1173: "Steroids"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

rmsgrey
Posts: 3616
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby rmsgrey » Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:02 am UTC

Jorpho wrote:
W3ird_N3rd wrote:With cocaine, in order to die you need to either combine it with other drugs or use heavily for an extended period of time and have a weak heart or perform hard labour (increased heart rate) under influence, which could result in arrhythmia and eventually a heart attack.
Are you implying that it is not possible or even feasible for a person to die by taking too much cocaine?


There are occasionally cases of people dying from ODing on water. Sufficient quantities of anything consumed in a short enough time will be lethal. I suspect the claim here is that under normal use, cocaine is non-lethal except as noted.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Klear » Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:44 am UTC

Surely you can't be comparing cocaine with dihydrogen monoxide? Don't you know that the stuff was even used in some showers in the concentration camps? Hell, when I was to Auschwitz, the stuff was everywhere.

elasto
Posts: 3750
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby elasto » Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:18 pm UTC

morbit wrote:
elasto wrote:Whether or not it's true in this particular case <...>


Eh? What's sense of citing very weak anecdotal correlation then?

To show how Randall has extremely bad timing as well as an extremely bad argument. This alleged steroid-induced murder is front page headlines where I am and probably where you are too; But even if this particular case doesn't turn out to be roid-rage there are plenty of proven cases historically.

(As I say, if he'd chosen blood-doping as his example or such, he'd have a much stronger case.)

User avatar
Jorpho
Posts: 6276
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Jorpho » Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:13 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:
Jorpho wrote:
W3ird_N3rd wrote:With cocaine, in order to die you need to either combine it with other drugs or use heavily for an extended period of time and have a weak heart or perform hard labour (increased heart rate) under influence, which could result in arrhythmia and eventually a heart attack.
Are you implying that it is not possible or even feasible for a person to die by taking too much cocaine?
There are occasionally cases of people dying from ODing on water. Sufficient quantities of anything consumed in a short enough time will be lethal. I suspect the claim here is that under normal use, cocaine is non-lethal except as noted.
ODing on water takes a considerable amount of deliberate effort, as does acute alcohol poisoning. It seems to me that reports of people overdosing on cocaine are considerably more common. But I may well be mistaken in that regard.

elasto wrote:there are plenty of proven cases historically.
"Proven"? Really? How exactly were they "proven"?

morbit
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 4:15 pm UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby morbit » Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:23 pm UTC

elasto wrote:But even if this particular case doesn't turn out to be roid-rage there are plenty of proven cases historically.

I say bring them on. (And please don't be those "poly substance abuse, mentally unstable to start with" ones. If such cases are enough for you
you could just look into American wrestling or cinema people)

User avatar
W3ird_N3rd
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 3:43 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby W3ird_N3rd » Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:05 pm UTC

Jorpho wrote:
W3ird_N3rd wrote:With cocaine, in order to die you need to either combine it with other drugs or use heavily for an extended period of time and have a weak heart or perform hard labour (increased heart rate) under influence, which could result in arrhythmia and eventually a heart attack.
Are you implying that it is not possible or even feasible for a person to die by taking too much cocaine?

It's possible, but can basically only be achieved through your heart. Alcohol can either get you in a coma or tear down you liver.

I'll admit cocaine is known to blow aneurysms (being blown by the elevated blood pressure), also potentially causing death. This is however not viewed as a drug-related death, such a case can be seen in one episode of Dr G Medical Examiner on Discovery. Dr G considered it a natural death, because any event that elevated blood pressure - sports, excitement, anger, sex - would have caused the aneurysm to blow sooner or later.

Sure you can kill yourself with cocaine - the same is true for alcohol. Professor Funk also has an entertaining video about the subject: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/punct ... 1/feb/22/1

The only thing you could say is that the drugs can be difficult to compare. But one thing is for sure: it's remarkable how so many people believe alcohol is completely innocent.
rmsgrey wrote:
Jorpho wrote:
W3ird_N3rd wrote:With cocaine, in order to die you need to either combine it with other drugs or use heavily for an extended period of time and have a weak heart or perform hard labour (increased heart rate) under influence, which could result in arrhythmia and eventually a heart attack.
Are you implying that it is not possible or even feasible for a person to die by taking too much cocaine?


There are occasionally cases of people dying from ODing on water. Sufficient quantities of anything consumed in a short enough time will be lethal. I suspect the claim here is that under normal use, cocaine is non-lethal except as noted.

Correct.

