• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

The Ethics of Drug Dealing

Just like how fast food companies use certain cooking oils and fats that are highly addictive.
Really? Addictive as in physically addictive? You got a source for that?
As for the cigarettes thing, what do you mean it's unsurprising? You don't know what any of these chemicals are but you know that they're in cigarettes and that they're addictive?
 
^But you said you'd already done the research, it seems silly for me to do it all over again. I'm not the one making farfetched claims, imo you shouldn't cast aspersions that you're not willing to back up. I had a look, and the only mention of addictive chemicals I could find are fat and sugar- which everyone knows are in fast food.
 
Jews planned 9/11. I know this, but don't feel like providing any kind of evidence for it. Google it if you don't believe me.
 
^ LOL I guess you don't know the difference between scientifically proven facts and conspiracy theories. Oh well I don't care if you believe me or not, the facts speak for themselves if you spend more than 30 seconds doing the research you'll find the info. I could dig up the info but I just don't care enough about proving it to you to spend the time on it. You clearly have no desire for the truth and only are interested in maintaining your own biased opinion, so I'm not going to waste my time.
 
How is "fast food and cigarette companies fill their food with additives to make them more addictive" not a conspiracy theory? Besides, for all you know it's a scientifically proven fact that Jews planned 9/11. You just haven't done enough research.
You clearly have no desire for the truth and only are interested in maintaining your own biased opinion, so I'm not going to waste my time.
I rather think that asking for some kind of evidence before I accept a belief shows that I do care about the truth. I already said that I had a look on Google and found neither good, scientific sources, nor a news article that said anything about substances other than fat and sugar...which I already knew were in fast food. So you say that if I Google "fast+food+addictive" I'll see some hard evidence. I haven't. Why, then, would I, or anyone else for that matter, believe your claims? I'm supposed to just accept what you say without any kind of justification, as if you were the font of all knowledge? Sorry, I just don't have enough faith in your epistemic infallibility to do that. If you don't care whether or not people believe you, why bother trying to convince them in the first place?
 
i made a thread for ya. check S&T

if you want to discuss it here,

AOLNews said:
Scientist have previously proven links between drug addiction and fast-food addiction, but now there is a growing body of research that is finding out how junk food is hard wiring our brains for cravings.

The latest study, published March 28 in "Nature Neuroscience," likened the affects of high-fat, high-calorie fast food to those of cocaine or heroin, in animals at least.

The researchers showed that the pleasure-center in rats brains were overstimulated from the fast food similar to an addict's cocaine binge. Eventually, the pleasure centers became so overloaded that rats needed more and more food to feel normal, according to Paul H. Kenny, an associate professor of molecular therapeutics at the Scripps Research Institute.

Throughout the study, Kenny and his co-author studied three groups of lab rats for 40 days. The first group ate healthy food. The second ate a limited amount of junk food. The third group, however, was allowed to gorge on high-fat, high-calorie foods and became obese.

The startling side effect? The brains of the obese rats changed.

"The body adapts remarkably well to change -- and that's the problem," Kenny said in a press release. "When the animal overstimulates its brain pleasure centers with highly palatable food, the systems adapt by decreasing their activity. However, now the animal requires constant stimulation from palatable food to avoid entering a persistent state of negative reward".

During the study, the rats lost complete control over the ability to regulate whether they were hungry, often eating despite electric shocks. When the obese rats were put on a healthy diet, they refused to eat, starving themselves for two weeks.

In another study, researchers at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City showed that feeding rats a diet high in saturated fat, calories and sugar -- which is the typical make-up for a fast-food menu item -- lowered the rats ability to respond to leptin, a hormone that helps regulate eating behavior by controlling how full one feels. As rats grew fatter, the amount of leptin in their bodies increased signaling that they were dangerously close to starvation. They continued to overeat and gain weight.

Those who yo-yo diet face similar problems that those going through withdrawal do, Boston University researchers proved last year. According to Pietro Cottone, an assistant professor in the Laboratory of Addictive Disorders at BU, dieters seek out foods to avoid the negative feelings that they experience if they are deprived of their favorite comfort foods.

"These findings confirm what we and many others have suspected," Kenny said, "that over-consumption of highly pleasurable food triggers addiction-like neuroadaptive responses in brain reward circuitries, driving the development of compulsive eating. Common mechanisms may therefore underlie obesity and drug addiction."

Check out our writer's take on whether food addiction is worse than drug addiction.
 
^That article seems to be using "addiction" to mean any compulsive behaviour, rather than true physical dependency. It is also just talking about normal fat and sugar, not special kinds of addictive oils dreamed up by evil geniuses (genii?).

Thanks very much for the link qwe, much appreciated.
 
physical dependency is not addiction

it seems to be using addiction to mean using something (regularly) that causes pleasure levels to spike so absurdly that the brain has to re-modulate everything and thus cause cravings, withdrawal symptoms, etc
 
physical dependency is not addiction
It's all a matter of semantics, I've noticed a lot of arguments where people end up talking at cross purposes because of different conceptions of addiction.
 
Well the definition of "addiction" is somewhat open to interpretation.

There are a few different categories:

- psychological compulsion to continue the behavior
- withdrawal symptoms if behavior is ceased
- physical cravings to continue the behavior
- actions that are habit-forming

So just about anything can be psychologically addictive, money, food, sex, gambling, thrill-seeking, etc.

SSRI's have bad WD symptoms so I consider them addictive on that level

Nitrous Oxide can be habit-forming because the act of reloading chargers becomes sub-conscious. Cigarettes are similar, the habitual act of lighting up and inhaling becomes sub-conscious and therefore is easy to continue. Food is also this way, grabbing a bag of something and munching on it can be very habit-forming. I'd imagine also that "shooting up" can become habit-forming as I've noticed that snorting lines of mephedrone can be somewhat habit-forming (which is why I forced myself to quit snorting it)

Physical cravings are common with opiate and nicotine addiction and a few other drugs. So that makes it all the harder to quit because the body craves the chem to feel "normal". Combo that with something habit-forming that has WD symptoms and you've got a recipe for addiction for anyone who doesn't have a very strong desire to quit.

So yes, I'd consider food to be addictive in several of these categories.
 
^Fine, but there's nothing to suggest that fast food is any more addictive than any other fatty, sugary food.
 
Dealing weed and shit isn't bad but I see dealing herion an meth an all that as pretty

unethical. It destroys lives... even though its the buyers desicsion to buy in the first place

the dealer is still assisting them to their demise.
 
^ my dealers haven't ever assisted my demise and i've bought everything. a majority of users don't get addicted (excepting certain drugs like alcohol and tobacco). those who do get addicted are often self medicating, whether psychologically (for which it is taboo to prescribe opies) or physically
 
Someone dealing controlled and illicit substances is a product of the money making drug war that the Reagan administration set up. You cant blame someone for trying to take advantage of a law or set of laws that people KNOW is in high demand.

People will always need the sensation of external chemicals to alter conciousness. It's been that way ever since the first man discovered psychoactive plants and fungi.

Drug dealers are just like anyone else trying to make a living. Do you want to blame someone for ethical "problems"? Blame the user. If you cant do the research on a substance you like/want to try and cant establish a good connect for said substance then its your fault and no one else.
 
Top