NationStates Jolt Archive

Please no arguing over whether something here is a drug or not. Why? Cuz I can't re-edit the poll anyway, so that kind of argument is even more useless than other kinds.

Personally, I voted caffeine. Why?

First, it's the most prevalent. Nearly everyone does it.

Second, hardly anyone even considers it's a drug. Denial, people, that's the first stage...

Third, perpetual usage undoubtedly causes heart problems. And heart disease is, if not THE leading cause of death in the USA, at least one of the top 3.

I'm going to give the nod to LSD. Aside from the psychoactive effects, even if you choose to stop using it, it can come back to haunt you up to a year later. No other drug I am aware of continues to produce hallucinations (at indeterminable times, at that) so long after the drug has completely left your system. I choose LSD for that, if for no other reason.

Actually, usage of caffeine is not hazardous to the health if you are in good health, with low cholesterol, normal blood pressure, and no heart abnormalities. If you do, then no, you should not take it. Otherwise, you're good. Besides, a study found that caffeine promotes brain cell health.

Based solely on medical effects and ease of addiction, I voted Heroin.

Heroin.

Ignorance.

I remain doubtful.

Besides, LSD flashbacks are a minor and rare event even among users. Not that big a deal compared to everyone swilling coffee compulsively.

And of course there's studies that show it's perfectly all right... but a stimulant is a stimulant, and intaking something just to make your heart beat faster and make you feel more awake, more alive, every day, is a bad thing.

Also, caffeine is addictive. Only thing that ever got me addicted, anyway. Withdrawals and everything. Blech.

Then too, there's the whole Caffeine Culture... the latte, mocha, frappacino, cappacino, extra strength heart degreaser crap swilling, liberal angst having, coffee house attending, gossip mongering, valley girl voice having Caffeine Culture. Annoying, omnipresent, apt to make me go homicidal and start shooting lots of people - yep, thats more dangerous than Bill the Psychonaut having an acid flashback one day while smoking a phatty.

Caffeine doesn't incude hallucinations or violent behaviour. It's irrelevant how infrequently the flashbacks occur. The fact that it could happen anywhere, anytime, without any warning - not to mention the nature of them - makes it incredibly dangerous in my mind.

Smoking is incredibly common, and does a lot more harm to your body than caffeine. Not to mention harming others with second-hand smoke. I can't really see caffeine as at the top of that list.

Power.

Although in terms of this conversation, I'd have to go with one that wasn't listed in the poll and is one of the most devastating around right now: crystal meth. That's a drug to be scared of. I'm no prude--in fact, I'm in favor of legalization across the board because I believe in the right to do what you will to your own body. But meth will fuck you up--I've seen it firsthand.

Meth, yes. There are a lot of things I couldn't fit. I suppose I could have made speed "illegal amphetamine based" and caffeine "legal amphetamine based" but I figured, that would confuse people.

Smoking isn't more common than caffeine, though. What's more I've never known anyone who had cigarette withdrawals. Not really. Including myself.

LSD or flashbacks don't cause violent behavior. With hallucinogens, it's my opinion (and I do know what I'm talking about) that you get out of it what you put into it.

Also, second hand cigarette doesn't count. Or if it does, we might have to consider the air pollution from the irritable, aggressive coffee drinker - driven cars, too. The kind of guy who's pissed at someone for not driving fast enough. The kind of guy who stays awake for hours swilling coffee and then, in the inevatable come-down, crashes their car or truck cuz they fall sleep.

Heart disease, remember. Which caffeine contributes to. Auto accidents caused by people falling asleep cuz they can't get the stimulant they're dependent on for functioning, also.

I would have to agree that ignorance is more dangerous than any drug. People should be educated and then given the freedom to choose for themselves.

isn't it pcp that makes people insanly violent and able to take multiple bullets before stopping an attack? i'd say that's pretty damn dangerous.

And marijuana gets 0% of the vote, as it should.

Hmm, same with cocaine. Maybe the two most recent presidents having tried pot and cocaine has something to do with it?

Then again, I dont think either did speed, and no one voted for speed. Hmm.

Next time, I'll do a poll based on the drug categorization. Hallucinogens, stimulants, depressants, dissociatives, etc. Aphrodisiacs, breath mints, etc.

I'm going to give the nod to LSD. Aside from the psychoactive effects, even if you choose to stop using it, it can come back to haunt you up to a year later. No other drug I am aware of continues to produce hallucinations (at indeterminable times, at that) so long after the drug has completely left your system. I choose LSD for that, if for no other reason.

although I have heard this claim I have never found any evidence to back it up. I have done major amounts of LSD during my life as have many people that I know and none of us has ever had a flashback. But I dont deny that it is possible, I think it is just unlikely. And yer right if you do get a flashback sometime later in life it could be when you are holdign a firearm or driving, or even holding a baby and that could be disasterous.

we could say that adrenalin is a pretty dangerous drug too... for risk takers who take risks for that rush

Tobbacco has been shown to be "bad stuff" in some countries that's for sure...

My guess these numbers would hold true in others as well:

Social costs of smoking are triple those of illicit drugs

"The financial impact of tobacco and alcohol far outweigh the impact of illicit drugs, with smoking costing the community almost three times as much as any other category of drug, according to a study on the social costs of drug use in Australia."