Also, when you're using alcohol, swallow it down fast enough and you don't even need that much to kill yourself.

elasto wrote:Honestly, there were lots of examples Randall could have used - blood doping for example: Giving a sportsman his own red blood cells back. The extra risk to the athlete is minimal (though non-zero) and the risk to others is zero. Steroids though, that's just not a good example to trivialise:

Interesting how that article mentions that heavy drinking was involved and then can't stop blaming roid rage.

I'm not saying the steroids had nothing to do with it, that's for the police to figure out. But it's remarkable how the elephant in the room (being "he was already mad at her and when he got drunk decided to shoot her") is completely ignored.
Jorpho wrote:ODing on water takes a considerable amount of deliberate effort, as does acute alcohol poisoning. It seems to me that reports of people overdosing on cocaine are considerably more common. But I may well be mistaken in that regard.

The media plays its role in that.

From the professor Funk video, in order to die you need to take:

10x the effective dosage for alcohol.
15x the effective dosage for cocaine.
16x the effective dosage for XTC.
6x the effective dosage for heroin.[imahara]It's lethal people![/imahara]
50x the effective dosage for nicotin. (50 cigararettes smoked in a short time)
100x the effective dosage for caffeine. (100 cups of coffee.. ugh.. but you could do it with something more concentrated)
1000+ (plus!) the effective dosage for marijuna. The lung cancer may get to your first.

So yeah.. If you want to kill yourself with a cocaine overdose, that'll take quite some effort as well.

garble
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:20 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby garble » Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:26 pm UTC

Just stoking the fire... If steroids are banned because they're bad for athletes' health, why isn't everything that's potentially bad for their health banned? I mean certain exercise regimens will lead to enhanced performance while simultaneously causing concentric hypertrophy of the heart muscle leading to one being more prone to dying of a heart attack...

morbit
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 4:15 pm UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby morbit » Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 pm UTC

garble wrote:Just stoking the fire... If steroids are banned because they're bad for athletes' health, why isn't everything that's potentially bad for their health banned? I mean certain exercise regimens will lead to enhanced performance while simultaneously causing concentric hypertrophy of the heart muscle leading to one being more prone to dying of a heart attack...


I would like to see solid proof of causation here too.

User avatar
mathmannix
Posts: 1445
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:12 pm UTC
Location: Washington, DC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby mathmannix » Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:01 pm UTC

garble wrote:Just stoking the fire... If steroids are banned because they're bad for athletes' health, why isn't everything that's potentially bad for their health banned? I mean certain exercise regimens will lead to enhanced performance while simultaneously causing concentric hypertrophy of the heart muscle leading to one being more prone to dying of a heart attack...


I bet someone could come up with a better example involving sumo...
I hear velociraptor tastes like chicken.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Klear » Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:10 pm UTC

W3ird_N3rd wrote:From the professor Funk video, in order to die you need to take:

10x the effective dosage for alcohol.
15x the effective dosage for cocaine.
16x the effective dosage for XTC.
6x the effective dosage for heroin.[imahara]It's lethal people![/imahara]
50x the effective dosage for nicotin. (50 cigararettes smoked in a short time)
100x the effective dosage for caffeine. (100 cups of coffee.. ugh.. but you could do it with something more concentrated)
1000+ (plus!) the effective dosage for marijuna. The lung cancer may get to your first.

So yeah.. If you want to kill yourself with a cocaine overdose, that'll take quite some effort as well.


You seem to be ignoring the additivity of each drug. I'm not saying that it disproves your point, but there's more to it than just how much you can take before you die. You should compare as well the chance that once you try a drug, you'll continue using it, and changes in behaviour after either of them - how big chance is there you will OD because you simply don't care? Or that you'll get yourself/somebody else killed because of how you act?

User avatar
W3ird_N3rd
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 3:43 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby W3ird_N3rd » Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:14 am UTC

Klear wrote:You seem to be ignoring the additivity of each drug. I'm not saying that it disproves your point, but there's more to it than just how much you can take before you die. You should compare as well the chance that once you try a drug, you'll continue using it, and changes in behaviour after either of them - how big chance is there you will OD because you simply don't care? Or that you'll get yourself/somebody else killed because of how you act?

The biggest issue from my point of view is that almost everybody accepts the statement "alcohol is pretty safe" as fact. And "cocaine is pretty dangerous" as fact, without a single shred of proof and often with practically no knowledge whatsoever.

As I also mentioned, the drugs are hard to compare and in some aspects, you can't compare them. All I want is for people to actually start thinking about it and not just blindly repeat what "common knowledge" they've heard.

