Hacker News Reader

Comment by jmzachary | Hacker News Reader

Then let scientists take whatever drugs they want. Pot, heroin, cocaine, PCP, LSD, peyote, mushrooms, Vicodin, whatever. Taking prescribed medication for a use other than for which it was prescribed is illegal. So, by your logic, what's the difference?

The untold story is why do scientists feel the need to take medication to (temporarily) enhance their cognitive capabilities. I conjecture it is oversupply of them competing for fewer dollars and fame-producing discoveries, and/or most of them really aren't that smart to begin with (despite passing tests to get advanced degrees).

View on HN

I agree. We should allow scientists to take whatever drugs they want. Let's add everyone else, for that matter. (I think the steroid question is idiotic, especially as supplementation has become safer.)

Here's another secret. many professional musicians use beta blockers to steady their hands. They're beating out someone who has superior genetics! Pasta-forbid!

It's wetware hacking, and it works. (I'll admit to trying modafinil and realizing it wasn't for me -- never tried ritalin/adderall though.)

So, anyone can take any drug they want, but steroids are idiotic? Why? Are you discriminating between scientists and non-scientist bodybuilders? Or are you singling out steroids as unacceptable and anything else as acceptable?

It's not "wetware hacking" (whatever that means, but it sounds cool). It's biochemistry, and it doesn't always work.

The difference between this and the athletic thing is that it gives athletes an unfair advantage in competitions, whereas science is not primarily competitive.

I was just looking through the archive and saw this. What I meant was that the idea of steroids as an illegal substance was idiotic. The dangers of steroids are overstated with the newer generation of steroids in moderate doses (IE - below ronnie coleman levels.) Controlling insulin levels personally scares me, but I don't consider that as something to make illegal either.

My perspective is that people should have the right to use these chemicals on their bodies as they see fit. Now, if a private company wants to limit those working for their companies from ingesting such chemicals, I agree that it should be their option. (The NFL should be allow to test for steroids, for example.) I also agree that these chemicals should be limited to those whose bodies have matured.

However, I think it's idiotic to control what an adult does with his or her body if it doesn't affect another individual.

It's pretty close to the intended, prescribed use. If you can't focus on your work to the extent that allows you to compete with your peer group, you get prescribed Ritalin/Adderall.

Slavery was illegal too: so by your logic, to free a slave was to abuse him.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com