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/326/7383/242/a

Tobaco not for the user but for the people sorrunding people plus it is legal so its easy to get. (assumes somking

I voted tobacco. Heroin can kill you immediately in the short term, but in general tobacco kills thousands and thousands more.. the amount of heroin ODs is a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of people dieing prematurely of lung cancer and emphyzema.

*goes off for a smoke break* Hey, just because I'm a hypocrite doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Tobacco-Nicotine is by far the most harmful drug to society. All tobacco advertising and brand names should be immediately outlawed and replaced with a single generic type - available only with a special "Addict's Prescription".

I saw my favourite uncle die a long, slow death from this poison. I hate tobacco companies with a passion and support terrorist action against them if governments are unwilling to tackle them.

I'm going to give the nod to LSD. Aside from the psychoactive effects, even if you choose to stop using it, it can come back to haunt you up to a year later. No other drug I am aware of continues to produce hallucinations (at indeterminable times, at that) so long after the drug has completely left your system. I choose LSD for that, if for no other reason.

um, no drug can trigger effects when it is totally out of your system, and LSD is no exception. LSD flashbacks are caused when small amounts of the drug have stayed in your spinal fluid in "bubbles" which then can "burst" and cause effects like you would have when taking the drug.

this extremely rare, even among heavy users, though the instances where it does happen are terrifying and often disastrous.

personally i would rate both nicotine and heroine as more distructive, since they are addictive and will ALWAYS cause damage to tissues or nervous system balance. LSD has a small chance of causing such damage, and virtually no chance of being addictive, so i play the odds when it comes to determining how bad a drug is; if it is sure to screw you up then i consider it worse than something that might possibly screw you up.

Considering its effects on people of all nations throughout the history I´d say the most dangerous drug is religion. Imho the higher one´s level of education is, the less religion is a topic for them. Instead of bombs, drop some teachers, computers and game consoles on Iraq and countries alike and you´ll have peace within one generation. :fluffle:

Considering its effects on people of all nations throughout the history I´d say the most dangerous drug is religion.

Isn't religion an expression of ignorance? No ignorance = no religion. :)

Heroin for me. Well not for me phyisically, but I mean that it should be rated as the msot dangerous.

it is the most addictive to me and it will shrink your veins to uselessness.

50% of the votes to legal drugs. And quite a few voters claim they think they are most dangorous cause they are legal. Makes me wonder how it would look if all those drugs had either been banned or all legal.

Anyway, back to topic.

I'd say ecstasy. It's a really hard call, but... Ecstasy opens up the channel that releases chmicals in us that makes us happy. Sadly, there isn't infinite of this substance, nor does it seems to be reprodused. Therefor heavy and/or long abuse of this drug can make you permanently depressed. A friend of a friend happens to be this way. And he kinda is suicidal(and with that i don't mean wreckless, but actually wanting to end his life) 24/7.

Altho Heroin and LSD are very very bad drugs aswell.

Dunno exacly how bad crack is, so write it here.

Don't like speed and cocaine is also bad and something i really don't like.

All other drugs is imo more or less "OK".

Isn't religion an expression of ignorance? No ignorance = no religion. :)

I am not quite sure what is being ignored with ignorance. I just think that people "addicted" to religion can be very dangerous and were dangerous in the past.

What the hell is crack? I thought it was a slang name for cocaine I didn't think it was a different substance. Could someone please help me out here?

My vote went to Heroin, as it is, in my opinion, the most addictive that is dangerous in the short, medium and long term. Short term there is no problem with smoking either tobacco or cannabis. Short term most of them can kill, inlucing a caffeiene overdose and alcohol overdose. long term they are all just as bad as each other.

I'd say ecstasy. It's a really hard call, but... Ecstasy opens up the channel that releases chmicals in us that makes us happy. Sadly, there isn't infinite of this substance, nor does it seems to be reprodused. Therefor heavy and/or long abuse of this drug can make you permanently depressed. A friend of a friend happens to be this way. And he kinda is suicidal(and with that i don't mean wreckless, but actually wanting to end his life) 24/7.


just to clear up a few things:

MDMA, or "Ecstasy," functions by slowing serotonin reuptake in the brain...it does NOT cause more serotonin to be released, nor does it cause more serotonin channels to open. all it does is slow the natural process by which extra serotonin is recycled back into the presynaptic cell (the cell that released it in the first place). interestingly, this sort of reuptake inhibition is the same action employed by anti-depressents like Celexa, Zoloft, Prozac or other SRIs.

serotonin is manufactured naturally in the brain, and there is NO danger of an otherwise normal person running out of serotonin due to using MDMA.

what over-long use or abuse of MDMA can do is make the post-synaptic cell (the one receiving the signal) become gradually less sensitive to serotonin signals. this can lead to depressive problems, though only if use is frequent and chronic. also, such depression is totally treatable.

MDMA is NOT addictive, and, by itself, CANNOT CAUSE DEATH. death from overdose on "E" is always due to other factors, such as heat stroke, or from the fact that an "E" pill bought on the street will contain drugs other than MDMA more than half of the time. these other drugs may include DXM, ketamine, amphetamines or ephedra, or even (rarely) opiates like heroine.

