HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ibarrett@casper.cs.uct.ac.za (I G Barrett)
Subject: Re: Drug Use Costs US $76 Billion per Year!
Organization: Computer Science Department, University of Cape Town
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 10:25:09 GMT


Your article/letter follows:
In <machman.712195642@milton> machman@milton.u.washington.edu (The Machman) writes:
>cklausme@jarthur.claremont.edu (Chris Klausmeier) writes:

>>Reposted for your enjoyment from biz.clarinet.sample (I'd love to see this
>>study!):
>>
>>said drug abuse, compounded by AIDS... skyrocketing health care prices
>>and a jammed judicial system are all draining the U-S economy. In fact,

>too bad they didn't determine what portion of that $76 billion is due
>to the illegality of some drugs versus what portion is actually due to
>the drugs themselves.  i'd bet all my civilly-forfeitable possessions
>that the former far outweighs the latter.

>-- 
> /'''   The Machman     machman@milton.u.washington.edu    david c carroll
> c-OO                                                                      
>    \                     "Big Science.  Hallelujah"

Of course the jammed judicial system is their own fault.  I seem to remember 
someone saying that the aim was to put all (illegal) drug producers, sellers
and users into prison  and that they would build more prisons if necessary.
Does anyone know if 'drugs' included alcohol, nicotine and caffeine since these
drugs surely cost the country more in terms of health care costs than all other
(i.e. illegal) drugs together.
I believe that in Britain the cost to the country due to these legal drugs is 
balanced against the money gained through taxation etc. and they come out way
ahead so it is considered acceptable (tacitly, of course, since no politician
would come out and say it is OK if a few people die because we still make a
profit).

Comments, opinions?

Swan
brrian04@uctvax.uct.ac.za

Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:45:07 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA

lamontg@milton.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist) writes:
: 
: Jesus Fucking Christ.  Is there one single fucking person on this goddamn
: net that has half the brain to realize that not only is our mind
: *psychological* but its also *biochemical*?  

Certainly, but then we are not talking about immediate addiction to a drug.
We are talking about an attempt, usually unconscious, of these people to 
cure a biochemical imbalance in their body. I would not call that being
addicted. Of course, if this attempted cure last long enough, then addiction
could occur - and frequently does (some alcoholics are a good example).

: You've got some truely fucking brilliant opinions.  Ah, so someone who
: has a genetically inherated metabolic disorder (specifically something that
: is related to gamma-ammunobutric acid in some way, and most likely something
: like an anxiety disorder) has "the power to change their beliefs and
: consequently their behavior".

Certainly, they do. But, in this case, it wouldn't help them any. They still
would be suffering from the disorder. That means they need to see a doctor
about getting the chemical aid that is going to be necessary for them to lead
a relatively normal life.

: Thats just really really brilliant.  They don't have any kind of psychological
: way to change their behavior.  The only way their going to change their
: behavior is through a chemical mechanism because their problem is entirely
: 100% chemical.  They're going to be alcoholics.  And there is no goddamn
: way they are going to stop giving importance to the beliefs that motivate
: that behavior.  "Anxiety attacks?  Ah, I think they're actually not
: important and not a problem in my life...  so, I think I'll just stop
: using alcohol and have fun with my anxiety attacks..."  Yeah, right.

As you say, it is likely that they will become (and remain) alcoholics. 
It is unfortunate that so many people consider alcoholism to be only a
psychological problem. That may be true for a large majority of cases,
but not all. Because of the belief that it is a "mental weakness" that
causes a person to abuse alcohol, many will not seek the medical help
which could help them control this problem. 

Bill
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 21:11:21 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell) writes:
: 
: This is what I disagree with.  The blame should stay on the alcoholic.  The
: alcoholic committed the acts, and responsibility suggests acceptance of
: blame.  Why be responsible for something that wasn't your fault?  Do you
: see why I disagree with this?

Yes and I realize why you can't understand the moral validity and the
effectiveness of the view.  I only can because I've been there.

: 
: Any shift of blame is irresponsible in the long run.

I simply disagree.  Shifting the blame for the cause clears the way for
accepting the blame for the consequences.

Bob

-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

Stomp out intolerance!

Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:5250 alt.drugs:13298
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Date: 22 Jul 92 05:50:36 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
: 
: The only argument is where you put the blame. It belongs on the person using
: the drug. People need to be willing to accept the consequences for their own
: actions, not blame a convenient scapegoat - that is a cop-out.
: 

Just to be redundant I'll say to this also that the AA and NA programs
achieve modest success using this paradigm.  Modest but better than any
other.  A saying that I have heard there is "the alcoholic's main problem
is alcohol."  Nothing helps so much as that realization.

