Illegal Drug Use/Smoking /Alcohol

[Hamble]

Making a drug illegal is saying the State is not liable for the cost of supporting a drug habit.


Historically alcohol and smoking killed the person using them.
It was only with the Welfare State to treat the affects and Social enlightenment to protect and prosecute victims of an individuals excess on family members changed public opinion.

Street drugs and the availability is a relatively modern problem post nhs
All the calls to legalise Cannabis forget that in legalising the State would then be responsible for treating the mental illness and protecting people from crime caused by the effects.

How can this Country afford such a burden?

[Ceam]

Making a drug illegal is saying the State is not liable for the cost of supporting a drug habit.


Historically alcohol and smoking killed the person using them.
It was only with the Welfare State to treat the affects and Social enlightenment to protect and prosecute victims of an individuals excess on family members changed public opinion.

Street drugs and the availability is a relatively modern problem post nhs
All the calls to legalise Cannabis forget that in legalising the State would then be responsible for treating the mental illness and protecting people from crime caused by the effects.

How can this Country afford such a burden?

To be fair the state do that anyway. Not that I think it should be legalised. Just pointing it out.

[Hamble]

To be fair the state do that anyway. Not that I think it should be legalised. Just pointing it out.

I agree and know that you understand the difference is that one cannot take away nhs support once given plus we now know about 'passive smoking damage' and the tragedy of children affected by a mothers
smoking and drinking hence a lot of nhs money is spent on education and prevention as the problem has increased.

In other parts of the world people are not covered for any abuse of alcohol or drugs some countries having severe penalty for using.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health...ems_by_country

[Derek H]

Why are you allergic to smoke? What caused this? Are you sure it is smoke that you are allergic to? What happens if someone has a bonfire/barbecue near you? What about the smoke from cannabis? Are you not bothered by car exhaust fumes? There are far more toxic pollutants in the atmosphere than cigarette smoke.

Why does anyone become allergic to anything? Why am I not allergic to a coal fire or a bonfire? The fact that you ask such rediculous questions give me grounds to wonder about your ability to think. Had I been a physician or some other type of scientist with adequate training I might have been able to respond, but I doubt it. You oviously regard yourself as a "know-all" in all senses of the word. Maybe you can tell me why I am allergic to cigar, pipe and cigarette smoke? I asked my GP today, and he couldn't answer. But he is extremely interested in what you can tell him. As he says: "seven years of university training and twenty years of practice hasn't given me the answer." So tell him, and maybe he'll be able to improve the training of all doctors in Norway. And make a name for himself in the medical profession to boot.

[said]

Why does anyone become allergic to anything? Why am I not allergic to a coal fire or a bonfire? The fact that you ask such rediculous questions give me grounds to wonder about your ability to think. Had I been a physician or some other type of scientist with adequate training I might have been able to respond, but I doubt it. You oviously regard yourself as a "know-all" in all senses of the word. Maybe you can tell me why I am allergic to cigar, pipe and cigarette smoke? I asked my GP today, and he couldn't answer. But he is extremely interested in what you can tell him. As he says: "seven years of university training and twenty years of practice hasn't given me the answer." So tell him, and maybe he'll be able to improve the training of all doctors in Norway. And make a name for himself in the medical profession to boot.

Well, for sure, no-one can ever say you are not predictable. I did not expect a civil answer, so I am not disappointed. First of all I am ASKING out of interest - how do you know it is cigarette smoke that you are allergic to? It appears odd that as you said yourself,you smoked for many years and presumably did not suffer any ill effects. Have you undergone tests to find out if it is a certain chemical in cigarettes or not? Do bonfires or car exhaust fumes not bother you? It would be very interesting to know. Your GP would also have been able to tell you that nicotine itself is used in many of today's drugs, according to The Lancet. If you could be persuaded to answer civilly - your response could prove to be of value.

