Obama didn't help the people, he helped CEO's continue to give themselves raises and keep on making cheap automobiles and charging an arm and a leg for them. All he did was help political donators keep their yachts.
My opinion being that you don't have the first (*)(*)(*)(*)ing clue about medical science? Then make me a liar.
Like the ones that backed Hillary? JP Morgan, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Corning Inc., and even colleges like University of California-Berkeley and Harvard . Yeah, fortune 500 companies and a lot of ther 1%ers you claim you hate lol. Guess what, Hillary cares more about their interest than you or your illegal immigrant friends hahahaha.
That doesn't even make sense. It's proven fact opioids are addictive. It's proven fact big pharma lied about that to practitioners so they would peddle their wares to the public. It's proven fact that they bought junk science by buying scientists and paying for desired outcomes. What else is there? Am I not allowed to form an opinion based on all the evidence provided, that a capitalist system enabled big pharma and encouraged big pharma to produce drugs they sold as harmless, despite knowing they were addictive, and the public now has a drug epidemic?
Erm no. Look at the 1%, you will find a great amount of the liberal elite as members. Start with Hollywood, then move on up to San Fransicko, the do a sweep across the country and you will see the liberals swimming in their money. You will stop in NYC and go to Wall Street and ask them why they are supporting Hillary so much lol.
That's because it's been all over the news that opiates are addictive. If the common theme was that they are non narcotic or habit forming, you wouldn't have a problem with it. I heard that nicotine was as addictive as heroine. I refused to believe them and was able to quit by doing a google search. One line: you only fail if you stop trying. That's it. Really simple. Took me two weeks and I was done! I still crave one sometimes if I smell it, but the knowledge of the b.p. increase sufficiently over-rides the desire for the cigarette. You see, nicotine has a two fold effect. It taps the pleasure center of the brain, but also raises blood pressure and hardens arteries. My focus on the latter effects over rides the pleasure effect. It's all what you focus your mind on. YOU have the power. Statists do not want you know this. They want you to be dependent on them to write more regulations to steal more of YOUR money. When I was taking tramadol, I didn't take the dosage they recommended. I took a much smaller amount. In fact, I just licked the tablet. Once I felt the effects, I put it back. One tablet lasted all day. They warn you not to do this, as if you're too stupid to know how to regulate your own medicine. But how many times have they been wrong and someone died or became very ill? How many alternate drugs could help people if they had the choice instead of the dr.? How cheap would medications be if not required by a dr? I'm more active in the summer so I take half the normal dose of b.p. medicine. I do have enough sense to check my pressure throughout the day. There may be a different kind of pain medicine that would work for you. Unfortunately, you do not have that choice.
There is more to it than basic math. A basic education into activism for the best mental health care will show you part of the real causes. There is an intent to disable and exploit and this is demonstrated by the lawlessness government exhibits. But this has a long history with all authority. Look to church control over Academia and psychology for the reason there is no real treatment/recovery for meth addiction. Or to government for the allowing of the abridging of the purpose of free speech or the public ability to educate itself upon substances or parental responsibility. Or look to the courts and law enforcement inability to recognize, follow and uphold laws relating to developing effective mental health care. The subpoenaed evidence would have proven something that could force psychology to oppose the church/state licensure authority. That would have been happening by 2000. But no, failure to appear is okay when pleadings are filed indicating homicides and suicides were caused by missing records subpoenaed. Evidence proving that other court records were absent. This declaration show the records were in possession of the county a year earlier. The sheriffs dept lied in the letter at the direction of the county counsel. How 'bout that ! Public law enforcement employees paid to violate laws then collude to lie about it! Evading compliance with health and safety code, drug and alcohol, effective mental health care. The entities both collectively obstructing justice, and judges are okay with it. Here's a woman judge ignoring a huge mound of evidence showing a part time meth lab, hah, "fire in bed of pickup parked at curb," in a house where I rented a room. http://algoxy.com/law/ud.glenbrook/sbmethcook+court.html Ever since the US military has been in Afghanistan heroin has gotten much more available and much cheaper. Remember the bodies of dead soldiers returning from Vietnam filled with bags of heroin? There is a history of this. Here's s letter from Santa Barbara counties top mental health professional showing a defacto approval of a potentially effective, new treatment. Actually old treatment, 1970's, shunned by church interests controlling gov. A FOIA was ignored for that "written response". Filed with the clerk of the board after serving on supervisors, then disappeared, then re filed. Then I try to get the paper to do a story about a federal law suit and history of law violation by Santa Barbara county related to the development of effective mental health. http://algoxy.com/law/no_free_press/sbsecretsofmedia.html 17 reporters and editors fired, starting 2 weeks after dropping off a copy of the lawsuit to a reporter. The district court secretly revised 1885 local court rules providing justice to pro se civil rights suits about 6 months prior and the new judge our suit should have gotten didn't happen. This is gov violating law Immorally, unethically and illegally evading development of effective mental health care that could help addicts stop themselves. Your points are valid, but the problem is far, far greater than you portray. The problem starts at the top, so discourse on fixing it needs to begin with authority GREATER than the top of government. That is us, the people. We need to understand then use our lawful and peaceful revolution.
Meth is the only drug I disagree with legalization. The Nazi's tried it with Pervatin and it did not work. It was incredible for a few months, then all hell broke loose within the Civillian community.
Our Founding Fathers invented a new way with our federal form of Government and the Doctrine of separation of powers. Our warfare-State is just, right wing, Orwellian fantasy and manufacturing "enemies of the State".
The facts show otherwise. In places like Portugal where use of drugs was decriminalized ... drug use and favorability went down. I agree that really harmful drugs such as Meth and Heroin should be kept illegal. We should treat addicts from a public health perspective rather than making them criminals. Those selling such dangerous drugs should be treated as criminals. There is absolutely no justification (under the founding principles of this nation) for making drugs like pot illegal.