Bob

-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

Stomp out intolerance!
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:5348 alt.drugs:13548
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Date: 26 Jul 92 23:16:12 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

mike@optimla.aimla.com (Mike Diehr) writes:
: Regarding the "addictive personality"...
: 
: A former girlfriend of mine had had a long history of problems before I 
: ever met her (i.e. cocaine addiction, panic attacks, hypochondria, etc...) 
: About a year after we broke up, I had a conversation in which she basically
: blamed me for all of her problems.   I'm not sure if she went through any
: AA / NA meetings or what...  : 
: 

I doubt strongly that that was the source of her angst.  What is taught there
is in fact responsibility.  One of the steps is to, as so far as it would
not compromise them, to make retribution to each and every one harmed by your
drinking.  It by no means takes you off the hook.  Blame in never shifted
to other people, the exact opposite.  The blame is shifted to the alcohol
but the consequences left with the alcoholic.

Bob

-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

Stomp out intolerance!
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:5249 alt.drugs:13296
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Date: 22 Jul 92 05:35:25 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:

: Of course they claim they were enslaved; one of the
: tenets of the "Anonymous" groups is claiming no power over the substance in
: question.
: 

Well yes now that you mention it.  And it seems that treating it in that
fashion has proven to be the single most effective method of achieving
recovery.  Coincidence?

Bob

-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

Stomp out intolerance!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
From: lamontg@milton.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Organization: 'Operation: Mindcrime'
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:26:44 GMT

morley@Apple.COM (John Morley) writes:
>rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:
>> Just to be redundant I'll say to this also that the AA and NA programs
>> achieve modest success using this paradigm.  Modest but better than any
>> other.  A saying that I have heard there is "the alcoholic's main problem
>> is alcohol."  Nothing helps so much as that realization.
>> 
>> Bob
>
>WRONG!  The alcoholic's main problem is not alcohol, it is the alcoholic.  The
>.....
>fear when you are in the presence of it.  A much happier state of being IMHO.
>
>I fully expect to get flamed severely by people that will insist that there
>are physical/psychological/hereditary/etc. causes for a disease called
>alcoholism, and to them I say that even if this were true, everyone carries
>with them the antidiote to that disease, the power to change your beliefs and
>consequently your behavior.  I personally know people that have been or are
>addicted to alcohol, crack, gambling, overeating, to name just a few of the
>more popular human obsessions.  The ones that I have seen get over their
>addictions are the ones that stopped giving importance to the beliefs that
>motivate that behavior.  The ones that I see fight endlessly with their
>compulsions are the ones that glorify the problem and try to interpret all of
>life through those puke-green colored glasses.

Jesus Fucking Christ.  Is there one single fucking person on this goddamn
net that has half the brain to realize that not only is our mind
*psychological* but its also *biochemical*?  

You've got some truely fucking brilliant opinions.  Ah, so someone who
has a genetically inherated metabolic disorder (specifically something that
is related to gamma-ammunobutric acid in some way, and most likely something
like an anxiety disorder) has "the power to change their beliefs and
consequently their behavior".

Thats just really really brilliant.  They don't have any kind of psychological
way to change their behavior.  The only way their going to change their
behavior is through a chemical mechanism because their problem is entirely
100% chemical.  They're going to be alcoholics.  And there is no goddamn
way they are going to stop giving importance to the beliefs that motivate
that behavior.  "Anxiety attacks?  Ah, I think they're actually not
important and not a problem in my life...  so, I think I'll just stop
using alcohol and have fun with my anxiety attacks..."  Yeah, right.

Get a *clue* that all people are not made equally.

*PLEASE*.

"Everyone carries with them the antidote..."  *snort*

-- 
Lamont Granquist  lamontg@u.washington.edu  (anon: ap.2187@cupid.sai.com)
University of Washington, Seattle.    Disc: if UW ever finds out what I post... 
alt.drugs FTP site: ftp.u.washington.edu[128.95.136.1] dir:/public/alt.drugs
               For quotes and other useless info see my .plan
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:5324 alt.drugs:13500
From: lamontg@milton.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Date: 25 Jul 92 13:06:35 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: 'Operation: Mindcrime'

pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman) writes:
>The point is, "outside assistance" that just reinforces the idea that
>they are slave to their genetics (or whathaveyou) is not much assistance
>at all.  Therapy to help them realize the power of the mind (both conscious
>and unconscious) to overcome whatever it is that "enslaves" them (be it
>addiction or anxiety attacks) is much more beneficial.

Well now, I have yet to see any evidence that the power of the mind can
overcome addiction/anxiety attacks/etc in all cases.  Also, the specter
of the all-powerful subconscious mind is continually being raised in
this discussion (even if its not directly stated).   THAT IS UTTER FUCKING
COMPLETE BULLSHIT!

In my most humble opinion of course.  *smile*.