I'll answer to some of your questions saying what I think - I don't have research on this. (if someone knows of research that proves me wrong or right, please, I invite you to share)
You should compare as well the chance that once you try a drug, you'll continue using it, and changes in behaviour after either of them - how big chance is there you will OD because you simply don't care?

What are the chances you continue using a drug? For cocaine, I don't really know. For alcohol, you only have to look at the immense number of people using it. The majority of people who try it continue using.

Chances of overdosing because you just don't care - alcohol is once again doing great. After a few beers, you get some more because it's the alcohol that tells you "what the heck". And everybody knows the cliche hangover line "I'm never drinking again". Yet, everybody who ever said that, does. What does that say?

With cocaine, nobody would think "what the heck" (that's not what cocaine does), but I suspect (I can only guess, those who died can't tell their story) there are people who just crave for another high or are so unhappy they choose to take the risk.
Or that you'll get yourself/somebody else killed because of how you act?

That's pretty unlikely with cocaine. Alcohol is well known to cause people to crash their car and kill themselves and/or others, get involved in bar fights, kill people under influence or fall into a pond and drown.

I'm not sure how cocaine could kill this way. I can't think of anything, that doesn't mean it can't happen, but alcohol is at least well known for this.

While inconclusive without numbers (which we'll probably never get as long as cocaine is illegal), so far I still haven't found any reason to think cocaine is more dangerous than alcohol.

By the way.. Cocaine was more or less outlawed as recent as 1914. After 1914 it was still legal for registered companies and individuals. Apparently before 1914, it wasn't considered so much of a problem.

User avatar
Max™
Posts: 1792
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:21 am UTC
Location: mu

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Max™ » Wed Feb 20, 2013 3:21 am UTC

If cocaine was used as commonly as alcohol the statistics would be very different.
mu

User avatar
Jorpho
Posts: 6276
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Jorpho » Wed Feb 20, 2013 3:31 am UTC

W3ird_N3rd wrote:It's possible, but can basically only be achieved through your heart. Alcohol can either get you in a coma or tear down you liver.
I don't really see how that's relevant. Are you saying longterm cocaine use does not have detrimental effects aside from eating away at your nose?

I'll admit cocaine is known to blow aneurysms (being blown by the elevated blood pressure), also potentially causing death. This is however not viewed as a drug-related death, such a case can be seen in one episode of Dr G Medical Examiner on Discovery.
That is conveniently arbitrary. You could just as easily say that liver failure is not a drug-related death.

Sure you can kill yourself with cocaine - the same is true for alcohol. Professor Funk also has an entertaining video about the subject: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/punct ... 1/feb/22/1
I find it very silly that he takes three minutes to actually get to the point and suggests taking a public survey of unknowledgeable individuals somehow constitutes SCIENCE!!!. But that's beside the point: it is already pointed out on the comments on that page that the calculation of an "effective dose" is somewhat suspect.

This is what it comes down to: alcohol is a depressant, and one typically consumed at relatively low concentrations; accordingly, if you are consuming excess amounts of alcohol, you are far more likely to fall unconscious before you can lethally poison yourself than you would be if you are consuming excess amounts of cocaine.

Also, when you're using alcohol, swallow it down fast enough and you don't even need that much to kill yourself.
Is chugging Everclear a thing these days?

[For the record, I am pretty much a teetotaler.]

User avatar
Quicksilver
Posts: 437
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 6:21 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Quicksilver » Wed Feb 20, 2013 4:56 am UTC

Jorpho wrote:
Also, when you're using alcohol, swallow it down fast enough and you don't even need that much to kill yourself.
Is chugging Everclear a thing these days?

[For the record, I am pretty much a teetotaler.]
is that a PARTY.MOV reference?

niky
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:34 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby niky » Wed Feb 20, 2013 7:53 am UTC

mathmannix wrote:I bet someone could come up with a better example involving sumo...


Retired sumo wrestlers suffer from a whole crapload of problems, including diabetes, liver disease and heart problems.

Max™ wrote:If cocaine was used as commonly as alcohol the statistics would be very different.


Well, opium (from which we get heroin) used to be just as common as tobacco a century or two back...

Klear wrote:
niky wrote:While the last one, people can accept because the poor girl was handicapped by her physique... what if someone who was not so handicapped used it to remove a breast completely, as the Amazons used to do to improve their archery?


Just a quick note that that is a misconception, which arose due to the folk etymology a- (without) and mazos (breast). There are numerous ancient depictions of Amazons and they are not missing anything important.


God damnit. Stop ruining my fetishistic Mono-Boob fantasies.

elasto wrote:Whether or not it's true in this particular case, steroid abuse doesn't just cheat fans and fellow athletes, it has a wider impact on society. They are controlled substances for good reason, both inside and outside of sport.


And yet, somehow, alcohol is still perfectly legal everywhere, despite the pool of anecdotal and statistical evidence showing a link between that and murder. Or at the very least, that a lot of murderers were soused at the time of the crime.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Klear » Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:45 am UTC

niky wrote:
elasto wrote:Whether or not it's true in this particular case, steroid abuse doesn't just cheat fans and fellow athletes, it has a wider impact on society. They are controlled substances for good reason, both inside and outside of sport.


And yet, somehow, alcohol is still perfectly legal everywhere, despite the pool of anecdotal and statistical evidence showing a link between that and murder. Or at the very least, that a lot of murderers were soused at the time of the crime.


I don't think Olympic athletes are allowed to compete drunk, though. Not that it would help them or anything.

In any case, booze has the advantage of being culturally ingrained. You can't take that away.

morbit
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 4:15 pm UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby morbit » Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:23 am UTC

Klear wrote:I don't think Olympic athletes are allowed to compete drunk, though. Not that it would help them or anything. In any case, booze has the advantage of being culturally ingrained. You can't take that away.


That depends on sport. In most alcohol is allowed in-competition.

I think most of these are non-Olympic, so you could say you can compete totally drunk at Olympic games.

http://list.wada-ama.org/list/p1-alcohol/#Alcohol

About cultural thing, that's spot on. I enjoy few times in year good cigar, as well as some whisky. Probably would be healthier to use marijuana but you cannot compare sheepishly inhaling fumes from some plant of dubious legal status and of sketchy provenance, to properly indulging in former substances.

fifiste
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 11:48 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby fifiste » Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:15 pm UTC

Alcohol is one ridiculously bad drug.

From the addictivity, to its toxicity - from the rather low threshold between effective and lethal dose.

One of the most annoying thing about alcohol is its active effects - I kind of like to describe it like a "bad idea" juice. Some drugs make people see fancy patterns, some make them sleepy and euphoric, make them slump down or a sofa or in the corner or something, some make them preppy and sociable - alcohol is one of those ones that makes them want to punch or stab people, drive cars at ridiculous speed, climb on tall rickety shit, call your ex. , piss on police car etc. Kind of combination of active/agressive+stupid/incompetent.

(There's a saying that a thing worse than an idiot is an active idiot)

The cherry on the cake is that alcohol is one of the very few drugs from which withdrawal can itself be lethal.

Cheers!

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Klear » Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:47 pm UTC

fifiste wrote:Alcohol is one ridiculously bad drug.

From the addictivity, to its toxicity - from the rather low threshold between effective and lethal dose.

One of the most annoying thing about alcohol is its active effects - I kind of like to describe it like a "bad idea" juice. Some drugs make people see fancy patterns, some make them sleepy and euphoric, make them slump down or a sofa or in the corner or something, some make them preppy and sociable - alcohol is one of those ones that makes them want to punch or stab people, drive cars at ridiculous speed, climb on tall rickety shit, call your ex. , piss on police car etc. Kind of combination of active/agressive+stupid/incompetent.

(There's a saying that a thing worse than an idiot is an active idiot)

The cherry on the cake is that alcohol is one of the very few drugs from which withdrawal can itself be lethal.

Cheers!


A completely agree, except that I see those as reasons why alcohol is awesome =)

User avatar
W3ird_N3rd
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 3:43 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby W3ird_N3rd » Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:28 pm UTC

Jorpho wrote:
W3ird_N3rd wrote:It's possible, but can basically only be achieved through your heart. Alcohol can either get you in a coma or tear down you liver.
I don't really see how that's relevant. Are you saying longterm cocaine use does not have detrimental effects aside from eating away at your nose?

The question was "can it kill you". Apart from a heart attack, I don't know how cocaine could kill you, even in the long term. I'm not saying it's a healthy thing to do.
I'll admit cocaine is known to blow aneurysms (being blown by the elevated blood pressure), also potentially causing death. This is however not viewed as a drug-related death, such a case can be seen in one episode of Dr G Medical Examiner on Discovery.
That is conveniently arbitrary. You could just as easily say that liver failure is not a drug-related death.

If you already have some liver disease that was going to kill you anyway, you would have a point.

