Fresno Famous

Re: (in brief)

Regarding legalization of meds.
The primary reason for govt. involvement with any medication is (actually,) more for the standardized understanding of what the meds do.

All medication,
All ANYTHING if taken in excess can lead to medical situations that are life threatening.
The whole idea of a formulary, or accepted list of medications is so that each med or substance (of any type,) is thoroughly understood so that the benefits and drawbacks of the meds are able to be weighed.

-Further? It has to do with the physician being able to understand what drugs interract with others (some cancel each others out, some increase their potency, some have horrendous side effects, etc...)

It's along this trail that research has found what works best, what has the least ammount of side-effects, and what (such as acid,) has no real benefits to society whatsoever.

This has been further confused, in recent years, as there is a whole new area of 'medecine,' where compounds and de-regulated substances are being tauted as cures and whatnot,
-some are, most aren't, but the interractions with humans can be myriad, and, since it's often really unclear not just what is in these 'remedies,' but HOW much of whatever is in them, the results can be explosively dangerous.

Though there is a happily paranoid contingent of life that is all 'the govt. wants to control us,'
-when it comes to medication (among those who want everything to be just 'legal,')
-In fact, the very same standards and practices that prevent, say antifreeze? from being used as cough syrup (or in toothpaste,)
-ARE the same standards that say '...ya know cocaine in coca-cola is not such a great idea.'

This extends even further:
There are a ton of meds I used to work with patients with (in terms of emotional and dev. disabilities concerns,) that have been taken off the the market -because they've been found to be too heavy, -and new meds that have more exact effects (with fewer side effects like heavy liver and damage and sterility.)
-THIS is even within the spectrum of 'understood,' and regulated medications, ---so the whole formulary changes as time goes on, -and usually it's for the better, (but, again, this requires constant monitoring and constant dialogue and case study information gathering and disbursement.)
-Folks who want 'the govt.' out of everything' -don't understand how truly awful THAT scene would get, really fast.

Regarding Medical Marijuana?
Well, truth be told the stuff you usually get that is 'registered,' -I am told- is utter garbage compared to what cousin elmer is growing down in his back yard in the Tower...

---Same could be said for the other cousin Elmer over in Va. who has his own still, and can make way better 'shine than anything you can get at the local liquor store, (problem is, if Va. Cousin Elmer has a bad batch? folks get sick and die...)

I agree that it's an old an stupid argument.

Simply hang out with somebody who has been a habitutal drug user (even alch.) and you'll find somebody who has diminished reasoning abilities, -and pot heads DO actually sound and act like pot heads.. (sorry, but if it wasn't true, it would be funny, Cheech and Chong will always walk among us.)

Is deregulation of drugs the answer?
Oh hell no...

In fact, BECAUSE so many folks get duped each year by pseudo science 'cures,' for everything from AIDS, to MS, to Oncological issues, to any one of a variety of psych issues, We NEED to further understand the real benefits and drawbacks of all substances being used (be they legal or not,)
-Considering that, often with the abovementioned conditions and more -time is of the essence?
Accurate information and correct diagnosis and thorough treatment are crucial.
Putzing around with a bunch of 'unknown' treatments can be deadly and make things worse (and often do.)

It can happen at (seemingly) innocent levels:
For example: somebody goes to take an 'herbal supplement to loose weight,'
-and are given some sort of 'natural regemine that also includes MaWhong or MaWhey, and told
'...it's herbal, it's fine,'

-and the person asks their distributer
'...I have extreme allergies to caffiene and stimulants, does this have anything like that?

-they get told '...oh no, it's strictly 'herbs,' and is purely natural and can't hurt you, -it's not medecine.'

-the person then takes it and has a STROKE...
(...cause those nice herbs are basically plants that produce the equivallent of 'speed,')
(but it's not known as speed, on a grand scale, -because the plant isn't that widely understood.)

THATS why everything has to be looked at so carefully.

(The stroke victim in this case? my own mother.)

Folks then say: '...well, your mother should have consulted with her doctor prior to taking the dietary supplement..'
-Yep, you're right...
-but you know what?
The supplement provider (this is a registered business, btw,)
had all sorts of literature and was emphatic that it was 'not a drug, it's a natural supplement,' The idiot was still clinging to that 'but it's natural, but it's natural, it doesn't need to be regulated by doctors,' when my mom (who survived,) and dad were like 'um, you made a mistake here...'

-people just don't get that most medicines are derived from 'natural,' sources, or (otherwise,) benign chemical or seeming innocuous minerals and stuff.

-Further?
There had not been enough studies publicized to show what this stuff was capable of doing, (the 'herbal weight loss suppliment.)
The person selling the dietary aid really had no idea what they were selling, (and most folks, outside of being pharmacists and chemists, or those who work with this stuff, do.)

(I wound up finally finding out what was going on, while sitting down with a nurse in the ER who was writing, as part of her thesis,
a huge paper ON suppliments (she also happened to be initially from the UK,)
-and she was explaining to me that there is a huge problem with folks being sold stuff, and taking stuff, -and nobody (reliably,) knowing what the substances did...
I was just glad that this one nurse was keeping my mother alive, and took it on herself to study this stuff.

As prone as folks are to say, in this area '...it's that damn oppressive govt, and they need to keep their noses out of our business...'
-and start pointing to totalitarianism and stuff,,,

--What they don't get is: the very system that is insuring their safety (FDA,) has probably prevented them from being sickened and poisoned a gazillion times over.