Personally, I don't think its of much assistance to someone who might
have a genetic disorder for which they will damn near need a miracle to
overcome it simply via using the subconscious mind.  It is *EXACTLY* like
telling cancer patients that they should just use their subconscious
mind to come up with a "miracle cure" like the cases you read about in
the media every now and then.

What these people need is adequate pharmacotherapy to fix the underlying
biochemical problem without all the psychological "you can do it yourself"
bullshit.

-- 
Lamont Granquist  lamontg@u.washington.edu  (anon: ap.2187@cupid.sai.com)
University of Washington, Seattle.    Disc: if UW ever finds out what I post... 
alt.drugs FTP site: ftp.u.washington.edu[128.95.136.1] dir:/public/alt.drugs
               For quotes and other useless info see my .plan
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
From: phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Organization: Cadence Design Systems
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 19:56:48 GMT

In article <1992Jul20.191221.14423@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
>I know well the "addictive personality" type. I have worked with quite a
>few of them. This does not mean that any drug wields a magical power over
>people who consume the drug. In most cases, it is not the power of a drug,
>it is the lack of willpower that is the problem - in other words, the body
>is strong, but the mind is weak.

I am also familiar with people with addictive personalities (and am fortunate
not to be included in that group).

What happens with NA and AA is the addiction to the particular drug is replaced
by an addiction to the NA or AA support group.  I agree that this addiction is
probably healthier for the person involved, but it is an addiction nonetheless.

I'm not sure an addictive personality can be cured.  The best remedy seems
to be to recognize that the person has an addictive personality and to
channel the addiction to activities that are nondebilitating.  I had one friend
who replaced a cocaine/marijuana addiction with an addiction to bicycling and
triathalons.  Unfortunately, he overdid this and hurt himself and is now, I
believe, addicted to religion.  I do believe the religion addiction is much
healthier for him than the drug addiction.

In any case, I don't think the fact that some people have addictive
personalities is a legitimate excuse for throwing people into jail for
possessing and/or using drugs.

-Pete Zakel
 (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)

Mayor Vincent J. `Buddy' Cianci on the ACLU's suit to have a city nativity
scene removed:
		"They're just jealous because they don't have three wise men
		 and a virgin in the whole organization."
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
From: s4610160@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Kauf Man)
Subject: Article: LSD arrests going up; Deadheads targeted?
Summary: DEA sucks
Keywords: LSD, Grateful Dead
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 19:06:03 GMT

From the Monday Portland Oregonian:

LSD arrests going up;
Deadheads targeted?
by Jim Newton, LA Times-Washington Post Service
   Federal arrests in LSD cases have gone up dramatically during the past 
two years as drug enforcement agents aggressively attempt to thwart the
drug's apparently resurging popularity.
   During the late 1980s, the DEA typically arrested about 100 LSD offenders
a year.  Last year, that number shot up to 243.  This year, it's on track to
hit 300.
    "My objective is to try to get ahead of the curve on this," said DEA
Administrator Robert C. Bonner, citing studies that show modestly
increasing LSD use when most illegal drugs appear to be on the decline.  "We
recognize that LSD is a potential problem of the future."
    As the DEA steps up its enforcement efforts against LSD one group in
particular is on the spot: fans of the Grateful Dead, a popular rock band
whose history is intertwined with that of LSD.
    Grateful Dead have created feretile harvesting areas for agents looking
to make LSD arrests, and the leaping number of those arrests has convinced
many members of the bands entourage that the federal government has routinely
inserted agents into concert crowds.
    Rumors of DEA surveillance are so detailed that many fans of the Grateful
Dead even profess to know the federal code name: Operation Dead End.
    In an interview last weekl, Bonner denied that such an operation exists,
but, he acknowledged, "It's tru that we have had some investigations that 
have led us to Grateful Dead concerts."
    For its part, the Grateful Dead - through the Rex Foundation, a
philanthropic organization that it funds and whose board includes members of
the band - has quietly fought back.
    Families Against Mandatory Minimums, a Washington, D.C.-based group
lobbying for changes in sentencing laws, has received scores of modest
contributions from people across the country, many of whom have family
members in prison.  But the second-biggest check to date arrived last
month: It was a $10000 donation from the Rex Foundation.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Better heresy of doctrine,             Scott.Kaufman@STPEC.umass.edu 
 than heresy of heart."                            or
        John Whittier                   s4610160@titan.ucc.umass.edu
        Mary Garvin, Stanza 22                 (413) 253-4245

 "One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."
      -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
From: lewis@aera8700.mitre.org (Keith Lewis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Does Lyndon LaRouche own ABC now?
Date: 22 Jul 92 13:47:15 GMT
Organization: The MITRE Corporation

Last night I saw a story on ABC news about the prison system (federal, I
think).  It seems that 20 or 30 years ago, they put quite a few people away
for life.  ABC says that the crimes for which they were put away were not
heinous by todays standards, and every day there are DRUG DEALERS being let
out on the street.  So we should shorten the sentences of these aging
murderers and rapists to make room.

