Thanks guys, one issue I have with the study though is the use of the term disease, I believe we really need look at why mental disorders have such a negative stigma that we resort to calling something like addiction a disease when it is not. Mental disorders should carry the same weight as any disease in the nature of seriousness they present. We shouldn't have to rebrand something so it's more palatable to the masses. Most addicts have some type of diagnosis that fuels the addiction. I hate when we simplify something because in my opinion addictions are symptoms of underlying mental problem.
Thanks for the link adam2014. From what I could gather it appears that a group of experts, though I could not find out who all was apart of it, sat in a room and graded each drug on a scale of harm in several areas. Now I have no access to any of their criteria they used and I couldn't find any evidence they based their conclusions on, not that they didn't, I just couldn't find it. There is a strong likelihood of confirmation bias due to how they came up with the grades. Without knowing what constitutes harm I have no way to truly understand the graph. If its out there I would be more than happy to look at it.
Quick question what is Butane, are they referring to THC concentrates or huffing?
On another I absolutely agree with the point they were trying to make, the way we classify drugs isn't based on science and makes very little sense.
Stop baiting like a troll and add something constructive to the conversation, this "study" doesn't explain anything, did you not graduate from high school, do you know nothing about methodology? Stop being and child, this mindless blathering on your part hurts my brain. If you have access to the criteria, how what was valued and how they got there then post it here, that would atleast be helpful.
Proper assessment of the harms caused by the misuse of drugs can inform policy makers in health, policing, and social care. We aimed to apply multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) modelling to a range of drug harms in the UK.
Members of the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs, including two invited specialists, met in a 1-day interactive workshop to score 20 drugs on 16 criteria: nine related to the harms that a drug produces in the individual and seven to the harms to others. Drugs were scored out of 100 points, and the criteria were weighted to indicate their relative importance.
MCDA modelling showed that heroin, crack cocaine, and metamfetamine were the most harmful drugs to individuals (part scores 34, 37, and 32, respectively), whereas alcohol, heroin, and crack cocaine were the most harmful to others (46, 21, and 17, respectively). Overall, alcohol was the most harmful drug (overall harm score 72), with heroin (55) and crack cocaine (54) in second and third places.
These findings lend support to previous work assessing drug harms, and show how the improved scoring and weighting approach of MCDA increases the differentiation between the most and least harmful drugs. However, the findings correlate poorly with present UK drug classification, which is not based simply on considerations of harm.
Centre for Crime and Justice Studies (UK).
Armchair is one of most respected and well informed posters on here. He doesnt post or comment very often, but when he does everyone except you listens. You were called names, because you are very close minded, and rarely take anyone else's opinions, theories, and factual information, without adding your "there is no grey area, open and enlighten your mind bullshit." I think you do post some interesting posts here and there, which include good debates and discussions. But overall, not only myself, most people here think you are a straight up troll and might I say Idiot. Let people discuss certain topics themselves, and if you don't have anything to add to the topic, you don't need to contribute. Just my thoughts. Take or Leave it.