Context: that’s common ADHD medication. It’s similar to Methamphetamine, but not as abusable.
Talking about blanket bans/restrictions, it makes sense to point out that it’s not all black and white. But I think everyone can see that they referred to severe meth abuse.
People are approaching it from the wrong direction. It might seem like I am trying to justify methamphetamine being available by pointing out the similarity to methylphenidate. In fact, that’s not what I am doing at all.
I am pointing out that methamphetamine has two effects, and that one of those two effects is biologically the same effect as methylphenidate.
This means that regardless of whether a person with ADHD(which is something you have your whole life) uses methylphenidate or uses methamphetamine, it’s performing the same basic role, as medicine.
To explain this in simple terms:
A person with ADHD has a brain that is naturally starved for dopamine and norepinepherine.
Giving methylphenidate(Ritalin) to a person with ADHD is like giving food to someone who’s starving. Their body needs it to make up for a chemical their body doesn’t naturally have enough of. Methylphenidate is like a gourmet meal with all of your nutrients for the day.
But for that same person, methamphetamine is like junk food. A greasy burger, a large order of fries, and a shake. It’s not the best thing for you, but it DOES provide those chemicals that the person with ADHD doesn’t naturally have.
So classifying this as “addiction” is very inappropriate. It’s not that the person is finding a new substance and putting it in their body and that it’s becoming a need. It’s that the person was born with a need for chemicals that other people’s brains naturally already had, and then they found a medicine that provided those chemicals. Calling them “addicted” when all they’re doing is just taking a drug that raises their low levels to be like everyone else is pathologizing treatment, and it’s creating a false perception.
A lot of the things referred to as addiction are just a person who has a natural shortage of something trying to make up for it. And the people in charge think that they are performing a benefit by banning those substitutes. No. The solution is to actually make sure that people have the ability to meet those needs well before they ever get into a situation to use drugs.
You don’t convince people with ADHD not to use meth by banning it. You convince them not to use meth by identifying them young and making sure they have access to methylphenidate from childhood, which has been shown to drastically reduce the odds of using something like meth.
Most things that are called “addictions” are just people trying to meet a biological need and not having a good option for how to do that. The solution isn’t to make those things unavailable(leaving their needs TOTALLY unmet, which is dangerous for them), but instead to look at making sure that those needs get identified and taken care of when the person is young, to know how to meet those needs in ways that are more appropriate.
A person who is starving might benefit from having a super healthy meal. But if they don’t have that super healthy meal, from their perspective, that unhealthy meal will do.
A person who lacks enough dopamine and norepinepherine might benefit from having a super appropriate medicine(methylphenidate). But if they don’t have that super appropriate medicine, from their perspective, that unhealthy medicine(methamphetamine) will do.
These “addictions” aren’t springing up and aren’t caused by the drug. They’re from birth.
A “meth addict” with ADHD is equally as addicted to meth as a person with diabetes is to insulin. It’s just that one is demonized.
The human body naturally produces endocannabinoids.
Endocannabinoids are something that helps the person calm down, reduce stress, and deal with pain.
Marijuana has two main things in it: THC, and CBD.
OMG THC GETS YOU HIGH!
But CBD is Cannabidiol, which acts on the body in the same way that endocannabinoids do.
There are groups of people whose bodies congenitally have fewer endocannabinods than most other people. Starting day one of their lives. Naturally. People who have never touched marjiuana since the day they were born. (Oh, and this group of people also tends to be congenitally extremely forgetful because their brain naturally doesn’t have enough dopamine, and also tends to be congenitally lacking motivation because their brain naturally doesn’t have enough noreperinepherine.)
So if one of these people uses marijuana and their body then has the cannabinoids that other people just naturally have, do you believe that person is an addict, or do you believe that person is basically taking a supplement for something their body doesn’t naturally produce?
And if they’re just trying to get to the level that other people naturally already have in their body?
Or how about this:
Meth has two main effects:
Remember the two chemicals I referenced above?
(Oh, and this group of people also tends to be congenitally extremely forgetful because their brain naturally doesn’t have enough dopamine, and also tends to be congenitally lacking motivation because their brain naturally doesn’t have enough norepinephrine.)
