we obviously have a difference of opinion which is to be expected - i'm fine with that. the condescending tone, sadly, devalues a lot of what you're writing.
i took a step back from this and thought about it and the statement "people who don't do drugs are missing out" is, in reflection true. but in isolation it's a pretty meaningless statement and, again on reflection, i was rather more focused on the intent behind the post (about which, i will admit, i must have made assumptions. never a good thing).
that said, in the spirit of the op, the following are also true, right?
people who don't eat carrots are missing out
people who don't visit belgium are missing out
people who don't pilot the space shuttle are missing out
people who don't wear prada are missing out
people who don't speak spanish are missing out
people who don't go fishing are missing out
people who don't watch movies are missing out
people who don't listen to the beatles are missing out
etc.
from there, the following must also be true, right?
people who don't have cancer are missing out
people who don't have aids are missing out
people who don't believe in god are missing out
indeed, it's rather a self-evident statement to say: people who don't do x are missing out where x=anything
of course they are - they are 'missing out' on x.
so why bother pointing it out at all? well, i think it's a fair assumption that the reason the op bothered to post it at all is that s/he believes that when x=drugs, 'missing out' is a 'bad' thing (for want of a better word). and that's what caused me to sympathise with purplefirefly's position and view the post for what it looks like to me - simple snobbery.
so i agree that they're missing out but i totally disagree with the implication that it's necessarily a bad thing or a poor choice or something to be pitied. or whatever.
regards
alasdair