David Nutt's dangerous drug list..

Transcendence said:
According to this list, cannabis is more dangerous than huffing paint thinner. Nice.
Click to expand...

I also noticed that.

How did 19 people die from Cannabis?

I can understand if they were smoking and then driving or operating heavy machinery but you shouldn't drive intoxicated at all.
 
Is this really supposed to be in order? And how is alcohol not number one??

LOL my favorite is marijuana being just slightly more dangerous than solvents.. -hmmm..... *looks at bowl and weed*... hmmmmm... *shifts eyes over to can of gas and heavy sock*.... hmmmmmmmmm

*edit* lol oh, I see the last posters agree! haha
 
something tell me the government have tied his hands behind his back, Any real scientist will tell you that half of this is ether wrong or been made to look different with statistics


Weed deaths? 19 EH?! Is that like of all time ever in the whole world or is it when them deaths accrued from when some plants grew into some fiber glass and was sold out in which people got poisoned and died?

Sorry for any spellings
 
Yerg said:
^I think that he might just have a point. Of course a single use of cannabis is less harmful than a single use of cannabis; on the other hand, I know no-one who still uses solvents, whereas I know many people, including myself, who use cannabis daily, and experience negative effects as a result of this. I think the social cost of cannabis use in terms of opportunity cost might be greater than that of solvents.
I'm not saying that he's right, but we shouldn't dismiss his ideas as not even possibly right. If we are going to reject every scientific conclusion that doesn't fit with our intuitions, what's the point of researching at all?
Click to expand...

You can't call it the "dangerous drug list" if this is the case. It has nothing to do with the danger of using marijuana or solvents then, just maybe the overall monetary cost to society.
 
^Surely it reflects the fact that cannabis use tends to be heavier and more sustained than solvents, i.e. that the average person who smokes cannabis for the first time will probably end up using much more cannabis than a first time solvent user will use solvents? And maybe "dangerous drugs list" is a misnomer, but social cost was certainly one of the factors being considered. That's the name of the article, not the paper, which was called "Estimating Drug Harms".
 
Definition for "dangerous" according to Google:

involving or causing danger or risk; liable to hurt or harm.

Considering tobacco is known to contain many chemicals that are recognized carcinogens I think it should really of rated way higher on the list. Just my opinion.
 
Mora Fiend said:
Definition for "dangerous" according to Google:

involving or causing danger or risk; liable to hurt or harm.

Considering tobacco is known to contain many chemicals that are recognized carcinogens I think it should really of rated way higher on the list. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

Yep. And why isn't alcohol number 1? The legal drug that causes many times more deaths than heroin ever could.

People in power need guidance when it comes to the deciding factors of drug dangers and drug laws.
 
I agree with some of what was said in The Times article, but some did seem a bit habberdash and bollocks...

I do like David Nutt and think he's doing a lot to try change the public's misguided perception of drugs (due to media and political influence etc.), but some stuff in that article doesn't seem to be helping the cause but hampering it.

Ah well, c'est la fuckin vie ay? :\
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top