Well, funny coincidence. Because those are the two chemicals that meth affects. Meth has two effects:
Meth tells a person’s brain “Don’t use all of this up.” And then the dopamine and norepinephrine stick around for a lot longer.
But meth also tells a person’s brain “Release as much dopamine and norepinephrine as possible.”
Usually, when people have a natural dopamine deficiency and norepinephrine deficiency, doctors give them a drug called “methylphenidate”. And wouldn’t you know it, methylphenidate treats the symptoms by doing the same as number one.
Isn’t that a weird coincidence? That people are becoming addicted to the thing that treats the congenital deficiency they had from the first moment of their life?
Or maybe a significant number of people whose body has chronic shortages of a certain chemical might not be “addicted” to that chemical as much as they are just finding out that their body would prefer to have the one chemical that everybody naturally has and their own doesn’t?
Billionaires have impacted my life in a negative way many times over what drug addicts have done to me throughout my life.
Perhaps if we didnt gatekeep basic necessities from those with the least in order to coerce them into wage slavery, some of those drug addicts that hurt me may have not done so. Maybe they wouldnt have despaired and spiraled into drug addiction if life was worth living. If they had something to live for.
Meth isn’t helpful but more effort needs to be put into resolving the root causes rather than putting out fires.
The fire fighting is still required, we certainly should be seeking to make it harder for criminals to push their poison on the population and punish them where we can, but ultimately they wouldn’t have a market if we correctly identified why users were using and developed more effective ways to help them to not use.
Punishing the users typically only achieves more cost in running prisons and pushes them further into the spiral that keeps them using.
It’s a chatbot. You can run it on your own computer if you want. No one’s stopping you. You’re just not allowed to profit off other people’s loneliness.
I don’t think meth is helpful, regardless of whether it’s a coping mechanism or not.
That wasn’t what I said.
Ohhhhhhh boy.
How about this: I take methylphenidate daily.
What do you think about that?
Context: that’s common ADHD medication. It’s similar to Methamphetamine, but not as abusable.
Talking about blanket bans/restrictions, it makes sense to point out that it’s not all black and white. But I think everyone can see that they referred to severe meth abuse.
It’s not really similar to methamphetamine.
I explained it in another response on this page.
People are approaching it from the wrong direction. It might seem like I am trying to justify methamphetamine being available by pointing out the similarity to methylphenidate. In fact, that’s not what I am doing at all.
I am pointing out that methamphetamine has two effects, and that one of those two effects is biologically the same effect as methylphenidate.
This means that regardless of whether a person with ADHD(which is something you have your whole life) uses methylphenidate or uses methamphetamine, it’s performing the same basic role, as medicine.
To explain this in simple terms:
A person with ADHD has a brain that is naturally starved for dopamine and norepinepherine.
Giving methylphenidate(Ritalin) to a person with ADHD is like giving food to someone who’s starving. Their body needs it to make up for a chemical their body doesn’t naturally have enough of. Methylphenidate is like a gourmet meal with all of your nutrients for the day.
But for that same person, methamphetamine is like junk food. A greasy burger, a large order of fries, and a shake. It’s not the best thing for you, but it DOES provide those chemicals that the person with ADHD doesn’t naturally have.
So classifying this as “addiction” is very inappropriate. It’s not that the person is finding a new substance and putting it in their body and that it’s becoming a need. It’s that the person was born with a need for chemicals that other people’s brains naturally already had, and then they found a medicine that provided those chemicals. Calling them “addicted” when all they’re doing is just taking a drug that raises their low levels to be like everyone else is pathologizing treatment, and it’s creating a false perception.
A lot of the things referred to as addiction are just a person who has a natural shortage of something trying to make up for it. And the people in charge think that they are performing a benefit by banning those substitutes. No. The solution is to actually make sure that people have the ability to meet those needs well before they ever get into a situation to use drugs.
You don’t convince people with ADHD not to use meth by banning it. You convince them not to use meth by identifying them young and making sure they have access to methylphenidate from childhood, which has been shown to drastically reduce the odds of using something like meth.
Most things that are called “addictions” are just people trying to meet a biological need and not having a good option for how to do that. The solution isn’t to make those things unavailable(leaving their needs TOTALLY unmet, which is dangerous for them), but instead to look at making sure that those needs get identified and taken care of when the person is young, to know how to meet those needs in ways that are more appropriate.