Alcohol causes liver failure. Cocaine does not cause aneurysms.
Sure you can kill yourself with cocaine - the same is true for alcohol. Professor Funk also has an entertaining video about the subject: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/punct ... 1/feb/22/1
I find it very silly that he takes three minutes to actually get to the point and suggests taking a public survey of unknowledgeable individuals somehow constitutes SCIENCE!!!. But that's beside the point: it is already pointed out on the comments on that page that the calculation of an "effective dose" is somewhat suspect.

This is what it comes down to: alcohol is a depressant, and one typically consumed at relatively low concentrations; accordingly, if you are consuming excess amounts of alcohol, you are far more likely to fall unconscious before you can lethally poison yourself than you would be if you are consuming excess amounts of cocaine.

Somewhat true, although many Dutch kids have made the news here because they either died or ended up in a coma in hospital.
fifiste wrote:Alcohol is one ridiculously bad drug.

From the addictivity, to its toxicity - from the rather low threshold between effective and lethal dose.

One of the most annoying thing about alcohol is its active effects - I kind of like to describe it like a "bad idea" juice. Some drugs make people see fancy patterns, some make them sleepy and euphoric, make them slump down or a sofa or in the corner or something, some make them preppy and sociable - alcohol is one of those ones that makes them want to punch or stab people, drive cars at ridiculous speed, climb on tall rickety shit, call your ex. , piss on police car etc. Kind of combination of active/agressive+stupid/incompetent.

(There's a saying that a thing worse than an idiot is an active idiot)

The cherry on the cake is that alcohol is one of the very few drugs from which withdrawal can itself be lethal.

Cheers!

Agree. :)

Stupid Christian Dutch politicians outlawed mushrooms 5 years ago, we're going the wrong way. :-(

User avatar
bmonk
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:14 pm UTC
Location: Schitzoed in the OTT between the 2100s and the late 900s. Hoping for singularity.

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby bmonk » Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:45 pm UTC

fifiste wrote:Alcohol is one ridiculously bad drug.

From the addictivity, to its toxicity - from the rather low threshold between effective and lethal dose.

One of the most annoying thing about alcohol is its active effects - I kind of like to describe it like a "bad idea" juice. Some drugs make people see fancy patterns, some make them sleepy and euphoric, make them slump down or a sofa or in the corner or something, some make them preppy and sociable - alcohol is one of those ones that makes them want to punch or stab people, drive cars at ridiculous speed, climb on tall rickety shit, call your ex. , piss on police car etc. Kind of combination of active/aggressive+stupid/incompetent.

(There's a saying that a thing worse than an idiot is an active idiot)

The cherry on the cake is that alcohol is one of the very few drugs from which withdrawal can itself be lethal.

Cheers!


I'd offer one or two quick reasons why alcohol is often treated differently from other drugs:
1. Tradition, since it was discovered and became commonly available early in history--and even before. As soon as fermenting grain/fruit juices were noted by proto-farmers.

2. (likely related to the above reason) It is very easy to make and even to distill compared to most other drugs, making regulating it nearly impossible. Even look at how many military units in war have access to hooch--even when it is forbidden, the troops find ways to make or procure it. It's not always good tasting, but it is available. Growing and purifying, say, heroin or cocaine is a lot more involved and takes longer.
Having become a Wizard on n.p. 2183, the Yellow Piggy retroactively appointed his honorable self a Temporal Wizardly Piggy on n.p.1488, not to be effective until n.p. 2183, thereby avoiding a partial temporal paradox. Since he couldn't afford two philosophical PhDs to rule on the title.

User avatar
W3ird_N3rd
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 3:43 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby W3ird_N3rd » Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:59 pm UTC

bmonk wrote:I'd offer one or two quick reasons why alcohol is often treated differently from other drugs:
1. Tradition, since it was discovered and became commonly available early in history--and even before. As soon as fermenting grain/fruit juices were noted by proto-farmers.

2. (likely related to the above reason) It is very easy to make and even to distill compared to most other drugs, making regulating it nearly impossible. Even look at how many military units in war have access to hooch--even when it is forbidden, the troops find ways to make or procure it. It's not always good tasting, but it is available. Growing and purifying, say, heroin or cocaine is a lot more involved and takes longer.

It'll be pretty interesting to see what crystal meth is going to do. It's pretty new unlike alcohol (at least the simple recipe with lithium batteries to make it is), but it's also relatively easy to produce using off-the-shelf items.

I haven't tried it, but from what I hear it's not terribly healthy.

