angelsmoke
Bluelighter
I think what I'm trying to say is this drug seems unique in the way that almost instant and constant abuse of it has gained a slightly weird "it's so fiendish that it isn't your fault your caining grams of it a night, it's the drug" acceptance.
I think that in this thread we're deliberately trying to keep an attitude of sympathy rather than blame. Not meaning that as a dig at you -- but trying to explain the attitude.
nnatural said:I don't think it's the drug itself that is so unique - more like the £ to effect ratio which makes it so dangerous... unlike coke which is still technically a luxury expense, this habbit can be kept up with a fairly modest salary - very dangerous :
I think another factor is that people don't realise it has any addiction potential. The closest thing most people have to compare it to is pills, which will hopefully have been mostly MD, which is categorically not addictive. If it had been more likened to coke, I think people would have been more careful. As it was we just didn't know enough.
Don't the Scottish start uni at 17?been head said:in uni at age 17 ?