A person who is starving might benefit from having a super healthy meal. But if they don’t have that super healthy meal, from their perspective, that unhealthy meal will do.
A person who lacks enough dopamine and norepinepherine might benefit from having a super appropriate medicine(methylphenidate). But if they don’t have that super appropriate medicine, from their perspective, that unhealthy medicine(methamphetamine) will do.
These “addictions” aren’t springing up and aren’t caused by the drug. They’re from birth.
A “meth addict” with ADHD is equally as addicted to meth as a person with diabetes is to insulin. It’s just that one is demonized.
Your body your choice.
With drug addiction, it is often very much literally not your choice.
The human body naturally produces endocannabinoids.
Endocannabinoids are something that helps the person calm down, reduce stress, and deal with pain.
Marijuana has two main things in it: THC, and CBD.
OMG THC GETS YOU HIGH!
But CBD is Cannabidiol, which acts on the body in the same way that endocannabinoids do.
There are groups of people whose bodies congenitally have fewer endocannabinods than most other people. Starting day one of their lives. Naturally. People who have never touched marjiuana since the day they were born. (Oh, and this group of people also tends to be congenitally extremely forgetful because their brain naturally doesn’t have enough dopamine, and also tends to be congenitally lacking motivation because their brain naturally doesn’t have enough noreperinepherine.)
So if one of these people uses marijuana and their body then has the cannabinoids that other people just naturally have, do you believe that person is an addict, or do you believe that person is basically taking a supplement for something their body doesn’t naturally produce?
And if they’re just trying to get to the level that other people naturally already have in their body?
Or how about this:
Meth has two main effects:
Remember the two chemicals I referenced above?
Well, funny coincidence. Because those are the two chemicals that meth affects. Meth has two effects:
Meth tells a person’s brain “Don’t use all of this up.” And then the dopamine and norepinephrine stick around for a lot longer.
But meth also tells a person’s brain “Release as much dopamine and norepinephrine as possible.”
Usually, when people have a natural dopamine deficiency and norepinephrine deficiency, doctors give them a drug called “methylphenidate”. And wouldn’t you know it, methylphenidate treats the symptoms by doing the same as number one.
Isn’t that a weird coincidence? That people are becoming addicted to the thing that treats the congenital deficiency they had from the first moment of their life?
Or maybe a significant number of people whose body has chronic shortages of a certain chemical might not be “addicted” to that chemical as much as they are just finding out that their body would prefer to have the one chemical that everybody naturally has and their own doesn’t?
Until the choices you make stay affecting others around you in a negative way. Which is kind of inevitable with Meth.
Billionaires have impacted my life in a negative way many times over what drug addicts have done to me throughout my life.
Perhaps if we didnt gatekeep basic necessities from those with the least in order to coerce them into wage slavery, some of those drug addicts that hurt me may have not done so. Maybe they wouldnt have despaired and spiraled into drug addiction if life was worth living. If they had something to live for.
Yes, multiple things can be bad. Great tangent.
So we’re banning billionaires?
You do you. I’ll be banning attention baiters from mine. Buh bye.
Our choices always affect the ones around us.
That’s not what I said, but thank you for helping pointing out why “your body, your choice” isn’t a great argument.
I’m half-serious.
I’m mostly human.
Meth isn’t helpful but more effort needs to be put into resolving the root causes rather than putting out fires.
The fire fighting is still required, we certainly should be seeking to make it harder for criminals to push their poison on the population and punish them where we can, but ultimately they wouldn’t have a market if we correctly identified why users were using and developed more effective ways to help them to not use.
Punishing the users typically only achieves more cost in running prisons and pushes them further into the spiral that keeps them using.
Looks like that’s what they’re doing.
Good thing they aren’t doing that! You can still run whatever you want locally.
You may have missed the comment I was responding to?
I saw it; my comment was about the topic of the article.
So deleting a person’s ai companion isn’t punishing them? I think they might disagree …
It’s a chatbot. You can run it on your own computer if you want. No one’s stopping you. You’re just not allowed to profit off other people’s loneliness.