The question is, being readily available (illegal or not, you can make it yourself), will the whole world become addicted? (I doubt it)

niky
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:34 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby niky » Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:14 am UTC

We've had millenia to breed for alcohol addiction and the amazing way it can keep a soldier from being scared spitless.

We haven't had that long to breed for meth-heads. And meth-fueled barbarians aren't toppling the Roman Empire, so the point may be moot. :mrgreen:

User avatar
Jorpho
Posts: 6276
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Jorpho » Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:26 am UTC

Quicksilver wrote:
Jorpho wrote:Is chugging Everclear a thing these days?

[For the record, I am pretty much a teetotaler.]
is that a PARTY.MOV reference?
I did watch that once, so maybe I was thinking of it subconsciously..?

bmonk wrote:I'd offer one or two quick reasons why alcohol is often treated differently from other drugs:
1. Tradition, since it was discovered and became commonly available early in history--and even before. As soon as fermenting grain/fruit juices were noted by proto-farmers.

2. (likely related to the above reason) It is very easy to make and even to distill compared to most other drugs, making regulating it nearly impossible. Even look at how many military units in war have access to hooch--even when it is forbidden, the troops find ways to make or procure it. It's not always good tasting, but it is available. Growing and purifying, say, heroin or cocaine is a lot more involved and takes longer.
I think there might be something to be said for the idea that one's family/community/country may have its own distinctive means of preparing alcohol, such that no other family/community/country prepares something that tastes quite the same, so continuing to drink or prepare the same thing over the course of generations develops its own importance.

Meth, surely, does the same thing regardless of who makes the meth. Right?

ijuin
Posts: 1059
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby ijuin » Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:05 am UTC

W3ird_N3rd wrote:
You should compare as well the chance that once you try a drug, you'll continue using it, and changes in behaviour after either of them - how big chance is there you will OD because you simply don't care?

What are the chances you continue using a drug? For cocaine, I don't really know. For alcohol, you only have to look at the immense number of people using it. The majority of people who try it continue using.

Chances of overdosing because you just don't care - alcohol is once again doing great. After a few beers, you get some more because it's the alcohol that tells you "what the heck". And everybody knows the cliche hangover line "I'm never drinking again". Yet, everybody who ever said that, does. What does that say?


I think that for "addiction", we are mainly looking at the people who obsessively use it--e.g. those whom we would consider "alcoholics". If the user's mindset is to take some of the drug "as soon as possible" as opposed to being able to wait until a pre-arranged time and place, and/or if the user dwells obsessively on thoughts of taking the drug, then it is definitely an addiction.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Klear » Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:21 am UTC

Jorpho wrote:I think there might be something to be said for the idea that one's family/community/country may have its own distinctive means of preparing alcohol, such that no other family/community/country prepares something that tastes quite the same, so continuing to drink or prepare the same thing over the course of generations develops its own importance.

Meth, surely, does the same thing regardless of who makes the meth. Right?


I think if meth were as prevalent as alcohol, there would be soon many flavours to choose from (vintage meth, anyone?), but probably not as diverse as alcohol. I love how Europe can be divided roughly into three belts based on which source of alcohol is most available - south is the wine belt, mainly Italy, France, and Greece, then there's the beer belt - you wouldn't believe how much beer we can drink here in Czech Republic, and to the north is the vodka belt, mainly Russia and Scandinavia.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby addams » Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:15 pm UTC

fifiste wrote:Alcohol is one ridiculously bad drug.

From the addictivity, to its toxicity - from the rather low threshold between effective and lethal dose.

One of the most annoying thing about alcohol is its active effects - I kind of like to describe it like a "bad idea" juice. Some drugs make people see fancy patterns, some make them sleepy and euphoric, make them slump down or a sofa or in the corner or something, some make them preppy and sociable - alcohol is one of those ones that makes them want to punch or stab people, drive cars at ridiculous speed, climb on tall rickety shit, call your ex. , piss on police car etc. Kind of combination of active/agressive+stupid/incompetent.

(There's a saying that a thing worse than an idiot is an active idiot)

The cherry on the cake is that alcohol is one of the very few drugs from which withdrawal can itself be lethal.

Cheers!

You are funny. It is so true.
Giving a drunk DECAFE! coffee is fun, fun, fun.

You seem to have stumbled on the problem with Meth.
Those people are active. Right?