Lawful business in drugs is Commerce. The right should stop complaining about Taxes for their fantastical and Orwellian, public policies that resort to the coercive use of force of the State.
You are clueless as to the importance of opioids in medicine, and espouse that "big pharma lied" as facts not in evidence.
Right, got a link for that claim, or are you just pulling it out of your ass? Oh and don't forget to add the word "Orwellian" in your next post, it makes you sound so much smarter.
Never said they have no place in medicine. Please point me to where I did. I said they were pushed on everyone by big pharma, for things as small as ankle sprains. Now, please feel free to buck up and explain to me why opioids are needed for minor, extremely minor injuries, or even extensive injuries? Also, why is it OK to exculpate big business from their part in this? Disgusting patronizing BS.
You suggested that the use of opiods in medicine was because it benefited big pharma, that doctors were duped into using them, and we have a nation of addicts as a result, implicit of the consequences outweighing the benefits in medicine. Opiods are good at suppressing pain, and taken according to prescription, come with minimal risks to the injured. People abuse all sorts of (*)(*)(*)(*). People abuse big macs and scratch tickets ffs. I, personally, believe that people should be free to do so. I dislike the schedule of drugs as a whole. Life saving drugs have to come from somewhere... you can demonize manufacturing for abuse all you like... I don't care. Demonize Smith & Wesson because of the use of their products. Demonize Ford when someone drives drunk. Have at! You claim it is a "fact" that "big pharma" mislead doctors. Show me. I am all about holding people accountable for wrongdoing. You will get no argument from me demonizing Phillip Morris et al for misleading the public and medical community. NEW smokers, however, have no excuse for what they do to themselves. I believe they should be free to smoke if they want. Maybe we disagree... I dunno... but tone down your insulting rhetoric. I get to have a difference of opinion.
Again, you excuse the company and blame the consumer for listening to their doctor. You can't seriously contend that it's all up to personal responsibility. Tell me, do you know -anything- about addiction? Do you understand even the basic concepts of it? http://theweek.com/articles/541564/how-american-opiate-epidemic-started-by-pharmaceutical-company I've posted other information prior that proves they lied about the addictive properties of opioids. https://grabien.com/file.php?id=63967 I'll keep posting it if I need to do so. Big pharma convinced doctors these drugs would do no damage. In the meantime, they didn't bother to consider the structure of addict brains is highly different on a cellular level - then regular brains. I have taken opioids. I am not an addict. My brother took opioids for a broken arm. He's 6 months clean after a 3 year bout of heroin addiction. Started with one oxycontin. I guess it's his fault his cell structure is different, his doctor didn't research, and just gave him opioids because big pharma said it's ok? Where's the culpability? Where are the lawsuits? California is already suing them. Yet here you sit, excusing it.
Exactly. Time in and time again, we're, as humans, spoon fed horse manure, in believing that 'Hey, you can't function well in public? Talk to your doctor about This Effing Pill, it's a life changing thing. You can tell by the people in the commercial smiling, rowing their boats, getting intimate with their significant other. That could be you, if only you start taking this drug'. Yeah, scientists have also did a study where sugar even effects the same part of the brain as smoking nicotine does (Can't find the article). They weren't suggesting using the various drugs to suppress sugar addiction, but it's something to look at, and really begin to ponder. Why would sugar & nicotine effect the same part of the brain? In that same breath, what is the direct relationship between the two and how does it truly effect our bodies? These type of things fascinate me, and I congratulate you on your strong will to cut out nicotine. My Dad used to smoke 1 - 2 packs of cigarettes a day. It got to the point where he didn't want to do it anymore, had an entire carton of cigarettes, broke them all up, and threw them into the trash. Just mind over matter, is all it really is. So I agree with you. If you want to do it, you can do it, plain & simple. Yeah, it's not fun being on a drug that you know is having adverse effects to your system. Currently I'm not taking any medication for my herniated disc. I'm just suffering with the pain, as it's the only thing I'm able to do. However, on the flipside, it's also why I want to get cannabis legalized, as it also has pain management properties. If some, if not most, drugs are derived from some plant source, can't get much better than ingesting the pure plant.
I think both of you have a legit point. I think, on one hand, you have to at some point blame the individual for taking the pills. Take me for instance. I just stated, in this very same thread, that when I was taking Tramadol for my herniated disc, I began feeling like my body was craving it, wanting me to take more of it. I was explained to my doctor that it was the non-narcotic version of it, so that shouldn't be the case. If I continued to listen to my doctor, kept taking it as prescribed, whose to blame if something bad happens to me? I'd say myself, because the doctor would live on with his life, while I would suffer through whatever. In that same breath, I understand that some folks just have things that force them to be addicted to stuff. Those folks can't be at blame for it, but then I blame the doctors for not doing the proper research on the individual. However, this also comes down to the patient to properly update the doctor with the relevant information that they're seeing. Case in point, my endocrinologist never approached me about potentially being at risk for LADA (Latent autoimmune diabetes in adults). I approached my doctor with the question, and she gave me a blood work order to see if I have auto-antibodies in my system. If I didn't ask this question and I eventually developed type 1 diabetes from my type 2 diabetes, whose fault would that have been? When big pharm companies blatantly lie about the drugs they're selling, then absolutely, they need to be help accountable. On that same coin, the FDA also needs to take some responsibility for this. If they're the ones standing between us and the drug companies, they also need to be held accountable for this. Hence why I feel all of these big entities just need to go away. They are only serving their own self interests. If a few to many of us die, as long as they get the maximum amount of money out of us, they don't care, in my opinion. I feel you two are arguing the same points, just looking at it from different directions.