THAT they don't want to concede to...
And in these crowds, (which I was also raised in bouncing from health-food-co-op to health-food-co-op as a kid in the sixties and seventies,)
there is a huge issue of people who seem to need to find every possible way to 'rebel,' and 'buck authority,' ---and it has affected otherwise reasonable thought processes, (unfortunately.)

When you see a lot of stuff with comments like '...now YOU can know what THEY don't want you too,' --and it's about good health?
Seriously...
Start to wonder.
-I mean, if something is that good for you, and is going to work, -dontcha think somebody of the 'THEY,' department would want to take it, explode it onto the market, -and make a pile of dough selling it to people who really need it?
--Some of the advertising and logic of the 'conspiracy,' crowd in this is amazingly nill.

Where Marijuana fits in?

Truthfully, around here?

I think it is more of a hot button topic.
-You have plenty of folks who are still convinced that 'the man is trying to stick it to them, (still.)'
(possibly paranoid from all the dope.)

-And
---there is a LOT of pot grown around here, (I've been told that it's actually among the highest yeilding crops in the area, it's just not documented when compared to other crops -because it's not registered.)
THAT means money, a lot of money, so yeah, it's going to be a topic here in the valley.

Will legalizing it (or not) mean any difference to the consumer?

Well, even if it is 'legalized,' it's still going to be by prescription only,
(we're not talking 'over the counter,' or 'bought at the healthfood store,' remedy here.)
-So it will still have to be regulated, -because it still is a drug.
So, it's not like cousin Elmer is going to suddenly be able to sell dope from the back of his microbus anytime soon, -anymore than he can sell antibiotics or muscle relaxants.

If a person has a prescription for 'medical marijuanna,' and has health concerns that can be relieved by it? then there should be no problem. (They're cleared.)

But, for the majority of pot smokers, that's not what it's all about.

My heart, especially because I have people in my life right now who are facing debilitating and probably fatal illness, (who are going off into areas of medical treatment where they're kinda more 'guinea pigs,' --goes out to anyone who is facing major health issues, and is in pain.
-But, having seen the results of so many of these 'alternative' methods, -the really wacked out stuff, -and how it not only dashes hopes to the ground, -but makes the person sicker?
-I totally feel, as much as possible, that working with regulated meds, and not heading off into the conspiracy theory medicine chest (which includes medical marijuanna, and the like,) is a major rip off.

Further?
That a person has to be 'stoned,' or 'drunk' simply to make it through life here in happy Fresno? (or anywhere?)
-again, deeper issue.

I think that has to be addressed first.

Sad, But True

As sad as it may seem, these issues are still issues because of the never ending liberal vs. conservative beauracratic and societal conflict over them. Society will never make a definitve decision on either, because that difference in views will always remain, and opposing sides will never come to a mutual agreement. We may see action and changes surrounding these issues at the beauracratic level, but significant change will always be accompanied by extreme opposition.

is there a compromise?

could everything be legal and still have systems to help folks who want help if they get caught in the web?

Would the guv'ment still regulate the quality of drugs?

I wrote a story years ago about a valley town, Minkler, who voted to legalize drugs. They had a clinic where people could get them safely and cheaply. Addicts came from all over. So did the media, libertarians, and cuiosity seekers. The addicts built hotels, restaurants...

They didn't have to steal, prostitute...and eventually had the support to un-hook themsleves when they were ready. Yep, I'm a utopian.

Craig
What is an authentic community?

Responsibility is the flip side of liberty.

Ian,

You're right in that historically the notion that the government, especially the federaal government, would control personal choices - including the taking of intoxicants, was viewed as anathema.

It's really in the post World War One era that the feds started down this path.

The difference between now and then cuts both ways. In 1900 one could buy opium, or marijuana, or drink oneself to death and the State was silent. That silence came from the Libertarian idea that people made their own choices - for good or for ill.

The same freedom that allowed one to do what one wanted in 1900 ALSO meant that if one was drunk in the street, or strung out and a vegetable, we could step over his/her carcass and feel no legal or moral requirement to help that person because that's what they chose.

TODAY, we would undoubtedly have to have a special government program to counsel and care for those who would stupify themselves if drugs were legal. I think decriminalization of drugs might be bearable if those foolish enough to take drugs to excess would know that we (as a society) would feel no compulsion to save them. Kind of the old maxim "they've made their beds, let them lie in them."

Yup, access to all drugs

Yup, access to all drugs legal and illegal. People seem to forget that drug laws in America only started during the early 1900s (1914?). And at one point even Alcohol was banned.

Of course, I'm lookin' at this as purely from an individual rights perspective. As far as social or financial impacts - I can't even begin to speculate as to what those would all be.

I'm glad more and more people are startin' to question these things, though.

interesting

Do you mean legalizing all illegal drugs or eliminating the prescription requirement or both? How would free access to all legally dispensed drugs affect any attempts to provide better access to needed drugs?

If all drugs were available in the marketplace it seems like it would continue to only give options to those who have health coverage or money? If all and any drugs were subsidized then it would potentially cost a fortune>

You raise some very interesting questions ianashley!

Craig
What is an authentic community?

Well said. And more

Well said. And more importantly, should the government have control of what drugs anyone decides to take?