Hacker News Reader

> But I don't understand how people can be so pro marijuana on one hand, and so anti-opiates on the other. It's pain. It's not noble to suffer needlessly.

Weed is not addictive, or even if it is in some people, to nowhere near the same level as opiates. It's also not responsible for thousands of overdose cases per year. It seems to me that THC pills would be better for pain management in these situations than opiate pills.

I also don't think you have much personal experience people who have been addicted to opiates. I have. It's not pretty. It's certainly worse than people who are merely potheads. The potheads I knew, when their source dried up or they ran out of money, were irritated, but were otherwise whole, and just waited until they could get their hands on more weed again. People addicted to opiates suffer severe withdrawal, and will do anything to get more pills. They can't simply stop using for a week.

Weed is not physically addictive like opiates are, but people do become psychologically dependent upon it to avoid dealing with stress and anxiety in healthier ways. And it can become difficult to stop if you haven't resolved the underlying problems that you're treating with it.

Oh yes, just like chocolate then.

> I also don't think you have much personal experience people who have been addicted to opiates.

I said as much. Which is a good enough reason to be suspicious of prohibition for me.

And to be clear, I'd find it very difficult to believe anyone gets a two week supply of opiates after surgery and goes all Reefer Madness after following the directions on the prescription. You're talking about people who abuse the drug. Most people who drink don't become alcoholics.

Now maybe you also want to abolish alcohol, in that case I just don't see any common ground.

I've tried pot for a migraine before and it only made me more nauseous. I'd be willing to try it for other types of pain but it certainly wouldn't be my first choice. I find the side effects mostly unpleasant.

I find opiates far more effective at relieving pain (tooth, back, eye pain after PRK surgery, mouth surgery after a car accident), with the fewest side effects. (I've only had light nausea once.) Running out of medication at the end of a course is a non-issue (I actually almost never finish it), and I notice lower levels of impairment than even a single beer.

But I don't abuse it. I take the larger dosage (500 vs 325? I forget exactly), in a maximum of 4 hour intervals (IIRC), and usually whatever the reason for taking them has subsided to the point ibuprofen alone works fine after about 48-hours.

And you would suggest that should end, without a viable alternative, because some other people abuse it? That seems like a very puritanical position to me.

You're arguing against a strawman. I'm not in favor of banning opioids and I don't know where you even got that impression from.

I assumed you were replying to my comment you quoted. Sounds like we misunderstood each other.

Other way around. You replied to me and turned it into a different topic.

> You're talking about people who abuse the drug. Most people who drink don't become alcoholics

The article is specifically about the effects of withdrawal when a 12 hour dose doesn't last 12 hours - when people are taking it by the prescribed schedule.

Exactly. The article rambles a bit, but the primary point is that when the effects wear off before the 12 hour interval but the patient keeps taking the drug as expected, it causes a cycle of pain and relief, which fosters addiction.

> But I don't understand how people can be so pro marijuana on one hand, and so anti-opiates on the other.

It's probably the hundreds of thousands of dead people from opiate overdoses vs the 0 dead people from marijuana overdose.

> I would guess a majority of adults in the US have had Vicodin or similar and I don't know anyone personally who ever got addicted.

You almost certainly know someone who has been addicted, you just didn't know. It is shockingly common.

Is there a higher rate of opioid addiction amongst opioid users than marijuana addiction amongst marijuana users?

I can't comment on that, but I'd be confident in saying the rate of death is higher~

One of these is not like the other, opioids cause a clinical chemical dependency very quickly (as mentioned by the article, if you 12 hour dose doesn't last the full 12 hours) while the [chemical dependency of marijuana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_use_disorder) is much more subtle.

It's not like I've never taken it.

Like I said, feels very hyperbolic.

It's like you're suggesting marijuana has no negative downsides at all when millions of people risk their freedom on a routine basis to consume it. Physical/physiological, doesn't make much difference when you're sitting in a cell and your family's financial future is in jeopardy. And I do know some people like that. It is shockingly common.

I don't think drug users in general should be in jail. Even if I think in general people would be better off without them outside of a medical reason.

When you start restricting people's freedom because you think you know what's best for them, and inflict needless suffering in the process, I have a hard time telling you apart from any other prohibitionist.

My point, which mirrored the point of the post to which I responded, wasn't that Vicodin wasn't useful in some cases. It was that it was overprescribed relative to the amount of pain of the particular procedure.

I find this isn't true at all. Especially after the new rules on it a couple years ago. What used to be routine now is looked at with suspicion IME.

And if you have any pain at all after a medical procedure, I see no good reason responsible adults need to suffer at all if there's an inexpensive, effective, safe treatment for the vast majority of them.

You might want to have a look at the first couple of graphs here: https://www.drugabuse.gov/related-topics/trends-statistics/o...

I'm not saying we should ban opioids. I have found them useful on occasion too. But to suggest there's no problem with people abusing them is not a helpful stance either.

I don't mean to suggest people abusing them isn't something to address. I just don't think the answer is to make it difficult or inconvenient for people who don't have that issue.

I suppose in the same way I think having to pick up Sudafed from the pharmacy these days is silly.

I'm not a libertarian by any stretch but for me this is a sort of sacrificing freedom for security issue. Assumption of guilt and pre-crime is bad and I don't see any reason why people should be forced to suffer needlessly after a medical procedure, even if it's only temporary, and even if someone else found the pain tolerable.

But I think I've beat this horse to death. ;-)