Pardon me while I puke.

Keith Lewis             klewis@mitre.org          "Mr. Cheap"
I don't dance to music; music dances to me.  Email me for my corrected PGP key.
The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
From: deeb@splinter.splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Stephen Humble)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Instant addiction (was Re: Partial Legalization)
Date: 21 Jul 92 17:05:37 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.drugs
Organization: College of Engineering, Northeastern University
In-reply-to: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com's message of 20 Jul 92 19:12:21 GMT

billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) sez:
> There are no drugs which can cause physical addiction from one or
> two, or even several uses.

[I hope one of the net.pharmacomavens will correct me if this is wrong.]

I have been told (by the prescribing physician) that Prednisone
withdrawal after only 3 daily doses causes an unacceptable risk of
kidney failure, so the dosage is gradually reduced over the course of
several days.

On the other hand, Prednisone is an anti-inflammatory steroid and has
no recreational use.

Stephen
Organization: Freshman, H&SS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 08:47:18 -0400 
From: William Spaulding Wood <ww1i+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Psychological Addiction


Brian Lintz has this to say (RE: Psychological Addiction):
Yes, psychological addiction is real, but the way it is used by the drug
warriors is misleading. Psychological addiction is not a property of the
drug, but rather of the individual. To say, "marijuana is psychologically
addictive" is false. Saying, "marijuana can be psychologically addictive"
is better, but still misleading. A better way of putting it is, "it is
possible for a person to become psychologically addicted to marijuana,
depending on the psychological makeup of the person." 

Agreed.  I believe the best way to word it, however is "Abuse Potential."
See how much easier that rolls of the tongue than "it is possible for a
person to become ....?"

    ~wig, just my too sense
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:5303 alt.drugs:13455
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Date: 24 Jul 92 16:30:58 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA

tjj@thumper..bellcore.com (J Tim Jordan) writes:
: >
: >Drugs affect different people differently. For some people a given drug will
: >have a mildly amusing affect, others will find it obnoxious and a few will
: >find it so great that it's hard to live without. 
: 
: It would be helpful to society to find these people and intervene. I have an
: on how to do this and it goes like this. Have it so that a person needs 
: a license to ingest a recreational drug. Make the laws such that the person
: has to renew his license yearly or something like that and have it that
: inorder to renew you have to fast from the drug for a period of one month 
: or so. If you caught ingesting a drug with out a license or if you can't
: go the month without ingesting then you go see a shrink. 

Why? What would any of this accomplish? You forget that use does not equal
addiction does not equal abuse. We need to be concerned when a person abuses
a drug in a manner that endangers other people and their property. Otherwise,
it is none of our business. 

Seeing a shrink might be the last thing an addiction prone person needs.

Bill
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:5502 alt.drugs:13863
From: Siddharth.Soni@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Siddharth Soni)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Psychological Addiction
Date: 31 Jul 92 02:04:58 GMT
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service

my friend who would go on binges and then stop seemd psy. addicted.
No matter what we were doing, (sports, etc[ANYTHINGG that should be enjoyed sober)

he would always be saying "GOD, Id LOVE to be  high right now!!"

Youre right, he wouldn't seem to laugh much in the midst of a binge, he'd 
just zone out and have an awful memory (What was i just talking about??)


--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: jrk@sys.uea.ac.uk (Richard Kennaway)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: possible source for strychnine rumours
Date: 31 Jul 92 12:02:27 GMT
Organization: SYS, Univ. of E. Anglia, Norwich, U.K.
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1

I missed the beginning of this thread.  What is the "Strychnine Universe"?

--
Richard Kennaway     SYS, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, U.K.
Internet:  jrk@sys.uea.ac.uk               uucp:  ...mcsun!ukc!uea-sys!jrk
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:5317 alt.drugs:13484
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Date: 25 Jul 92 04:30:54 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

morley@Apple.COM (John Morley) writes:
: 
: WRONG!  The alcoholic's main problem is not alcohol, it is the alcoholic.  The
: problem with 12 step (i.e. AA, NA, etc.) programs is that instead of helping
: an individual free themself from the assumption that they are dependent on
: something external, they instead promote the notion that anyone who has had
: a problem in their relationship to a substance is condemned to a lifetime
: of dependence that can only be kept under control by avoiding any contact
: whatsoever with that substance forever.
: 

There is so much in your post I would like to take on and disagree with
but this is not an A.A. meeting I'm afraid.

Bob
-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

Stomp out intolerance!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs