Former conspiracy believer here

[PixyMisa]

You're saying that the media cannot or do not manufacture opinion? I guess you could say that it's a chicken and egg situation a bit, but to me it's very much a two way street.

What is this "the media" thing? Newspapers? Magazines? Books? Network television? Cable? Satellite? Radio? The internet? In the US? UK? France? Germany? Italy? Spain? Canada? Russia? Japan? Australia? Brazil? Argentina? Peru? China? India?

Do they all speak with one voice?

I'm not arguing for legalisation of drugs. I'm saying the attitude and activities of Gov and Media are consistent with them having hidden agendas.

There is no possible action that is inconsistent with a hidden agenda. You aren't saying anything, Nick.

And the UN's plan to virtually eradicate heroin and cocaine production? That didn't get reported. Of course there's always a few busts here and there and the odd project, most of which mysteriously never seem to work long term. You won't eradicate heroin until you eradicate the US and British Govs!

The US and British governments alike have made possession, sale, production, and trafficking of heroin and cocaine illegal. Yet you claim they are propping up the production of these drugs. Evidence, please.

 

[funk de fino]

Try here otherwise google ketamine anaesthesia.

have you tried ketamine? i have

Have you tried ecstasy? i have

ketamine is a horrible drug with horrible effects especially if the dosage is incorrect and does not mix well with alchohol, it is used by vets as well i believe as a tranquilizer. I cannot believe you think think is a harmless drug, my worst ever experience with drugs was on this stuff. It was introduced to replace PCP, should we still be using PCP if it is "just" an anasthetic?

Ecstasy has many side effects including mental issues as well as being a known killer. Its actual effects when taken are wonderful but it has a lot of baggage and no govt in their right mind would decriminalise it

As for describing Heroin as a analgesic and not the devils work, you are sadly mistaken, i have seen first hand the damage this does to people.

What about GHB, you have not even mentioned this one and it is one of the most recent "social" drugs to be vilified?

I think you are disconnected from the reality of misuse of drugs in an ever so slightly scarey way?

 

[funk de fino]

The pharmaceutical industries need to make money and protect their long term interests. A closed shop has been created by prior litigation and this has resulted in relatively few players with the cash to put up the immense R&D needed to bring new drugs to the market.

Nick

All industries Nick, all of them

 

[Calcas]

Major thread swerve folks.

I suggest you start another thread and continue the discussion elsewhere.

 

[Nick227]

That ibogaine is naturally occurring does not mean that artificial derivatives wouldn't be safer or more effective. Lots of pharmaceuticals are patented derivatives of naturally occurring substances.

Hi PM,

Yes, that's true. However no one is developing any around ibogaine. A famous chap called Stanley Glick has been trying to develop his own, 18-MC, derived from ibogaine. He's not getting very far!

Don't you see the danger in that, if it's true? One dose, permanent change to your body chemistry?

It doesn't make a permanent change to your body chemistry.

They will if they can make money off it.

They could be making money out of it, and getting a lot of public cred too. It's not happening. Ibogaine was initially investigated in the US in the 40s. They're not bothered.

Aren't you suggesting that it is known to work, and known to be safe? What R&D?

Given in a clinical setting it's safe. There are scientific papers and summaries available. Check out Dr Deborah Mash and Dr Ken Alper.

What does that even mean, Nick? Companies exist to make profits for their shareholders. All companies. That's what a company is. What's legally protected about the status of pharmaceutical companies as opposed to any other industry? What is this mandate you speak of?

That is certainly true. However, in the case of medications to be given to sick people, capitalism can most clearly be seen to be failing a very large number of people.

The government restricted it; the government can unrestrict it.

The issue isn't decriminalisation. You can still study an illegal drug.

According to Wikipedia, trials are happening in one form or another in Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean, Costa Rica, the Czech Republic, France, Slovenia, the Netherlands, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand. The New World Order strikes out once again.

Clinical trials carried out to create papers for peer review? FDA trials. Or a few private clinics? Check!

Nick

 

[PixyMisa]

I have no idea who controls who.

And yet you make so many claims...

I'm saying that synarchy is an explanation consistent with much circumstantial evidence.

So are magical green pixies. Of course, magical green pixies don't exist.

Opium was banned after many years insistence from the public. The British went to war with the Chinese because the emperor refused to take any more of their drugs.

150 years ago.

There's a ban on heroin but no meaningful action taken to stop it being available or to help people who take it. There are strategies but it's feeble compared to what could be done. If the gov and media didn't so consistently jaw on about how concerned they are it wouldn't look quite so farcical, but as it is it looks either farcical or conspiratorial, depending on your disposition.

The same can be said about cocaine, ecstasy, alcohol, marijuana, tobacco, caffeine, fat, salt, sugar, speeding, violent films, pornography, fire ants, cane toads, and people who keep exotic pets in New York apartments.

What do you want to see? UN troops invading third world countries to destroy their opium and coca crops?

The pharmaceutical industries need to make money and protect their long term interests. A closed shop has been created by prior litigation and this has resulted in relatively few players with the cash to put up the immense R&D needed to bring new drugs to the market.

The semiconductor industries need to make money and protect their long term interests. A closed shop has been created by prior litigation and this has resulted in relatively few players with the cash to put up the immense R&D needed to bring new chips to the market.

The telecommunications industries need to make money and protect their long term interests. A closed shop has been created by prior litigation and this has resulted in relatively few players with the cash to put up the immense R&D needed to bring new services to the market.

The aerospace industries need to make money and protect their long term interests. A closed shop has been created by prior litigation and this has resulted in relatively few players with the cash to put up the immense R&D needed to bring new aircraft to the market.

Nick, in any industry where new products require large investments, there will inevitably be a small number of large companies rather than a large number of small companies. That's just arithmetic.

 

[PixyMisa]

Yes, that's true. However no one is developing any around ibogaine. A famous chap called Stanley Glick has been trying to develop his own, 18-MC, derived from ibogaine. He's not getting very far!

Stanley Glick is no one?

It doesn't make a permanent change to your body chemistry.

Does a single dose permanently remove or reduce heroin addiction? Or not?

They could be making money out of it, and getting a lot of public cred too. It's not happening. Ibogaine was initially investigated in the US in the 40s. They're not bothered.

"Not bothered" doesn't constitute a conspiracy.

That is certainly true. However, in the case of medications to be given to sick people, capitalism can most clearly be seen to be failing a very large number of people.

Capitalism fails a very large number of people in every way every day. It's not perfect, it's just better than anything else.

The issue isn't decriminalisation. You can still study an illegal drug.

Ah, so the government isn't part of the conspiracy. It's just that the pharmaceutical companies are "not bothered".

Clinical trials carried out to create papers for peer review? FDA trials. Or a few private clinics? Check!

Once again we come back to the most ineffective all-encompassing conspiracy ever. We have one government, one, decide not to fund trials into one drug. Private trials continue all over the world.

 

[Stout]

Nick...what do you figure the natural product ( Iboga ) wouldn't be acceptable to use in treating addiction. I read about your trip to Africa and your experiences there, but I'm wondering why packaging the natural product in gelatin capsules wouldn't work.

This way...we could exclude big Pharma.

 

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

So 17 pages, and this has become a thread about Nick's odd love affair with the topic of drugs, Red Ibis calling the OP a liar (without using the words lie, liar, or lying) and what else?

I think it's been sufficiently derailed. Someone pull the feeding tube out of this thread please. I don't care if it seems to react to external stimuli.

 

[RedIbis]

Red Ibis calling the OP a liar (without using the words lie, liar, or lying) and what else?

Once I think I'm out, they drag me back in.

 

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

Once I think I'm out, they drag me back in.

Don't worry, I'm using you as an example to have this thread euthanized

 

[Disbelief]

It's naturally-occuring so they couldn't get rights to the molecule, only use patents. It's more a one-shot medication. Pharm companies won't develop medications like this. They would struggle to cover R&D costs, and they have a legally protected mandate to make profits for shareholders.

Nick

Just curious. If pharm companies won't develop oneshot medications, why do we have vaccines? Aren't they one-shot? Didn't they just develop the chicken pox vaccine ove rthe past ten years?

 

[Stout]

SpaceMonkey...you always have the option of unsubscribing to this thread and leaving those of us who are actually enjoying it to revel in our celebration of offtopicness.

Besides...the OP is long gone from this thread anyway.

 

[Nick227]

Does a single dose permanently remove or reduce heroin addiction? Or not?

Single dose blockades withdrawal symptoms and provides drug abstinence for an average of a month or so. No other known substance can compare. Nothing in the same league.

Once again we come back to the most ineffective all-encompassing conspiracy ever. We have one government, one, decide not to fund trials into one drug. Private trials continue all over the world.

[/quote]

You're going to have to learn about the mechanics of getting a drug to market before being able to legitimately make sweeping statements like that. There are a handful of private clinics offering ibogaine treatment, and a number of individuals treating in lay settings. There is an immense difference between doing this and getting a drug onto the market where it's needed.

Nick

 

[Nick227]

So are magical green pixies. Of course, magical green pixies don't exist.

Q. Many, many previously quite economically and culturally separate countries have, over the last 50 years thanks to the activities of the WB and IMF, now become increasingly homogenised and brought into the world consumer market place.
Is this likely due to:

a) random activity
b) spontaneous self-organisation
c) the following of a formulated plan
d) green pixies

(Please note...if you answer (c) you will be ridiculed for clearly being a complete idiot)

 

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

SpaceMonkey...you always have the option of unsubscribing to this thread and leaving those of us who are actually enjoying it to revel in our celebration of offtopicness.

Besides...the OP is long gone from this thread anyway.

Tough to unsubscribe to a thread I never subscribed to!

I'm just calling attention that this thread needs to be euthanized and the drug talk maybe moved to new thread.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Q. Many, many previously quite economically and culturally separate countries have, over the last 50 years thanks to the activities of the WB and IMF, now become increasingly homogenised and brought into the world consumer market place.
Is this likely due to:

a) random activity
b) spontaneous self-organisation
c) the following of a formulated plan
d) green pixies

Since the question contains the answer, you're essentially making a circular argument here.

Dave

 

[chipmunk stew]

Just curious. If pharm companies won't develop oneshot medications, why do we have vaccines? Aren't they one-shot? Didn't they just develop the chicken pox vaccine ove rthe past ten years?

Also a rotavirus vaccine, a human papillomavirus vaccine, a smallpox vaccine, a herpes zoster (shingles) vaccine, and several others have been licensed in recent years.

 

[chipmunk stew]

Since the question contains the answer, you're essentially making a circular argument here.

Dave

I'd call it begging the question.

 

[Stout]

SpaceMonkey...fair enough. But at least it's still CT related.