Crack is a particular form of and method of intaking cocaine.

But really, you think all of them are just as bad as the other in the long term? That is, a longterm pot smoker will end up just the same as a longterm heroin addict?

I don't know about dangerous, but there's some pillhead across the street from me, who plays crap repetitive dance music ALL NIGHT LONG. It's not possible to listen to that stuff for more than about ten minutes, unless you're completely off your tits, and have lost all perception of time.

What the hell is crack? I thought it was a slang name for cocaine I didn't think it was a different substance. Could someone please help me out here?

"Crack" is a smokeable form of cocaine.

Initially, "free-base" cocaine was typically produced using volatile solvents, usually ether. Unfortunately, this technique is physically dangerous. The solvent tends to ignite. Hence a more convenient method of producing smokeable free-base became popular. Its product is crack. To obtain crack-cocaine, ordinary cocaine hydrochloride is concentrated by heating the drug in a solution of baking soda until the water evaporates. This type of base-cocaine makes a cracking sound when heated; hence the name "crack". Base-cocaine vaporises at a low temperature, so it can be easily inhaled via a heated pipe.

What's more I've never known anyone who had cigarette withdrawals. Not really. Including myself.

LSD or flashbacks don't cause violent behavior. With hallucinogens, it's my opinion (and I do know what I'm talking about) that you get out of it what you put into it.

Also, second hand cigarette doesn't count.

From those three statements alone, you've just all all credibility in my eyes. I know countless members of my family who smoke, and yes, the withdrawl symptoms are hell. Yes, LSD does cause violence. Yes, so do the flashbacks. A simply (but hardly exclusive) example is a person on LSD who thinks he is seeing demons, and tries to attack them.

Second hand cigarette smoke doesn't count? Right, giving someone else cancer is clearly completely harmless. Honestly, you've just proven (to me, at least; I'll leave others to draw their own conclusions) that you don't know enough about this topic to be debating it.

just to clear up a few things:

MDMA, or "Ecstasy," functions by slowing serotonin reuptake in the brain...it does NOT cause more serotonin to be released, nor does it cause more serotonin channels to open. all it does is slow the natural process by which extra serotonin is recycled back into the presynaptic cell (the cell that released it in the first place). interestingly, this sort of reuptake inhibition is the same action employed by anti-depressents like Celexa, Zoloft, Prozac or other SRIs.

serotonin is manufactured naturally in the brain, and there is NO danger of an otherwise normal person running out of serotonin due to using MDMA.

what over-long use or abuse of MDMA can do is make the post-synaptic cell (the one receiving the signal) become gradually less sensitive to serotonin signals. this can lead to depressive problems, though only if use is frequent and chronic. also, such depression is totally treatable.

MDMA is NOT addictive, and, by itself, CANNOT CAUSE DEATH. death from overdose on "E" is always due to other factors, such as heat stroke, or from the fact that an "E" pill bought on the street will contain drugs other than MDMA more than half of the time. these other drugs may include DXM, ketamine, amphetamines or ephedra, or even (rarely) opiates like heroine.
And then i get intrested in asking you how you gotten this information. So, From where did you get this information?

Crack is a particular form of and method of intaking cocaine.

But really, you think all of them are just as bad as the other in the long term? That is, a longterm pot smoker will end up just the same as a longterm heroin addict?

was that directed to me?

well, I ranked them overall top one worst, bottom ones least bad.

From those three statements alone, you've just all all credibility in my eyes. I know countless members of my family who smoke, and yes, the withdrawl symptoms are hell. Yes, LSD does cause violence. Yes, so do the flashbacks. A simply (but hardly exclusive) example is a person on LSD who thinks he is seeing demons, and tries to attack them.


i think what he was saying was that most people who use hallucinogens aren't violent when they hallucinate because, as he said, "you get out what you put into it." in my personal (and fairly extensive) experience as both a user and a drug councilor, you can't pretty much predict what kind of a trip people are going to have based on who they are and how they work. non-violent people who are genuinely gentle at heart simply don't have violent trips, but people who are using because they are suffering emotional problems or who have a history of extreme behavior may have violent trips.

the idea is that the drug isn't creating violence where there was none, it's simply allowing a more ready outlet for violence that was there to begin with. the state of mind of the user has been proven through experiments to have a huge impact on the nature of the trip, and i think all my personal experience backs that up. i have seen many different kinds of "bad trips," but only a certain kind of user reacts to the "bad trip" with violence.

crack and heroine are lethal, ecstasy can kill you as well. Pot should be legal the same as tobacco, tobacoo should be banned in closed doors. Coffee is a drug as well.

I'm not suggesting you take LSD and become a monster. However, it has been shown to cause hallucinations and paranoia, and it severely impairs your judgement. You don't have the be violent to have a bad trip, and a bad trip is all that's needed to trigger violence.

Yes, LSD does cause violence. Yes, so do the flashbacks. A simply (but hardly exclusive) example is a person on LSD who thinks he is seeing demons, and tries to attack them.


