Correct. However, it is effective in the short term, which makes its short term use valid. Occasional recreational use is also valid. I feel psychedelics are a better option in most cases. Elon Musk has chosen to use ketamine chronically–carelessness in, carelessness out. He shouldn’t be the face of ketamine. I’m rightfully concerned about the demonization of ketamine due to these headlines, when the only thing that should be demonized is Musk.
Musk is the same person who said homelessness is a propaganda word for useless drug addicts. Anti-drug sentiment is a dangerous radical right ideology. People must remember this when discussing this subject. I’ve seen comments on many posts relating to politicians and drug use with an inherently negative stance on drugs, particularly with Musk, which is my reason for tapping the sign. The articles themselves often have an anti-drug bias, and I feel that’s showing itself here a little.
Lobotomies also are effective in the short and long term for stopping suicide.
I think it’s perfectly fine to push back on drugs and procedures when we are currently only in the present to excuse it away as effective enough to get the outcomes we want.
It does not mean they are safe or should be promoted.
If it’s legitimately harming brain chemistry and has a similar effect to long term brain damage why is it OK other than because it accomplished a goal of getting other people to mumble that they can’t kill themselves and its seen as a victory.
Cautionary discourse and open about the possible negatives are how we move forward.
Demanding only positive and happy conversation around drug use is also radical and dangerous.
Don’t pretend it’s bad faith when it’s just against your own interests and beliefs.
Comparing an accepted prescription drug to a surgery that involves literally physically and permanently disfiguring the brain is nothing short of outrageous.
You are claiming I am openly portraying drugs as entirely safe to use for any purpose, which is a great insult to me and the people I am trying to help. This is a ludicrously irrational argument, and I suggest you delete your comment before you make a fool of yourself.
A lobotomy was a recognized and approved medical procedure. Within a few years in the late 1940s 10s of thousands of procedures were done.
The person who discovered the procedure won a Nobel prize for Medicine for how it helped people with psychosis.
How is it not related?
Because this is a chemical that alters brain chemistry instead?
Would you prefer I state electroshock therapy? Insulin shock? Malarial?
Those last 2 are using compounds instead of physical means.
My point stands that just because it is used in the medical field does not being and end the argument of safety and efficiency. Opiods are considered safe until you have to stop taking them and now we are pushing against the prescription and use of them.
You clearly have a specific predetermined opinion on the matter that makes you insulary from having to accept that their are differing opinions on the matter.
Your threat to my appearance does not diminsh my statement it just proves your bias.
Being open towards the use of drugs does not mean they are free of criticism and should not be used sparingly as the world may yet change on its opionion of the costs of their use yet.
This is not to say people can not take what helps but helping is not always good or an answer long term.
I don’t even know why I’m bothering typing this. It won’t change your opinion. You are a troll, and I’m speaking to a phantom. I haven’t even heard of some of these medical procedures, but whatever. Fine. School day it is, then.
A lobotomy was a recognized and approved medical procedure. Within a few years in the late 1940s 10s of thousands of procedures were done.
The person who discovered the procedure won a Nobel prize for Medicine for how it helped people with psychosis.
This is true. Combined with how slavery was only just recently abolished, and segregation is still the norm, it goes to show how incredibly innovative the United States was throughout its history.
How is it not related?
I don’t know, why is vitamin B12 not related? I just discovered that large doses treat dissociation.
Because this is a chemical that alters brain chemistry instead?
Yes.
Would you prefer I state electroshock therapy?
No, I’d prefer you state something relevant. Speaking of, here’s the two other operations mentioned in the history section of the lobotomy Wikipedia page that you looked at, that involve a compound.
Insulin shock?
Insulin. Insulin. That is a fucking hormone. Insulin is a hormone. Granted, that is a compound, and comparing a hormone to a narcotic is insane, but fine. At least we aren’t slandering HRT because of insulin shock.
Malarial?
Here’s one I’ve definitely never heard of. A quick read reveals it’s the process of using plasmodium to cause malaria, which causes a rise in body temperature, which then, in turn, mitigates other diseases. The malaria is then given treatment. I’ve never heard of something so stupid in all my years, but I’m still trying to find the compound invo–no. No, that’s impossible. The compound involved isn’t…
FUCKING EUKARYOTES!?
Since I’ve already lost so many brain cells, why not add some gasoline to the mix? Let me go sniff some real quick…done.
My point
Objection–you do not have a point, you have a mouth.
Just because it is used in the medical field does not being and end the argument of safety and efficiency.
Strawman.
Opiods are considered safe until you have to stop taking them…
Opiods [sic] is a weird way to spell benzodiazepines. Now, I’ve already torn your incorrect “opinion” to shreds, and now I’m literally giving you an argument against me, over a point that was never made.
You clearly have a specific predetermined opinion on the matter
That implies I was never anti-drug. I was. I supported banning all of them, and incarcerating all who ever used them. I was a Trump supporter. I vocally defended the cop that murdered George Floyd, blaming the fentanyl as everyone did. Point is, my mind has already changed, and what you’re doing is actually trying to unchange my mind.
The only one with a predetermined opinion on the matter is you, you Nixonite.
Your threat to my appearance does not diminsh my statement it just proves your bias.
My parents said the same thing when I warned them that voting for Trump was a stupid idea. Your strawman arguments don’t diminsh [sic] my statement, it only proves your bias.
Being open towards the use of drugs does not mean they are free of criticism
I still don’t know why this is being said, because I never said drugs are free of criticism. You are replying to a thread that is literally me replying to a comment mentioning ketamine’s dangers with frequent use, saying “correct”. What was that about bias, again?
This is not to say people can not take what helps but helping is not always good or an answer long term.