[said]

I agree and know that you understand the difference is that one cannot take away nhs support once given plus we now know about 'passive smoking damage' and the tragedy of children affected by a mothers
smoking and drinking hence a lot of nhs money is spent on education and prevention as the problem has increased.

In other parts of the world people are not covered for any abuse of alcohol or drugs some countries having severe penalty for using.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health...ems_by_country

I am on the fence with this one! You mention that we know about 'passive smoking?' How do we know - because we have been told!
This I find unrealistic. How does anyone know if someone would not have died from that same condition due to other causes, such as hereditary causes? All the evidence given on the internet carry similar verbs, may cause, could cause - indicating a weak promise but not fact. It is also very suspicious that there is no alternative argument such as you would find from those who dispute these claims, something which is always present on the internet, but which is absent for topics such as this and Global Warming. Also, under the Human Rights legislation, it would have been illegal to prevent people from smoking where ever 'unless it can be shown that certain people's habits have a detrimental effect on others' hence passive smoking came into being. Lung cancer is inherently difficult to diagnose - so how much passive smoking does it need to cause a person to die from it? Cancer itself has no absolute known causes - anyone can get it, from a man living alone on a desert island to someone living in the most densely populated country in the world. Hungary and Denmark have the highest rates of lung cancer in the world, yet there is less people who smoke than in China. A report from the States claims:

"In fact, there are more non-smoking women (never smokers and former smokers) who die in the U.S. each year from lung cancer, than women—non-smokers and smokers alike—who die from breast cancer.And finally, while we are seeing a general leveling off or even decline in the overall number of people with lung cancer in the U.S., the incidence for one group is increasing: that of young, never-smoking women. Could looking globally help us answer that question?" Very Well Health.

Of those who have lived past one hundred years, there are several who have, it is reported, been chain smokers all their lives:
The Queen Mother died at 101 years and smoked quite heavily, Mosato Nonaka died at 111 years was a chain smoker, and Jeanne Louis Calment who died at 122 years smoked regularly until she was 117 years old.

Also importing tobacco into the UK, is one of the highest import costs.

Food for thought?

[said]

People don't accept them, They are illegal you muppet.

I think if you're in the situation where they ask you about cigs and drink you would also get asked about illegal or even legal drugs.

I think you just make up this ******** to have an argument. idiot.

If the topic has no interest to you - why bother to reply? If you have nothing of value to add, why resort to personal abuse? If you cannot handle the size of the ball on the field, it is better you leave the field. Topics are for a discussion, discussion often invites an argument - that is what makes it so interesting. Imagine if everyone merely responded with 'I agree' or 'I do not agree' how boring that would be.
So put up or ......................!

[Hamble]

I am on the fence with this one! You mention that we know about 'passive smoking?' How do we know - because we have been told!
This I find unrealistic. How does anyone know if someone would not have died from that same condition due to other causes, such as hereditary causes? All the evidence given on the internet carry similar verbs, may cause, could cause - indicating a weak promise but not fact. It is also very suspicious that there is no alternative argument such as you would find from those who dispute these claims, something which is always present on the internet, but which is absent for topics such as this and Global Warming. Also, under the Human Rights legislation, it would have been illegal to prevent people from smoking where ever 'unless it can be shown that certain people's habits have a detrimental effect on others' hence passive smoking came into being. Lung cancer is inherently difficult to diagnose - so how much passive smoking does it need to cause a person to die from it? Cancer itself has no absolute known causes - anyone can get it, from a man living alone on a desert island to someone living in the most densely populated country in the world. Hungary and Denmark have the highest rates of lung cancer in the world, yet there is less people who smoke than in China. A report from the States claims:

"In fact, there are more non-smoking women (never smokers and former smokers) who die in the U.S. each year from lung cancer, than women—non-smokers and smokers alike—who die from breast cancer.And finally, while we are seeing a general leveling off or even decline in the overall number of people with lung cancer in the U.S., the incidence for one group is increasing: that of young, never-smoking women. Could looking globally help us answer that question?" Very Well Health.