Was just about to point out that hallocination can make you panic. And if someone then trys to grab you to calm you down you can become very violent.

And then i get intrested in asking you how you gotten this information. So, From where did you get this information?

i got this information from studying organic chemistry for a year, and from my studies toward my neuroscience PhD. i also have used many drugs myself, including MDMA, LSD, nicotine (briefly and regrettably), alcohol, cocaine, amphetamines and ephedra, DXM, GHB, 2CT-7 (a varient of 2CB), and marijuana. i never do a drug without learning the mechanism of action, and that applies to prescriptions, too.

I'm not suggesting you take LSD and become a monster. However, it has been shown to cause hallucinations and paranoia, and it severely impairs your judgement. You don't have the be violent to have a bad trip, and a bad trip is all that's needed to trigger violence.

research tends to contradict you. also, you need to realize that using small to moderate amounts of LSD will not, and cannot, cause the type of hallucinations you are referring to; on small amounts of LSD you will see distortions of visual perceptions, but you won't see little gnomes or magic flying fish or any of that sort of thing. to see actual constructs of imagination you have to be on relatively high doses of the drug. using and abusing are two different things; it's like how eating a normal-size candy bar won't do much to harm you, but eating a candybar the size of your torso will mess up your innards and make you sick.

From those three statements alone, you've just all all credibility in my eyes. I know countless members of my family who smoke, and yes, the withdrawl symptoms are hell. Yes, LSD does cause violence. Yes, so do the flashbacks. A simply (but hardly exclusive) example is a person on LSD who thinks he is seeing demons, and tries to attack them.

Second hand cigarette smoke doesn't count? Right, giving someone else cancer is clearly completely harmless. Honestly, you've just proven (to me, at least; I'll leave others to draw their own conclusions) that you don't know enough about this topic to be debating it.

1 - Your approval or recognition of my knowledge is irrelevant.
2 - It's one thing to say that LSD causes you to see demons. This is true, sometimes. BUt it's another to say that LSD makes you want to attack them and start trying to do so. PCP, on the other hand, DOES cause aggression, but your example is in either case an exception, not the rule.
3 - Cancer caused about half a million deaths in 2001. Heart disease caused almost three quarters of a million. It's my contention that caffeine's prevalent use, and it's nature as a stimulant, is more dangerous than tobacco. For example, it's often held around here that 2/5ths of the college kids at my campus smoke tobacco. But would you care to guess how many drink coffee or caffeinated soda on a regular basis? Who, in fact, if they can't get their daily dose, will suffer withdrawals?

And as I already said, cancer kills less than heart disease. It's also my contention that nearly-everyone using caffeine, causes more heart problems than the use of tobacco by a few. Even with second hand smoke.

What's more, by your suggestion that a bad trip is all it takes to make an LSD user violent, it's obvious to me YOU don't know what you're talking about.

Personally, I've had a bad trip more often than not. I've yet to hurt anyone.

research tends to contradict you. also, you need to realize that using small to moderate amounts of LSD will not, and cannot, cause the type of hallucinations you are referring to; on small amounts of LSD you will see distortions of visual perceptions, but you won't see little gnomes or magic flying fish or any of that sort of thing. to see actual constructs of imagination you have to be on relatively high doses of the drug. using and abusing are two different things; it's like how eating a normal-size candy bar won't do much to harm you, but eating a candybar the size of your torso will mess up your innards and make you sick.

No, research doesn't, not to any larger degree than the normal amount of dissention that accompanies any study. In any given set of studies, it's almost a guarantee that at least one will produce different results than the others. You can attribute that to dozens of factors, which isn't really the point of this topic so I'll put that aside.

Bottom line, LSD can and does cause hallucinations, violence (albeit indirectly) and severely impaired judgement. This can come back to haunt you after you stop using the drug.

Caffeine may cause heart problems. It makes you alert. It can cause insomnia. Oh noes.

I'll respect your right to your opinion of what defines dangerous, but I'll also thank you not to cram your personal bias down my throat. How you define a drug as being harmful or dangerous and how I do may very well be different.

--Edit--

Did you even consider in your rant that if caffeine was removed from society entirely, it would still squash cancer in numbers? It's simply more common, blaming caffeine for it is childish. Sorry, but your arguments aren't convincing. To each their own.

i got this information from studying organic chemistry for a year, and from my studies toward my neuroscience PhD. i also have used many drugs myself, including MDMA, LSD, nicotine (briefly and regrettably), alcohol, cocaine, amphetamines and ephedra, DXM, GHB, 2CT-7 (a varient of 2CB), and marijuana. i never do a drug without learning the mechanism of action, and that applies to prescriptions, too.

intresting that highly developed countries claims differances about this drug.