This is your first correct statement. Right at the end, too! A broken clock is right once a day. I use 24-hour time, sorry. Short end of the stick, sometimes.
All in all, I have had more intelligent debates on Reddit. I highly recommend you work for the Trump administration, they could use your mindset, conflating rationality and brazen emotional-esque response. And, like I said before:
Delete your comment, before you make a (further) fool of yourself.
Correct. However, it is effective in the short term, which makes its short term use valid. Occasional recreational use is also valid. I feel psychedelics are a better option in most cases. Elon Musk has chosen to use ketamine chronically–carelessness in, carelessness out. He shouldn’t be the face of ketamine. I’m rightfully concerned about the demonization of ketamine due to these headlines, when the only thing that should be demonized is Musk.
Musk is the same person who said homelessness is a propaganda word for useless drug addicts. Anti-drug sentiment is a dangerous radical right ideology. People must remember this when discussing this subject. I’ve seen comments on many posts relating to politicians and drug use with an inherently negative stance on drugs, particularly with Musk, which is my reason for tapping the sign. The articles themselves often have an anti-drug bias, and I feel that’s showing itself here a little.
Keep discourse in good faith.
Lobotomies also are effective in the short and long term for stopping suicide.
I think it’s perfectly fine to push back on drugs and procedures when we are currently only in the present to excuse it away as effective enough to get the outcomes we want.
It does not mean they are safe or should be promoted.
If it’s legitimately harming brain chemistry and has a similar effect to long term brain damage why is it OK other than because it accomplished a goal of getting other people to mumble that they can’t kill themselves and its seen as a victory.
Cautionary discourse and open about the possible negatives are how we move forward.
Demanding only positive and happy conversation around drug use is also radical and dangerous.
Don’t pretend it’s bad faith when it’s just against your own interests and beliefs.
Comparing an accepted prescription drug to a surgery that involves literally physically and permanently disfiguring the brain is nothing short of outrageous.
You are claiming I am openly portraying drugs as entirely safe to use for any purpose, which is a great insult to me and the people I am trying to help. This is a ludicrously irrational argument, and I suggest you delete your comment before you make a fool of yourself.
A lobotomy was a recognized and approved medical procedure. Within a few years in the late 1940s 10s of thousands of procedures were done.
The person who discovered the procedure won a Nobel prize for Medicine for how it helped people with psychosis.
How is it not related?
Because this is a chemical that alters brain chemistry instead?
Would you prefer I state electroshock therapy? Insulin shock? Malarial?
Those last 2 are using compounds instead of physical means.
My point stands that just because it is used in the medical field does not being and end the argument of safety and efficiency. Opiods are considered safe until you have to stop taking them and now we are pushing against the prescription and use of them.
You clearly have a specific predetermined opinion on the matter that makes you insulary from having to accept that their are differing opinions on the matter.
Your threat to my appearance does not diminsh my statement it just proves your bias.
Being open towards the use of drugs does not mean they are free of criticism and should not be used sparingly as the world may yet change on its opionion of the costs of their use yet.
This is not to say people can not take what helps but helping is not always good or an answer long term.
1.618033989…
You’ve chosen… poorly.
I don’t even know why I’m bothering typing this. It won’t change your opinion. You are a troll, and I’m speaking to a phantom. I haven’t even heard of some of these medical procedures, but whatever. Fine. School day it is, then.
This is true. Combined with how slavery was only just recently abolished, and segregation is still the norm, it goes to show how incredibly innovative the United States was throughout its history.
I don’t know, why is vitamin B12 not related? I just discovered that large doses treat dissociation.
Yes.
No, I’d prefer you state something relevant. Speaking of, here’s the two other operations mentioned in the history section of the lobotomy Wikipedia page that you looked at, that involve a compound.
Insulin. Insulin. That is a fucking hormone. Insulin is a hormone. Granted, that is a compound, and comparing a hormone to a narcotic is insane, but fine. At least we aren’t slandering HRT because of insulin shock.
Here’s one I’ve definitely never heard of. A quick read reveals it’s the process of using plasmodium to cause malaria, which causes a rise in body temperature, which then, in turn, mitigates other diseases. The malaria is then given treatment. I’ve never heard of something so stupid in all my years, but I’m still trying to find the compound invo–no. No, that’s impossible. The compound involved isn’t…
FUCKING EUKARYOTES!?
Since I’ve already lost so many brain cells, why not add some gasoline to the mix? Let me go sniff some real quick…done.
Objection–you do not have a point, you have a mouth.
Strawman.
Opiods [sic] is a weird way to spell benzodiazepines. Now, I’ve already torn your incorrect “opinion” to shreds, and now I’m literally giving you an argument against me, over a point that was never made.
That implies I was never anti-drug. I was. I supported banning all of them, and incarcerating all who ever used them. I was a Trump supporter. I vocally defended the cop that murdered George Floyd, blaming the fentanyl as everyone did. Point is, my mind has already changed, and what you’re doing is actually trying to unchange my mind.
The only one with a predetermined opinion on the matter is you, you Nixonite.
My parents said the same thing when I warned them that voting for Trump was a stupid idea. Your strawman arguments don’t diminsh [sic] my statement, it only proves your bias.
I still don’t know why this is being said, because I never said drugs are free of criticism. You are replying to a thread that is literally me replying to a comment mentioning ketamine’s dangers with frequent use, saying “correct”. What was that about bias, again?
This is your first correct statement. Right at the end, too! A broken clock is right once a day. I use 24-hour time, sorry. Short end of the stick, sometimes.
All in all, I have had more intelligent debates on Reddit. I highly recommend you work for the Trump administration, they could use your mindset, conflating rationality and brazen emotional-esque response. And, like I said before:
Delete your comment, before you make a (further) fool of yourself.