Oh me yarm. I can't remember how to treat ETOH toxicity.
Wikipedia is amazing. Dialysis? Really?
Spoiler:
symptoms of acute alcohol poisoning include:

severe confusion, unpredictable behavior and stupor
sudden lapses into and out of unconsciousness or semi-consciousness (with later alcoholic amnesia)
vomiting while unconscious or semi-conscious[11]
seizures
respiratory depression (fewer than eight breaths a minute)
pale, bluish, cold and clammy skin due to insufficient oxygen[12]
[edit]Management
Acute alcohol poisoning is a medical emergency due to the risk of death from respiratory depression and/or inhalation of vomit if emesis occurs while the patient is unconscious and unresponsive. Emergency treatment for acute alcohol poisoning strives to stabilize the patient and maintain a patent airway and respiration, while waiting for the alcohol to metabolize:[13] Also:

Protect vital signs by monitoring ABCs, or Airway, Breathing, and Circulation; that is, if the person is thought to be at risk for severe respiratory depression, consider an endotracheal tube to protect the airway and assist with breathing.
Protect the airway from aspirating stomach contents that could cause aspiration pneumonia.
Treat hypoglycaemia (low blood sugar) with 50ml of 50% dextrose solution and saline flush, as ethanol induced hypoglycaemia is unresponsive to glucagon.
Administer the vitamin thiamine to prevent Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome, which can cause a seizure (more usually a treatment for chronic alcoholism, but in the acute context usually co-administered to ensure maximal benefit).
Check urea and electrolytes to guide fluid replacement.
Apply haemodialysis if the blood concentration is dangerously high (>400 mg%), and especially if there is metabolic acidosis.
Provide oxygen therapy as needed via nasal cannula or non-rebreather mask.
Additional medication may be indicated for
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Idetuxs
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 12:33 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Idetuxs » Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:14 pm UTC

W3ird_N3rd wrote:Oh bite me.

Alcohol is toxic to the human body, yet we actually encourage people to drink. And people who don't drink are sometimes even ashamed and viewed upon as "boring" when it's revealed they don't drink.

Smoking, while no longer encouraged, is not healthy either.

And then there's.. Coffee. Or to be more precise, caffeine. It's a a central nervous system stimulant and you can get addicted to it. And spiders using it produce this. Tell me that's healthy.

I do not oppose drugs, quite the opposite. I think people should be informed and in case of serious drugs warned and perhaps even monitored. Maybe cigarettes should not be sold at gas stations but only at pharmacies. I strongly believe it's not a good thing to sell alcohol at supermarkets. All I'm saying is, do it properly. Either outlaw all drugs (that includes alcohol and caffeine!) or allow everything that's not terribly dangerous. And by "not terribly dangerous", I guess alcohol is a great benchmark.
Marijuana -> far less dangerous than alcohol -> legalize.
Mushrooms -> less dangerous than alcohol, just make sure you don't do it alone. -> legalize.
Cocaine -> less dangerous than alcohol -> legalize.
Speed/Crystal meth -> the "trip" is not so dangerous, but the hangover could be -> should perhaps not be legal.

In the end, everything can kill you. Dihydrogen monoxide kills people every single day, yet there is still not a single government in the world that even considers prohibiting it.

Anyone being surprised by me saying cocaine should be legal, it's just like other drugs: as long as you're not abusing it, it's no big issue. Cocaine can damage your nose in the long term, alcohol can damage your liver. Cocaine hangover can include fatigue and depression, alcohol hangover isn't pretty either. The primary reason I consider cocaine to be less dangerous than alcohol: while I wouldn't recommend driving, you're less likely to get involved in a car crash.


You clearly just read about cocaine use. I agree with legalizing cocaine, but less dangerous than alcohol??... The nature of cocaine is to push the user to abuse it. Drugs like cocaine and heroine are a one-way road. (there are exceptions of people that do not get addicted. have to look it up but I read an article on Scientific American about twins that went different paths after trying cocaine.)

DR6
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:44 pm UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby DR6 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 2:09 pm UTC

W3ird_N3rd wrote:
jadoth wrote:[...]
Speed/Crystal meth -> the "trip" is not so dangerous, but the hangover could be -> should perhaps not be legal.
[...]

I hope you are kidding. Crystal meth causes addiction after the first use and users usually last a few months before dying.
Last edited by DR6 on Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:24 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

speising
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby speising » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:04 pm UTC

DR6 wrote:I hope you are kidding. Crystal meth causes addiction after the first use and users usually last a few months after dying.


you mean, they remain edible? is meth a preservative?

DR6
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:44 pm UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby DR6 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:25 pm UTC

speising wrote:
DR6 wrote:I hope you are kidding. Crystal meth causes addiction after the first use and users usually last a few months after dying.


you mean, they remain edible? is meth a preservative?