yeah very few will agree that caffeine and such is a drug and so on but at least it tends to not have effects that are two bad like hallucinations so its safe to be legal. I myself tend to take in way more caffeine than I should but some drinks I enjoy are caffeine free. I also like caffeine mints. And I don't smoke or anything but live with smokers and they did smoke pot to before that so I was around the stuff and still am so maybe that has a negative affect on me. And same with many prescriptions and such which I only take the rare pain killer for rare pains and some anti acne meds so I'd say I'm pretty anti drug personally in my life sorta. hehe. ANy of the others are pretty damn bad and I'd avoid them and have myself and will

research tends to contradict you. also, you need to realize that using small to moderate amounts of LSD will not, and cannot, cause the type of hallucinations you are referring to; on small amounts of LSD you will see distortions of visual perceptions, but you won't see little gnomes or magic flying fish or any of that sort of thing. to see actual constructs of imagination you have to be on relatively high doses of the drug. using and abusing are two different things; it's like how eating a normal-size candy bar won't do much to harm you, but eating a candybar the size of your torso will mess up your innards and make you sick.My evidence is only anecdotal, but it is personal--my experience with acid has always been what I considered to be a heightened state of awareness, colors looked sharper, sounds seemed clearer, odors and tastes were enhanced (I think I never really tasted whisky until the time I drank it while tripping), and reflexes felt faster. That could have all been illusory, but that was the effect.

I also felt an almost manic happiness--overwhelming joy and glee at first that slowly wore on me as the trip continued, so that by the end I was just ready for it to be over. I also made sure never to take more than one and a half hits at any time, and also tended to space my trips out over months rather than doing them back to back. I had friends who claimed to see hallucinations, but they were doing a lot more than I was and more regularly.

I voted tobacco. Heroin can kill you immediately in the short term, but in general tobacco kills thousands and thousands more.. the amount of heroin ODs is a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of people dieing prematurely of lung cancer and emphyzema.


I think it really depends upon the metric used -or- where in the world you are.

Are you talking about short-term vs. long-term deaths?
Life-expectancy?
Side-effects?
Third-Parties? (i.e. second hand smoke, auto accidents, etc.)
Addictiveness?
Effect / rush?

I voted heroin, just because I have been on codeine (T3) after a serious injury. The painkiller worked great, but when it wore off, it wasn't a gradual rush. The pain was crippling and immediate. My physical response was to scream and hit the pill again. And I'm a pretty tough / hardy guy. Fortunately for me the T3 had other nasty reactions, and I moved from the prescription to massive doses of over the counter pain killers for months (doctor's orders).

In any event, just having had a legal opiate was enough to convince me of just how powerful and scary morphine really is!

Now consider this:


According to Pulse Check: Trends in Drug Abuse, during the first half of 2002, heroin was perceived to be the drug associated with the most serious consequences (medical, legal, and societal) in 15 of the 20 Pulse Check sites across the United States. Heroin users are predominantly white males, over age 30, who live in central city areas. Most heroin sellers tend to be young adults between the ages of 18 and 30.


SOURCE:
http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/factsht/heroin/

The risk associated with "smack" is two fold:

- OverDosing
- HIV/AIDS (due to needle sharing)

I think strong cases can really be made for most of the drugs in that list, and I'd like to thank the author for making what seems a fair survey (a rarity at times here). All and all, an interesting survey. What prompted the poll?

What prompted the poll? Curiosity. That and a sudden, recent addiction to making polls on this forum.

In all seriousness, it's hard to quantify how dangerous a drug is. In the end, the danger is usually ignorance or carelessness. There are only a handful of drugs I think are too dangerous for even well-informed, careful and responsible people to do, heroin and similarly strong opiates being among them.

You can measure the danger by

-Number of deaths per year
-Social/environmental damage
-Psychological addiction potential
-Physical addiction potential
-Chance of overdose
-Chance of being laced with some other, more dangerous substance
-Prevalence versus rarity (80% of America uses caffeine!)
-Physical damage done

Etc.

So there isn't really a right or wrong answer on this. Although death statistics are fairly convincing to me, at least.

It's troubling that so many seem to hold the misconception that heroin is worse for society than tobacco is. Clearly public education about this has failed.

Again, tobacco causes far more death and damage to society than heroin or any other drug does - that makes makes it our worst drug.

I'm very happy at how few people took the difficult, sad way of answering this question by giving abstract notions like "power" or "hate". Not that I'm a big fan of power and hate, I'm just a practical guy, I guess. My vote is for the heavier stuff: heroin or cocaine- I just don't buy into the gateway drug theories.

Alcohol is pretty bad when abused. Domestic violence is tragic and fuelled in no small measure by alcohol. (i still drink though).

Is it just me, but all of these poll choices are addictive, is their one common element that makes every one addictive that they have in common? To me, that'd be the most dangerous drug.

It's troubling that so many seem to hold the misconception that heroin is worse for society than tobacco is. Clearly public education about this has failed.

Again, tobacco causes far more death and damage to society than heroin or any other drug does - that makes makes it our worst drug.

Very true. I find it strange how many people accept the propaganda about heroin without bothering to study the facts. I find it hilarious, in a sad sort of way, that it isn't even allowed for use in medicine when in fact it acts just like and is inbetween the potency of morphine and fentanyl (although much closer to morphine). But then again, pot is Schedule I also while benzodiazapines (xanax, valium, etc) which can cause physical addiction in a week or less (twice as fast physical addiction to opiates) and which have far worse, and possibly deadly withdrawal symptoms (heroin withdrawal is not fatal) are Schedule IV. Practically all the dangers associated with heroin -other than the potential for addiction -are due to the fact that it is illegal and lack of education which stems from propagada rather than true information being spread. (Sorry for the rant, but of the illegal drugs speed, crack/coke are more deadly, Ecstasy depends on whether it is pure MDMA or one of the cocktails of sold as E, and of the legal ones tobacco and alcohol are also more deadly - tobacco definitely in the long term, alcohol in both long and short term).


