiction it should stay that way
>>7752026
He was a trust fund kid. It's easy to be functional when all you have to do is spend your dad's money and scribbler a bit.
>>7752112
>Many claims and rumors are false and perpetuated because they are based off a true fact, though they become diluted and misinterpreted along the way. But there are true claim put forth against many of the products sold by companies, and these claims (scientific papers) are put through peer reviews which give them some credibility.
Right, and I'm arguing that this is true of the tobacco industry with people trying to make them pay with false claims. Just look at any leaked tobacco documents/email site like source watch and it looks like people are demonizing the tobacco industry by treating them like the snake of Eden with claims like "huur tobacco companies are trying to create grassroots front groups" or "durr tobacco companies found out in their own studies that secondhand smoke is four times worse than firsthand"
Why is it so hard to believe the same thing is happening to tobacco? Monsanto/GMOs have a pr problem too but scientists rush to their defense all the time despite controversies and leaked emails.
>>7752276
>cheatcodes that break the game exist in real life
spooky desu
>>7751974
There are definitely recreational cocaine/meth users though. Just look at Hollywood/rich or well off middle class people for the former.
>>7742994
Do you not know what "moderation" is?
Don't make it into something you do throughout the day, and better yet, don't do anything every day.
>>7752669
So if people can show that they can do cocaine, meth, or heroin in moderation, what exactly would be wrong with decriminalizing these drugs?
>>7752276
But crack, morphine and even opium also stimulate the pleasure/reward center of the brain. In the same vein I do remember reading somewhere that people who do cocaine too much end up frying their pleasure center to the extent that pleasure can no longer be experienced from any source. But I would assume this only applies to daily users of cocaine and crack who never want to stop. Leif Garret claims to have quit heroin after being hooked so are you implying he's lying or an exception to the rule? Does heroin addiction lead straight to death? I thought a lot of vietnam vets used to do heroin(or was it soviets in afghanistan?) and after the war 90% of them quit?
>>7752658
Many of them die of overdose too, through usually on heroin I think. The Belushi brothers and Chris Farley come to mind. Maybe celebreties are more reckless than the average joe when it comes to their health because they're surrounded by lunatics partying like crazy.
>>7752977
>the belushi brothers and Chris Farley
Those guys were fat and led unhealthy lifestyles in general though. There are quite a few celebrities rumored to and confirmed to have used cocaine and they're still in decent shape.
>>7753275
Meh, I think synthetics or concentrates are really just asking for trouble but every natural drug is there for the taking and should be encouraged to promote thinking outside the box, with regards to coke that would only include the leaf chewing, the coca teas, drinks and what not. The only synthetic exception I can think of would be LSD but its natural counterpart would be the magic mushrooms anyway.
All the suppression stems from occult control in the west, Popery, puritanism and what not. Totalitarianism, obedience and compliance in the east like draconian China. This is because thinking outside the box is dangerous to established hierarchies which like to maintain control obviously.
Drug laws could be radically simplified by allowing all natural drugs, they are time proven, Big Pharma should be highly regulated, by far the largest pusher of our day.
>>7752686
all three of those substances are substantially more addictive than alcohol or tobacco
>>7752034
>So why are so many Vietnam vets such crazy assholes?
A shitty war in the thick of a jungle (or a mountain side, depending on where you were at) with shitty leadership and shitty equipment with shitty support back home against an opponent who is extremely organized, well indoctrinated and sufficiently equipped would send most people into a PTSD tailspin.
It could happen to anybody, as my dad would say. He would know, it happened to him. Took him 20 years to get over it.
FYI: he toked on dank kush, but only AFTER he got back from Nam. Transformed him into a "jolly" fellow.
>>7753275
I was referring to heroin though. They all died from speedballs.
I wonder now whether "reasonable" people are just too scared to try heroin and that's a factor in the high addiction rate. Like skydiving or other high risk activities, because of effective brainwashing the only people attracted to actually doing it would be people who "just don't care" as opposed to ciggy and beer consumers where a large percentage of users have a sense of responsibility and self control...
>>7742005
Ive done cocain a couple times at parties, races ect, but it;s super hard to get in australia and fucking expensive, and also it isn't a high that really does much for me. I'm confident and outgoing as it is. However too many variables for me to say it is/isn't addictive in my life. I wouldn't go searching for it, however I would take it if someone offered. Plus I am kinda scared of 'hard; drugs. I stick to things like LSD once a year and weed now and then.
>>7753413
And if people can manage to not do them on a constant/daily basis I assume they'll be fine.
>more addictive than alcohol or tobacco
Bullshit. Seeing how often smokers go to their cigarette packs and seeing as there are a lot of fucking alcoholics out there (David Nutt thinks it's the most dangerous drug overall) I sincerely doubt this.
>>7753458
>against an opponent who is extremely organized, well indoctrinated and sufficiently equipped would send most people into a PTSD tailspin.
Except it was the vietcongs who were underfunded, underarmed and terribly organised. They allegedly lost every battle too and except for dogfighting had a much worse kill ratio.
>>7753765
But what if a lot of alcoholics are just too scared to try meth, crocodil or heroin because they know it's a hard drug and have been effectively brainwashed against them? Or don't have access to them?
Are you seriously suggesting that if someone tries both beer and heroin each weekend for a few months that they'll have a harder time kicking the beer than the heroin?
Or do you want to change your answer and say that alcohol is more widely abused than hard drugs because it's cheaper, legal and more readily available along with having an extremely low chance of killing you by overdosing?
>>7753767
I was referring to the NVA. You are right the VC was unorganized.....but their mission was reconnaissance and assassinations.
>>7753783
NVA didn't have better weapons with the exception of jets and choppers which they still had very few of. They didn't have better training either with the exception of their AF so your argument is still invalid.
>>7753789
>NVA didn't have better weapons with the exception of jets and choppers which they still had very few of
I never said they had better weapons. I said they were "extremely organized, well indoctrinated and sufficiently equipped".
>They didn't have better training either with the exception of their AF so your argument is still invalid.
The Russians and the Chinese trained not only capable pilots, but also the NVA. They also supplied them too. Sufficiently.
You have no counterclaim because you clearly didn't read any of what I initially wrote.
>>7753799
>They also supplied them too. Sufficiently.
Sufficiently enough for them to lose every single major engagement? I think the NVA outmanned the US and I'm saying the US was better trained and equipped so how exactly is the NVA "superior" tactically to US forces?
You're making it sound like US forces were left high and dry and that's where the PTSD came from. But besides all the advantages besides numbers, the US also got to use chemical weapons and basically nape any position the NVA or Vietcong were dug into. You're making it sounds like the Viets were the ones with a tactical edge. I don't even...
>>7753832
You don't even what? Think for yourself?
Of course you don't.
Learn basic reading comprehension skills before you attempt to pick apart someone else's point.
I never said anything of soldiers being left high and dry, or implied it in my previous comments.
Jesus Christ anon
>>7737077
Well put!
>>7753934
Yes you did. You implied that the viet forces were more adept at killing american forces due to their superiority and that is what caused PTSD.
I retorted that this is factually incorrect. If anything, it should have been the Viets who should have contracted PTSD for the same reason. Whenever I drilled down to the nitty gritty you started with your mental gymnastics trying to dance away from the facts.
tl;dr the PTSD was not caused by being part of a weaker force, but by having weaker wills to begin with for those that suffered.
