Posted by metric on April 3, 2009, at 16:23:43
In reply to Re: Barbiturates for insomnia » metric, posted by yxibow on April 2, 2009, at 19:06:49
> Despite the rant, chronic insomnia is a condition that affects millions of people. I for one know that it is probably one piece of the very intricate disorder I have.
>Insomnia sucks. There is nothing good about insomnia. Where did I imply otherwise?
> It affects anxiety, depression, EPS and side effects -- the lack of sleep interferes and can increase those disorders.
>
> I wouldn't just snub it off like that, but you're entitled to your own opinion. I know personally I don't like being an insomniac.
>Please show me where I trivialized insomia.
> As for "as it was a century ago", people were selling heroin, cocaine, anything, you name it, over the counter. Do you really think in a society where medicine has rapidly expanded health you would want readily available hard drugs OTC ?
>I'm sorry, that reads as a non sequitur to me. Societies in which medicine has "rapidly expanded health" have an increased need for prohibition?
Of course I believe people should be able to buy any drug they want. I value individual liberty. Somehow, incarcerating people for their personal choices seems contradictory to the principles upon which this country was founded. Moreover, the War on Drugs is essentially a war on the poor. Rich people can afford to pay doctors to legally obtain their drugs (hard and soft), while the poor cannot.
> Oh, and about a century ago 20 million people died of the flu around 1915-1920.
>
> There were no antibiotics, at least none you would want unless you wanted to play russian roulette with sulfa drugs.
>
> No MRIs, polio, malaria, a lot of diseases were rampant in 'modern' countries.
>
> Yes, people were stylin' in the roaring 20s in some ways like rebirths of fun and debauchery in recent times.
>You've lost me completely. Perhaps English is not your native language? That would explain a lot. I mean that innocently.
> But if one thinks psychiatry is still fraught with problems, which it is, because while we have a lot of tools, it is still in some ways in the 'middle ages' -- try living then.
>Psychiatry doesn't have *any* tools (at least not in the sense you intend). I don't regard psychiatry as a legitimate branch of medicine.
> There was nothing but asylums, misunderstanding at best, and rough and inhumane at worst.
>In other words, like it is now, sans the drugs.
> -- Jay
poster:metric
thread:887877
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20090330/msgs/888527.html