Of the drugs listed above I would say that the worst is alcohol. It is extremely toxic to the body with heavy consistent use. It promotes violence. Alcohol intoxication impairs judgement more than being intoxicated to the same level more than any of the other drugs listed above. It is one of the few drugs where people fucked up out of their minds will insist that they are ok to drive, operate, etc on. It is possibly to fatally overdose on alcohol, alone or in combination with other drugs (many cases which are reported as drug od's actually occur because of the synergistic effect of combining with alcohol). It is highly addictive. Withdrawal from an alcohol addiction can be fatal.

I don't see how prevalence over rarity is any indication of danger. For instance a lot of us eat vegetables, moreso than who share needles.

I'd argue that in the UK tobacco (largely from cancer, heart and respiratory problems, though its numbers are dropping dramatically and steadily,) then alcohol, (largely from traffic accidents and liver problems, and is increasing dramatically and steadily,) and then Heroin and morphine (though the numbers we have for deaths caused by them are incomplete,) are the most dangerous drugs *at the moment* because they are a factor in by far the most deaths (in that order, too.) However it's also important to keep in mind that small amounts of alcohol can also be beneficial to your health (alcohol and caffeine can both be used to treat stroke victims, for example,) and it's almost impossible to calculate these benefits for the entire population, though I suppose these unknown figures would be more than cancelled by alcohol use leading to 60-70% of domestic violence and 39% of accidental fires. Similarly it's difficult to know how often needle sharing with certain drugs (I'm looking at you, heroin,) has led to the transmission of lethal diseases, such as HIV.

The gateway drug theory is simply that people who use softer drugs are more likely to use the harder stuff compared to the rest of the population, not that the switch would be automatic. It's more or less been proven correct, and seems rather obvious.

Research! 8)

I chose alcohol cause I had my worst experiences with it.

i got this information from studying organic chemistry for a year, and from my studies toward my neuroscience PhD. i also have used many drugs myself, including MDMA, LSD, nicotine (briefly and regrettably), alcohol, cocaine, amphetamines and ephedra, DXM, GHB, 2CT-7 (a varient of 2CB), and marijuana. i never do a drug without learning the mechanism of action, and that applies to prescriptions, too.

Wish I had some sources.

[QUOTE=L a L a Land]
I'd say ecstasy. It's a really hard call, but... Ecstasy opens up the channel that releases chmicals in us that makes us happy. Sadly, there isn't infinite of this substance, nor does it seems to be reprodused. Therefor heavy and/or long abuse of this drug can make you permanently depressed. A friend of a friend happens to be this way. And he kinda is suicidal(and with that i don't mean wreckless, but actually wanting to end his life) 24/7.
QUOTE]

This is actually incorrect. What any drug does is increase stop the re-uptake of neurotransmitters, which allows the neurotransmitters to constantly tickle a neuron without being re-absorbed to the sending neuron.
In the case of Ecstacy (and many other drugs) the neurotransmitter in questoin is Serotonin, the same neurotransmitter that regulates sleep, appetite and mood, as well as a whole range of other bodily functions.

Where you are mistaken is your belief that this substance is limited. Serotonin is constantly produced in the body, the rate at which it's produced being determined mostly by what is eaten. (esp. high with pottasium rich foods e.g- bananas)

Personally, I would rate alchohol as being the most dangerous drug, with nicotine a close second.

i got this information from studying organic chemistry for a year, and from my studies toward my neuroscience PhD. i also have used many drugs myself, including MDMA, LSD, nicotine (briefly and regrettably), alcohol, cocaine, amphetamines and ephedra, DXM, GHB, 2CT-7 (a varient of 2CB), and marijuana. i never do a drug without learning the mechanism of action, and that applies to prescriptions, too.

You should try 2ci (another analouge of 2cb) although the nectar of the gods is surely DMT (aka business mans lunch) - Of all the psychotropic substances that I've ever tried, it is by far the best.

For those that prefer an organic high, I would also highly reccomend Ayahuasca, as well as Salvia divinorum, which is effectively a herbal DMT

I chose alcohol cause I had my worst experiences with it.



Wish I had some sources.

just google for them. You'd be surprised how many amazing substances are completely legal, safe and available on-line...

Meth is the most dangerous drug, hands down.

Also, fun fact.

Nicotene is more harmful to the body than heroin.

The problems people run into with heroin are: forgetting to eat, using public needles, injecting impure heroin, and of course, losing all their money to it.

If they're using it safely, have enough money, and remember to eat, they're fine.

