Posted by btnd on April 13, 2003, at 18:52:29
In reply to Re: Xyrem = GHB. Please don't. » Carlos, posted by Larry Hoover on April 13, 2003, at 11:03:41
> > Of course it's not for everyone. Your mileage may vary. I gave you my person experience.
>
> "The patient required 507 mg of lorazepam and 120 mg of diazepam over 90 h to control agitation." is an example of another, very real, person's experience.But this person was using GHB (I will call it "Xyrem" from now on since Dr.Bob doesn't like non-FDA treatments :) non-stop, 24/7. No wonder he had psychological problems. But Xyrem is not physically addictive until you start to use it "round-the-clock". He could also have an addictive-type personality or was self-medicating himself inappropriately. If it wouldn't be Xyrem, he could also be using something else.
>
> >But I think with education (not propaganda, or bias subjective views) and government scare tatics there would be much less drug abuse.I agree 100%.
> We know that scare tactics don't work. Back in the '70s, the government floated the idea that LSD caused genetic damage and birth defects. Rather pathetic, really, as the very same government published statistics showing that birth defects were actually falling during this period. When I caught the government in this lie, it actually was a major factor in my decision to try LSD.
>And how about alcohol prohibition, it was a total failure and so is current war on drugs - by spreading false information.
The key should be to inform people of the ACTUAL effects, side-effects, and how to avoid/minimalise them if they decide to use. Hey-it's your own body, if you decide that you want to intoxicate yourself with MDMA for example (instead of legal alcohol/tobacco, which by the way kill hundreds of thousands people per year) - the government/FDA/DEA/police should have nothing to do with it. But I'm getting much out of the subject and will stop it right here:)> I have taken pains to find the most balanced and complete information about GHB, and posted it in the first message I put into this thread. That is not propaganda, or biased information. Negative connotations are not evidence for either characteristic.
With all due respect Larry, it wasn't "balanced" information - you cited anti-Xyrem facts. There are 2 sides: pro-Xyrem and anti-Xyrem. They both deliver exaggerated information. The truth lies in between - Xyrem used in a RESPONSIBLE way can be a good tool against anxiety/insomnia/depression. It is a valuable medicine, but with cautious use - the moment you start to abuse it - the problems arise.
Anti-Xyrem sites show experiences of actual addicts who were totally ABUSING the substance.Some good (although rather pro-Xyrem) information to balance out your post :) can be found at: http://www.ceri.com - Special menus - GHB.>
> >Not to mention the stigma that comes with current illegal drug use. I can think of many illegal drugs less harmful (when properly used) than alcohol.Yes, almost every drug is less harmful than alcohol (with the exception of tobacco/powerful stimulants)
>
> That's quite an inappropriate argument to make. You're comparing the "proper" use of illegal drugs to all usage of alcohol. Alcohol in moderation is beneficial to your health. Moderate use of alcohol is the only "proper" use.
>It is exactly the same way with Xyrem. In moderation/properly used - it is beneficial for health.
Brad
poster:btnd
thread:218347
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20030411/msgs/219074.html