• Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

  • N&PD Moderators: Skorpio

Legitimate medicines in Sched I

chicpoena said:
I was stating it from the point of view of the DEA, not my own personal point of view. As in, whenever a completely legitimate, useful drug starts to be used recreationally by a decent amount of people, they ban it by saying it has no medical value (by placing it in Schedule 1).

Obviously a medicine is a medicine, whether you can get high or not. And all medicines should be legal.
Click to expand...

Then why isn't methamphetamine, cocaine etc sch 1 as enough people abuse them (more people abuse coke than heroin)? The reason is more to do with petty prejudices amoung the people doing the schedule classification than what you've suggested
 
From the DEA's perspective any drug is abusable. You can take 1200 mg caffeine and get hyped out of your fucking mind but its not even regulated the slightest bit. I can go to the drug store and crack open some Benzedrex or Vicks inhalers and get pretty fucked but they aren't regulated. Just at the same time I could find a 2 year old forgotten bottle of Vicodin and get totally fucked and who's gonna know?

(By the way, 3 things I haven't done yet heh, have snorted caffeine before tho)
 
This is why the Dutch law regarding drugs is superior over the American law. We have 4 levels of regulation. The lowest is OTC, after that it's medication covered by the medicine act(stuff like antibiotics and anti-depressants, non-abusable but regulated medication), and after that you have 2 levels of regulation covered by the Opium Law. The Opium Law consists of 2 lists, list 1 which cover all the highly addictive, physically dangerous or medically obsolete drugs. List 2 covers all the psychologically and relatively harmless drugs. Drugs from both lists can be prescribed by doctors, so in theory a licensed doctor(or psychiatrist) could prescribe any drug he/she thinks would be benificial for his/her patient. That's why heroin for instance can be prescribed by doctors to heavilly addicted heroin junkies. This also makes it possible to experimentally prescribe otherwise illegal drugs, without having to change the law to make the experiment possible. For instance if the medical council proposes a experimental trial with MDMA therapy, psychiatrist could legall aquire it through a pharmacy, without having to change the law. Both the well known harddrugs like MDMA, cocaine and LSD are covered by list 1, as well as very addicitive medication like strong opioids(morphine etc.) and stimulants like methylphenidate and dextro-amphetamine. Cannabis and hash are also list 2 substances in the Netherlands.
 
I think one would be hardpressed to come up with a C-I drug that does not have a conceivable medical use. Opiates, stimulants, anesthetics, sedatives, those are all pretty obvious, psychedelics for various experimental uses which show a lot of promise, what else is there, really?
 
This also makes it possible to experimentally prescribe otherwise illegal drugs, without having to change the law to make the experiment possible.
Click to expand...

Is there much research being done there into use of psychedelics for psychotherapy, psychology? Looking at MAPS it seems most of their studies took/are taking place in the US and switzerland.
 
There is a synthetic steroid which was made and placed in Sched I. I'm pretty sure that it has no medical use because it was noted only for building muscle, which is not a medical use.
 
You can't think of any medical uses for anabolic steroids? You haven't looked to hard, huh?
 
otb01 said:
There is a synthetic steroid which was made and placed in Sched I. I'm pretty sure that it has no medical use because it was noted only for building muscle, which is not a medical use.
Click to expand...

O rly?
 
anabolic/androgenic steroids are all placed Sched III so i have no clue what you are talking about....????.....

they all have potential medical use as known in the literature
 
dorothyperkins said:
Is there much research being done there into use of psychedelics for psychotherapy, psychology? Looking at MAPS it seems most of their studies took/are taking place in the US and switzerland.
Click to expand...
In the US and Switzerland they have to make an appeal for the medical board, or whatever the propper name for it is(can't think of it atm), but in the Netherlands licensed doctors and psychiatrists don't have to do this, so it will go unnoticed, to MAPS obviously as well. Much of these experiments are kept low-profile as well, so not to attract to much attention and start a debate which might cause a change of the current policy and law regarding these type of experimental prescriptions. The only time it did get attention from the media and goverment was when some doctors in a few of the major Dutch cities started prescribing experimental heroin to long time addicts, because it was done at goverment funded methadone clinics, they had to ask permission to the city counsils because they were the ones wo distibuted the fundings among several methadone clinics. LSD isn't probaply used anymore by psychiatrists though, but MDMA still rarely is, if I'm not mistaken for treatment resistant PTSS.
 
You're not thinking at all, are you? Have you bothered to read SomeKindaLove's links? THG would be fine for treating both conditions.
 
Thanks psych0naut, they still doing the heroin prescribing? They just started a trial here (UK), from an article in the independant:
The most common treatment for heroin abuse in Britain is methadone, a synthetic drug similar to heroin but less addictive.
Click to expand...
ie. No good! No wonder it doesn't work.

Oh and do you think any psychiatrists use the 2C-s, would think there would be advantages over lsd, generally shorter duration, kinda tuneable effects, probably easier to work with.
 
ie. No good! No wonder it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? Methadone is certainly an effective treatment for addiction, far better than anything else available. Heroin may be a really effective treatment for heroin addiction, but it does little to get addicts back into stable, drug free lifestyles.
 
^ No. Methadone does not "treat" addiction, it merely substitutes a legal, slightly more socially acceptable addiction to a longer acting (and might I add, more addictive) substance. There are innumerable threads about this in Other Drugs.
 
THG causes sterilization in people who use it. It's not suitable for med use.
 
Methadone does not "treat" addiction, it merely substitutes a legal, slightly more socially acceptable addiction to a longer acting (and might I add, more addictive) substance.
Click to expand...
That's what i thought, though i wasn't sure. Is it actually more addictive? I guess you don't get a rush from drinking it like shooting h, so is that why addicts still go buy h off the street?
Give them something as good as or better than heroin and they'll never want to buy it off the street again. Though that might lead ppl. to become junkies so they can get the really cool prescription shit!
 
chicpoena said:
LSD is the only successful treatment for alcoholism.
Click to expand...

Where were you when I was catching flack for saying this in some other thread? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top