I voted for heroin, but crack is also very bad. I have a relative who took it, and what happened? This relation went completely nuts, and despite going into rehab six times, no of us could keep this relative clean. It took jail to do that, based on charges of parole violation. The relative is in a small town somewhere near the Canadian border, and the relative's life is being rebuilt. But I hate what it did to a family member of mine. For all we know, it nearly killed this relative.

i think this thread is pointless because you should define what "dangerous" means, because that word has many meaning for many different people.

I'd put hate. It's the most dangerous drucg of all becuase the user is filled with the desire to do harm to others - and can acheive great power too, destroying whole nations.

Wish I had some sources.

my list of "sources" ranges from the physician's drug reference to my orgo textbook to lab experience breaking down different drugs, so i can't really give you much in internet-link form. there's piles of info out there, though, just do a search and look for certified links.

By the way, can i marry Bottle? Cuz i think you're awesome, i love people who know what they're talking about! Thanks, im so with you on all the stuff you said.

By the way, can i marry Bottle? Cuz i think you're awesome, i love people who know what they're talking about! Thanks, im so with you on all the stuff you said.

*blush* you're welcome, though i don't see it as any more than what all people should do. my brain and body are the only ones of each that i get, so i'm not going to fool around when i put chemicals in them...i want to understand the effects of what i take, including the effects that i might not see or feel directly. i don't understand how other people can just go to the doctor and get a prescription and take it without knowing what it is or what it does to their body; they just trust that it's fine, and don't bother to check for themselves. that's weird to me. maybe i'm just a chicken or paranoid or something, i dunno, but it's kept me out of trouble with drugs thus far :P.

*blush* you're welcome, though i don't see it as any more than what all people should do. my brain and body are the only ones of each that i get, so i'm not going to fool around when i put chemicals in them...i want to understand the effects of what i take, including the effects that i might not see or feel directly. i don't understand how other people can just go to the doctor and get a prescription and take it without knowing what it is or what it does to their body; they just trust that it's fine, and don't bother to check for themselves. that's weird to me. maybe i'm just a chicken or paranoid or something, i dunno, but it's kept me out of trouble with drugs thus far :P.

no i think the word you were looking for there is SMART. Because if we taught people what drugs ACTUALLY do to one's body, we would all be better off and safe from all that propaganda shit!

wow

honestly im really suprised that even 2 or 3 people have any idea about what they are talking about. Normally drug threads are compleatly envelloped by ignorant people who have never touched a drug, let alone have any credable experiance or knowledge about it.

The question is wrong in nature. "Which drug is the most dangerous?" isnt really an issue. none of the drugs should kill you if used properly and no unusual reactions occur (I have heard of heroin instant deaths, I dont know how it works, but if someone does know, please inform me). Its a matter of damages. If you are worried about physical and long term bodily and physological damages, then things like crystal meth, crack, cigarettes, alcohol, heroin and MDMA are at the top of that list. If you are talking about psychologically damaging you then lsd, lsa, psylopsibin, salvia divorium and DMT.

I would personally say pharmacuticals are much worse than any drug taken for intoxication (especially if you are taking them to become intoxicated). Especially anti-depressants. Its the ignorance of the populace toward these things. If a doctor perscribed it, its obviously good. This leads to a lot of problems.

. Similarly it's difficult to know how often needle sharing with certain drugs (I'm looking at you, heroin,) has led to the transmission of lethal diseases, such as HIV.


If we are factoring the possible transmission of lethal diseases into the picture then alcohol definitely gets a huge boost in its danger rating, as drunkeness is infamous for often resulting in unprotected intercourse between random strangers.

I see alot of people talking aobut what is the most harmful drug, but whihc is the most dangerous? I vote alchohol, hands down. IT is the only drug on the list that is widespread, legal, and responsible for more deaths than all of the others combined. Its terrible for your liver, ait addictive, and causes many people to become violent. I would say that alchohol is more of a problem than any other drug that exists.

achually cigarettes still have the highest death and highest user mortality rates.

Oh, i hadn't noticed they (cigarettes) were on the list. Still, alchohol is respoonsibly for moreviolent deaths than all toher combined (I consider car accidents violent)

ya, i just finished doing my friends essay for her law class about this issue and the economics of it.

I'm not sure if vehicle accidents were included or not, but the user mortality rates for alcohol and cigarettes individually are still higher than the user mortality rates for things like crack and heroin.

wow

honestly im really suprised that even 2 or 3 people have any idea about what they are talking about. Normally drug threads are compleatly envelloped by ignorant people who have never touched a drug, let alone have any credable experiance or knowledge about it.

The question is wrong in nature. "Which drug is the most dangerous?" isnt really an issue. none of the drugs should kill you if used properly and no unusual reactions occur (I have heard of heroin instant deaths, I dont know how it works, but if someone does know, please inform me). Its a matter of damages. If you are worried about physical and long term bodily and physological damages, then things like crystal meth, crack, cigarettes, alcohol, heroin and MDMA are at the top of that list. If you are talking about psychologically damaging you then lsd, lsa, psylopsibin, salvia divorium and DMT.

I would personally say pharmacuticals are much worse than any drug taken for intoxication (especially if you are taking them to become intoxicated). Especially anti-depressants. Its the ignorance of the populace toward these things. If a doctor perscribed it, its obviously good. This leads to a lot of problems.

