Hitler's Drug Addiction

"At the end, when he was already hiding in his wet and dark Fuhrerbunker and his beloved Eukodal was no longer available, the dictator was in a frail state."

But the statement "the first in 1943, when the Americans landed in Sicilia" gives us the begin date: 10th of July 1943, only 660 days before the famous suicide.

(The only real issue with "synthetic heroin" is when people cut heroin or other drugs with more powerful ones, like fentanyl, leading to overdoses. Once again, the illegality introduces these dangers.)

Same people probably don't know that Methamphetamine (the evil devil drug) is Schedule II and legally available to be prescribed in the US. And that speed is amphetamines, very similar to meth, and prescribed to 6 yr olds. Or that when your 7-yr-old gets a small surgery, they likely hit her with fentanyl (much, much, stronger than Heroin).

It's just throwing around words to scare and promote ignorance and fear of actual science/medicine.

But heroin was synthesized in 19th century in England and oxycodone in 20th century in Germany, therefore it can't be considered "pre-" heroin, at least not globally. But maybe heroin wasn't common in Germany and therefore oxycodone was pre- in Germany?

From the article: “After World War II, the Americans who captured Morell translated the word ‘Eukodal’ as ‘Enkodal.’ They thought it was a legitimate medical treatment and dosage.”

It's really not hard to believe. The current form of drug treaties and opinions is a distinctly post WWII phenomenon.

I believe the US military still offers drugs to its soldiers, but they are very strictly regulated and presumably are more rationally provisioned. War can be very mentally and physically stressful, and drugs tend to be the best short term option to ameliorate this stress and keep the machine running.

Nothing like meth or speed, though. Terrible for soldiers. I believe there is a high association between meth use and vulnerability to mental trauma.

I have never experienced this. Marijuana can exacerbate existing schizophrenia or expose it. If you hear voices after consuming it, I would talk to a doctor. It can be a quite strong drug, but it does not typically cause clear, audial hallucinations. (I would more describe it as distorting and/or decomposing the audio perception, kind of like the visuals you get from lsd. Pretty, but certainly not meaningful by itself.)

But, I've watched someone go through a psychotic breakdown when smoking weed the first time. They were not aware of their family history of schizophrenia until after that happened and they asked around. Be careful. :)

"There is no doubt about Hitler’s guilt; he planned the mass murder of six million people well before he began using drugs. The “total rush,” the loss of reality and megalomania have always been his state of mind"

The world was so close to nuclear annihilation, and JFK was on a half dozen drugs, including steroids, antipsychotics, and amphetamines, from the doctor the secret service called "Dr. Feelgood."

It's fascinating what presidents could get away with pre-Lewinsky.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/08/the-medi...

The problem comes in when you want to maintain the level of awesome ... and can't. That's when the detrimental side effects hit.

You can be quite a high functioning, normal member of society with a drug habit. As long as you can pay for it, and as long as it doesn't interfere in the aspects of your life you don't want it to, one can make a rational case for continuing drug use.

Think about coffee. It's great. It makes you feel great. It's socially acceptable. It's also highly addictive, and the withdrawal symptoms can be nightmarish for some people. But it's not viewed as a bad drug.

Drug use is illegal and is taboo. Many people who take drugs are not going to talk to you about it.

You won't have seen a lot of drug use. You'll only have seen the worse end of drug use.

You have seen plenty of people who can have a few alcoholic drinks a week? That's drug use that doesn't end in wreckage and death, even though alcohol is very harmful and very addictive. (And physically addictive, not just psychologically addictive.)

Drugs definitely have their role in the world. People are prescribed amphetamines daily to function better. However, as with anything that changes how you perceive the world, there are always new chances to hurt yourself. My best advice is not to view drugs as an end themselves, but a means to reach a mental state.

The "safe performance pill" is called adderall. I would not call it very relaxing, though, or calming; it merely makes reward feedback much, much stronger.

Alternatively, there is acid, which is its own thing. Do your research heavily with that, but I experience it as very relaxing and clarifying. It is also extremely hard to abuse in a way that would cause "wreckage and death".

1. What is the lesson to be learned?

I believe that the lesson to be learned isn't that drug use makes you better or worse. It's that people of all walks of life abuse drugs. Even people who are very successful. Despite the immense power of drugs. It is still the person, not the drug that determiness a person's life. Aaron Sorkin is a crack head. He's starring in that new Steve Jobs film, but has also worked on such successes as West Wing and The Social Network. Does crack make you successful? No.

2. All I've seen in drug users is wreckage and death. Maybe I haven't seen the whole picture.

Drug use is rampant in the United States. It's just hidden or is not considered drug use because a prescription is involved. Remember how out in the open alcoholism used to be? (Think Mad Men. Or talk to a grandparent about how things used to be.) Alcoholism didn't just go away. People just started keeping it to themselves.

3. Is there an upside to drug use? If there was a safe performance pill maybe I would try it.

Amephatimes, Speed, Aderall. All the same drug. All abused across the country by college kids. I really don't know what the long term dangers of amphetamines are. Not only college kids are abusing them, that's just where it's most obvious. People use them as smart pills. They apparently allow you to focus on working and studying for hours.

In closing, I think being smart and talented can also come with sadness and other mental issues. Sometimes drug use is a way for talented people to self-medicate. The talent and potential is still there. It's comes down to the individual whether drug use will inhibit them from their goals.

Many drugs have an impact on your mental state.

I personally suspect that if someone has an addiction they cannot break, there is probably some underlying problem fueling it, possibly a physical health issue. So saying drug use is associated with wreckage and death....cancer leads to drug use and wreckage and death. But sometimes, cancer leads to drug use that averts death, though at a cost.

Thus, you get somebody like Willie Nelson who is essentially a life-long pot head where his drug use/abuse didn't get in the way of his work; Willie has also noted that Waylon Jennings was fond of speed, but that Willie didn't like the stuff. Going down the list of accomplished writers yields a treasure trove of alcoholics not frequently remembered for the wreckage they made of their lives (F. Scott Fitzgerald, O. Henry, Hemmingway).

As a society in the US, the unfortunate moralistic approach to addiction as a personal failure rather than a physiological concern holds back those who could likely benefit from certain substances but never come into contact with them. Also of note, it would seem a certain percentage of the US population simply has an addictive compsition:

http://cdn.thewire.com/img/upload/2012/10/12/drug-spending-v...

But I mean the guy is, literally, Hitler.

    If a story has had significant attention in the last year
    or so, we kill reposts as duplicates. If not, a small
    number of reposts is ok.