Subject:
|
Re: Curious, if true
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 4 Mar 2002 18:19:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
289 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Pedro Silva writes:
>
> > OTOH, there are many disadvantages to the use of hypodermic syringes (sp?):
> > #1- There is a larger risk to contract diseases (AIDS, Hepatitis,...) from a
> > needle than there is from a syringe;
>
> You mean when I step on one at the beach?
Yes, for instance. But in addition, there's the danger from needle one
user to the next, whereas two pot-heads sharing a bong or a lighter are far
less likely to transmit AIDS or Hepatitis.
> Or do you mean I'm supposed to care if junkies contract AIDS? I mean,
> hypothetically, I do care. But at the same time, that's a risk they are
> balancing as they make their decisions. It's not exactly any of my business.
While I recognize that your statement is consistent with your
previously-stated viewpoint, it can readily (and not incorrectly) be argued
that, as a member of society, it is indeed your business whether the
junkie--another member of society--contracts AIDS.
> > #2- It is possible to vent a room easily, but is is risky to dispose of
> > abandoned syringes;
>
> It is no easy task to be rid of the residue from smoke.
The yellowing of walls and the lingering smell of smoke is a "hazard"
entirely different from the real, actual danger posed by dicarded syringes.
I know, some asthma suffers can rightly assert that even minimal smoke
contamination can trigger an attack, but does anyone really see that as
equivalent? For non-asthma suffers (and for people without respiratory
problems), smoke residue is an annoyance.
> > #3- IV drugs cause persistent wounds in the place of injection (in extreme
> > cases, limbs may have to be amputated);
>
> That too should go into the decision of whether to engage in that behavior.
> But again, it doesn't have much to do with me.
Again, if you count yourself as a member of society, it does. Further,
once addiction takes hold, it's all well and good for the bystander to say
"well, he made his choice--let him live with it," but it's not that simple.
We could discuss the delusion that "there is no such thing as society,
only individuals" if you think it would be useful. I have yet to hear a
convincing argument that the plight of the individual in the society of
which I am a part has nothing to do with me.
> > #4- Most IV drugs are synthetic. This isn't a problem "per se", but the
> > amount of residual chemicals that are poisenous is not neglectable;
>
> See above.
For non-asthma suffers, smoke residue is an annoyance.
> > #5- You will not become addicted to a drug by inhaling 2nd hand smoke, once
> > in a while; it is too sparse.
>
> Agreed. So? I won't become addicted to a drug by being near somone as they
> inject it into their thigh, either. But if someone next to me is burning dried
> weeds then I am affected by their polution. Not so with the injection unless
> they discard their needle haphazardly.
And that's 90% of the point Pedro is making, of course. But how are you
affected by their pollution, exactly? Unless you are exposed long-term, or
unless you have some pre-existing condition, then the effects are
negligible, I suspect. Even if you have a legitimate medical condition,
then you're still responsible (by your previously asserted logic) for the
air that you take into your own lungs. If the hypothetical smoker wishes to
exhale in Place A, and the smoke affects you in Place B, it's not exactly
any of the smoker's business. Even if Place A happens to be your favorite
bar, restaurant, or telephone booth, if the owner of Place A imposes no
prohibitions on smoking, I again don't see how it's any of the smoker's
business what you do and don't inhale.
> > I'm sure there are other reasons, and I'm also sure there may be other good
> > reasons to prefer IVD; IMHO, the IV ones are riskier to the non-users,
> > because of the dangers posed by the leftovers.
>
> I'm sure that the magnitude of consequences associated with IV drug use is
> greater, but the risk itself is much less.
On what basis to you make that conclusion? And for whom is the risk "much
less?" The direct introduction of substances into the bloodstream is
considerably more risky--from the standpoint of exposure, contamination, and
delivery--than the inhalation of smoke or powder. You may be presupposing
some sort of legalized standard of IV drug purity to ensure safety. That's
fine, but we should equally presuppose a legalized standard of inhaled drug
purity (which, at least as far as tobacco is concerned, is entirely
nonexistent.) I'd need to see hard evidence that the use of injectable
drugs is less risky.
> So it's kind of a balance. I'm bothered by drug-smoke almost every day. I
> encounter needles on the beach less than once per year.
I suspect that you avoid such needles by avoiding areas of their
occurrence. I suggest that you avoid drug-smoke by similarly avoiding areas
of their occurrence. Unless the smoker is exhaling directly into your mouth
or nose, I don't see why it's any of the smoker's business what you do with
their discarded smoke. More precisely, I don't see why you object to smoke
but not to needles, other than because of your personal convenience (ie, out
of sight, out of mind).
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Curious, if true
|
| (...) I sort of agree. I have a financial interest in the situation because I contribute to funding the remediation. And I may have all the empathy in the world for people who are hurting themselves. But I'm not sure that I have the right to stop (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
| (...) You mean when I step on one at the beach? Or do you mean I'm supposed to care if junkies contract AIDS? I mean, hypothetically, I do care. But at the same time, that's a risk they are balancing as they make their decisions. It's not exactly (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
21 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