Shenanigans on my mind made me write "after" when it should be "before", I'm stupid like that.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby addams » Sat Feb 23, 2013 7:52 pm UTC

DR6 wrote:
speising wrote:
DR6 wrote:I hope you are kidding. Crystal meth causes addiction after the first use and users usually last a few months after dying.


you mean, they remain edible? is meth a preservative?

Shenanigans on my mind made me write "after" when it should be "before", I'm stupid like that.

Really? That is not the way I read it.

From the first use, and continuing with each successive use; Drug induced Psychosis is a very real risk.

A Psychotic is one thing. A hyperactive and frightened Psychotic is a different thing. Poor babies.
Oh, Dear God; How do we treat the most vulnerable among us?

Do you know that you run that risk every time you get out of bed? Or; Don't get out of bed?
Staying in bed won't save you. Getting up is risky. What ya' going to do? Any clue?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1840
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby eran_rathan » Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:56 pm UTC

speising wrote:
DR6 wrote:I hope you are kidding. Crystal meth causes addiction after the first use and users usually last a few months after dying.


you mean, they remain edible? is meth a preservative?



Heroin certainly is. Look at the Rolling Stones.
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

wumpus
Posts: 546
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:16 am UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby wumpus » Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:59 pm UTC

W3ird_N3rd wrote:10x the effective dosage for alcohol.
15x the effective dosage for cocaine.

So yeah.. If you want to kill yourself with a cocaine overdose, that'll take quite some effort as well.


The catch is that alcohol's typical delivery system (drinking it) is typically slow enough to effect you enough that you rarely want enough to OD regardless of your initial desire for booze. The two ways it kills are:

1. Frat pledges being hazed or otherwise forcing themselves to drink in an effort to prove themselves. Butt-chugging takes this to new heights as it removes even more control from the user.
2. Long term alcoholics who have built up such a high resistance to drunkenness that they can drink themselves to massive BACs. "High resistance" doesn't mean everything scales accordingly and they can obviously die from such acts.

As far as cocaine goes, I went to the University of Maryland the year after Len Bias (top college basketball draft pick) died (of cocaine OD the day after the draft). I saw very little cocaine on campus, lots of alcohol and no deaths either way, but I probably have a big selection bias there. From what I've heard about heroin (this is mostly side comments from Dr. Restak's books) is that heroin resistance scales far and fast enough that users are likely to try large dosages just to re-experience getting high off heroin (and it won't work).

I would hardly argue the safety of other drugs over alcohol due to how you calibrate the dosage. First, you are unlikely to have your dealer (liquor store) supply you with a beer with ten times the alcohol (although I did notice the extra hit from Flying Dog's Winter Ale (7.4%) before noticing it on the label), where in illegal drugs that isn't always the case (although the only real story of this I've heard of was for LSD, another "impossible to fatally OD on" drug). The point is that the danger of alcohol is like the danger of cell phones - blunt trauma from car crash (or occasionally puncturing-slicing trauma if it leads to gun or knife violence) and not anything caused by direct use. I would claim that a more realistic comparision of the dangers of alcohol over competing drugs is that while it typically takes heroic efforts to get addicted to it, once it has its claws in you it isn't going to let go.

Finally, I have to try to go back to the topic of steroids. Is it really necessary to limit what medicine can do for patients (there were plenty accusations of steroid abuse prior to the Superbowl for "healing too fast") in order to make sports fair? I understand that in many parts of the US, education funding means "money for football (or sometimes basketball) and maybe a little extra to keep classes crawling along, but is it necessary to regulate medicine to keep the Superbowl/World Cup/Olympics fair? Don't answer that, bread and circuses for the loss of humanity.

Fellstorm
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:52 pm UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Fellstorm » Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:03 am UTC

I made an account and sought out this thread because I so SO wanted someone to suggest (or confirm) that the floating thing was a Ly-Cilph from Peter F. Hamilton's Night's Dawn trilogy.

Lurkie
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 5:12 pm UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Lurkie » Wed Mar 06, 2013 7:55 pm UTC

Here and I'm thinking it's Fred from Diane Duane's book So You Want to Be a Wizard.

User avatar
Jofur
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:50 pm UTC

Re: 1173: Steriods

Postby Jofur » Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:06 pm UTC

eran_rathan wrote:Heroin certainly is. Look at the Rolling Stones.


Hey-oh!
Everybody is doing it and nobody knows why.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mscha and 103 guests