Of those who have lived past one hundred years, there are several who have, it is reported, been chain smokers all their lives:
The Queen Mother died at 101 years and smoked quite heavily, Mosato Nonaka died at 111 years was a chain smoker, and Jeanne Louis Calment who died at 122 years smoked regularly until she was 117 years old.

Also importing tobacco into the UK, is one of the highest import costs.

Food for thought?

Gene Therapy.
Some people are born with a pre disposition to cancer.
A fault in their DNA -a horrible disadvantage.

Coal Miners and their family's acquired dreadful diseases shortening their lives just by living in a pit village.

[Ceam]

If the topic has no interest to you - why bother to reply? If you have nothing of value to add, why resort to personal abuse? If you cannot handle the size of the ball on the field, it is better you leave the field. Topics are for a discussion, discussion often invites an argument - that is what makes it so interesting. Imagine if everyone merely responded with 'I agree' or 'I do not agree' how boring that would be.
So put up or ......................!

I'm saying there is already a system in place, illegal drugs are just that. So not acceptable anywhere. Jesus they even have classes for how naughty you're being.

Smoking is a disgusting smelly habit, and is banned in public enclosed places for good reason.

Drinking is debatable due to health concerns, Arsehole drink drivers and anti social behaviour.

[said]

What point are you trying to make, he died of lung cancer?

My dad died from lung cancer (the primary) in May 2013, in March he walked the Ingleton Waterfall Walk with me often leaving me behind on the steep uphill bits, somebody with undiagnosed lung cancer can appear to be in good health and show no symptoms.

I am sorry to hear about your Dad, that could not have been easy. The fact that people do not show symptoms is not really the point!
Unfortunately, there are many who die from lung cancer, and many who die from other cancers. There is no single cause known as to why people contract cancer. What I am saying then - is how people can be so sure that Mr. Castle died from passive smoking? Could it not have been hereditary? Was there any cancer known on your father's side of the family? Was alcohol or smoking used in his family? Did he have any severe accidents sometime in his life? There is a field of thought that any injury can give rise to cancer. Did your father's personality change over the recent years prior to his death? This is another thought that has been put forward. Did you father suffer tiredness? There are several similar symptoms noticed in many cancer sufferers, but there is insufficient evidence to establish these symptoms in all sufferers.

[said]

I'm saying there is already a system in place, illegal drugs are just that. So not acceptable anywhere. Jesus they even have classes for how naughty you're being.

Smoking is a disgusting smelly habit, and is banned in public enclosed places for good reason.

Drinking is debatable due to health concerns, Arsehole drink drivers and anti social behaviour.

Now you are getting to it! "Smoking is banned for a very good reason" "Drink drivers and antisocial behaviour" But for some reason you have omitted the dangers to the public on illegal drug use? Is this because the media appear to only publish the first two causes and are lax to report on the latter?

[Ceam]

Now you are getting to it! "Smoking is banned for a very good reason" "Drink drivers and antisocial behaviour" But for some reason you have omitted the dangers to the public on illegal drug use? Is this because the media appear to only publish the first two causes and are lax to report on the latter?

Jesus wept, It's illegal, what more is there to say? Do I have to link to the definition of illegal for you?

[Derek H]

Smoking has long been banned in public places - yet this has no effect at all on other people.

Quote said:
Now you are getting to it! "Smoking is banned for a very good reason"
Unquote.

I rest my case. Time for you to take a rest too, said? For the sake of many of us who log on once in a while?

[Hamble]

Now you are getting to it! "Smoking is banned for a very good reason" "Drink drivers and antisocial behaviour" But for some reason you have omitted the dangers to the public on illegal drug use? Is this because the media appear to only publish the first two causes and are lax to report on the latter?

Love your posts said.

Very interesting topics.

[said]

Love your posts said.

Very interesting topics.

Thanks Hamble, much appreciated. Ha!Ha! Even the negative comments show that people read the threads.