The most common cause of sudden death from heroin is a synergistic effect with a CNS depressant - usually alcohol, but barbituates also. If a person has ingested large amounts of alcohol or downers then even tiny amounts of heroin can be deadly as the combination magnifies the respiratory depressant effect of heroin greatly. Another of the more common causes of instant death from heroin is related to quinine, which is often used as a cut especially in white powder heroin. Quinine overdose can cause pulmonary edema and thus lead to drowning. Even though heroin OD does not have this specific effect, these cases still get labelled as sudden death due to heroin (rather than attributing the death to the actual chemical which caused it - propaganda at work). The most common cause of death by actual overdose is a user receiving a batch that is much purer than what he or she is used to and then injecting the normal amount without testing it. There are also some theories that state if a person is mentally conditioned to using in a certain place, then sometimes using elsewhere causes tolerance to actually be lowered so the usual dose will result in an OD.

Aside from the cuts and unknown purity levels that one has to deal with in purchasing heroin on the street, when not mixed with other drugs heroin is one of the more physiologically safe drugs. Even more so if a user can afford to avoid going the IV route. Effects of long term use to the human body are negligable. Whether or not heroin is psychologically damaging depends on what one causes harm and varies from user to user. Most people who are drawn to heroin enough to have difficulty walking away from it are chronic sufferers of either physical or emotional pain.

One thing that I totally agree with you about is the danger of pharmaceuticals. The side effects of some are disaterous (including inexplicable instant death caused by several of the drugs approved for psychiatric patients - if they don't give you parkinsons etc.. I'll shut up now before I start ranting against the psychiatric profession in general).

The most common cause of sudden death from heroin is a synergistic effect with a CNS depressant - usually alcohol, but barbituates also. If a person has ingested large amounts of alcohol or downers then even tiny amounts of heroin can be deadly as the combination magnifies the respiratory depressant effect of heroin greatly. Another of the more common causes of instant death from heroin is related to quinine, which is often used as a cut especially in white powder heroin. Quinine overdose can cause pulmonary edema and thus lead to drowning. Even though heroin OD does not have this specific effect, these cases still get labelled as sudden death due to heroin (rather than attributing the death to the actual chemical which caused it - propaganda at work). The most common cause of death by actual overdose is a user receiving a batch that is much purer than what he or she is used to and then injecting the normal amount without testing it. There are also some theories that state if a person is mentally conditioned to using in a certain place, then sometimes using elsewhere causes tolerance to actually be lowered so the usual dose will result in an OD.

Thanks for clearing that up

Aside from the cuts and unknown purity levels that one has to deal with in purchasing heroin on the street, when not mixed with other drugs heroin is one of the more physiologically safe drugs. Even more so if a user can afford to avoid going the IV route. Effects of long term use to the human body are negligable. Whether or not heroin is psychologically damaging depends on what one causes harm and varies from user to user. Most people who are drawn to heroin enough to have difficulty walking away from it are chronic sufferers of either physical or emotional pain.

I didnt think heroin was that safe, the joys of propoganda

It's troubling that so many seem to hold the misconception that heroin is worse for society than tobacco is. Clearly public education about this has failed.

Again, tobacco causes far more death and damage to society than heroin or any other drug does - that makes makes it our worst drug.

That is the problem though: you are looking at fatalities, while those of us whom are voting heroin, are considering other factors.

Now I could be wrong, but from the list given, heroin was the sole injecting drug, which kills through another means: HIV. While it is true that a user can simply not share needles, the reality is that there are social pressures to share needles with your friends, thus HIV/AIDS deaths in IDU populations are something I factor in.

Basically, I've smoked cigarettes ... had a slight buz. I've taken legalized coedine and was completely smashed. The cigarettes I was able to say no to ... the coedine was a bit (not that much though) harder to pass up on.

I'm inclined to believe the studies that talk about how addictive opiates are, and that coupled with the small risk of overdose (instant death) and HIV infection are enough that I feel that at the very least governments shouldn't scale back heroin education programs.

That said, I'm not suggesting that tobacco isn't a serious problem either. It is, and for the reasons you and others have been saying. It is a killer.

In my mind, it is a matter of how much of your life a drug is expected to take away. You can smoke for years, and finally die of cancer, but I am guessing that tobacco is only taking away 20 some of years of a persons life. I could be wrong.

HIV/AIDS seems to be lowering the life expectance in countries that are stricken with high prevelance rates by 30 years! Granted this is a number coming from UN reports and is not focused on solely HIV spread via IDU. In fact, in southern Africa HIV is spread primarily through unsafe sex.

But this is a point worth considering too ... the campaigns to promote safer sex usually are directed towards people who feel using protection is bad. In the case of needle sharing, the medium / vector of HIV spread is a bit different, but the same basic idea is there: you can't always trust your friends to practice safer use. Not safe use, but safer use.

I think heroin deaths can be prevented or at least seriously reduced, because as Kitties pointed out, its long-term effects are the addiction. It isn't like acid or something that will rot your brain.

Not that this is the issue, but...

If we could level the playing field a bit, ie, health standards on illegal narcotics and safe use guideline ect, by far both tobacco and alcohol would be far more dangerous.