How does the World view America these days?

In no way are your white junkie children to blame for the state's drug problem. 

Edited August 29, 2016 by doublename

When I think of the average American I think of LePage

^^ Or, in general, along with the semi-retarded junkies that I've encountered from Maine -- the war on drugs

 

Just because Shifty-McSmoothie is taking the risk to make his money off an obviously thriving marketplace, doesn't make them the end-all to blame for the problem itself. If anything, they're 'American' as fuck -- free market, lots of profit to be made and continuous demand. Drug dealers are some of the smartest entrepreneurs I've seen... it just so happens they happen to not be the greatest individuals in the world because of the massive stigma and risk they take to make their dollar.  

 

I'm not condoning heroin dealers, but it's absolutely piss-poor for this fat hunk of ivory turd to even put the blame on a race of people for drugs. He turns the knob to 11 by then painting the dealers as defilers because they touched some pure-white-snowbunny in his weird stupid fantasies. Fuckin' over the top racist bullshit is exactly what that is. 

 

How in the fuck do people elect these ass-clowns?

 

edit-- that was in response to doublename

Edited August 29, 2016 by Audioblysk

  On 8/29/2016 at 7:47 PM, LimpyLoo said:

When I think of the average American I think of LePage

I dunno about average, but definitely representative of a significant portion of Americans. (10-20%, if i was blindly guessing at a number)

  On 8/29/2016 at 8:10 PM, Audioblysk said:

^^ Or, in general, along with the semi-retarded junkies that I've encountered from Maine -- the war on drugs

 

Just because Shifty-McSmoothie is taking the risk to make his money off an obviously thriving marketplace, doesn't make them the end-all to blame for the problem itself. If anything, they're 'American' as fuck -- free market, lots of profit to be made and continuous demand. Drug dealers are some of the smartest entrepreneurs I've seen... it just so happens they happen to not be the greatest individuals in the world because of the massive stigma and risk they take to make their dollar.

 

I'm not condoning heroin dealers, but it's absolutely piss-poor for this fat hunk of ivory turd to even put the blame on a race of people for drugs. He turns the knob to 11 by then painting the dealers as defilers because they touched some pure-white-snowbunny in his weird stupid fantasies. Fuckin' over the top racist bullshit is exactly what that is.

 

How in the fuck do people elect these ass-clowns?

 

edit-- that was in response to doublename

I didn't know ths at the time, but apparently LePage won because of 3rd party votes....he only had ~30% of votes...which is encouraging in a way

that was the first time he ran, he actually won comfortably the 2nd time.

Oh weird I didn't know that

^^^ that's sabo, the los angeles based upstart

 

https://youtu.be/_5jnn1AIt7Q

The vitriol in the election aside, one of my coworkers that was born in I think Connecticut actually gave me an interesting comparison to a few different aspects in Canada and the states (Healthcare isn't as prioritized in the U.S. as it is in Canada, the quality of food is better in the U.S. because of the FDA, et cetera). Kind of made me think differently about things for maybe two seconds before I stepped back into my cynical shell and started to become full of blind bias once again.

 

 

 

  On 8/30/2016 at 2:14 AM, Nebraska said:

https://youtu.be/_5jnn1AIt7Q

 

US pharmaceutical ads are mental, I occasionally catch them when watching a US stream of a football game. undoubtedly a significant factor in the overprescription of drugs americans suffer from. I take a couple of ibuprofen a year maybe, an occasional puff on an asthma inhaler in hay-fever season (a handful of anti-histamines a year as well). but that's it, and I'm approaching 40. how many americans can say the same? especially worrying for those under 30, and seriously troubling for kids who's brains aren't even finished growing yet.

  On 8/30/2016 at 2:42 AM, caze said:

 

  On 8/30/2016 at 2:14 AM, Nebraska said:

https://youtu.be/_5jnn1AIt7Q

 

US pharmaceutical ads are mental, I occasionally catch them when watching a US stream of a football game. undoubtedly a significant factor in the overprescription of drugs americans suffer from. I take a couple of ibuprofen a year maybe, an occasional puff on an asthma inhaler in hay-fever season (a handful of anti-histamines a year as well). but that's it, and I'm approaching 40. how many americans can say the same? especially worrying for those under 30, and seriously troubling for kids who's brains aren't even finished growing yet.

 

 

NSAID's are the worst for you of the OTC pain medications. You should avoid them.

 

https://www.ucdavis.edu/news/whats-behind-heartbreaking-risk-anti-inflammatory-drugs

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3888349/#b36-vhrm-10-025

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/10/health/fda-painkillers/

 

Antihistamines: 

 

Not conclusive but worrisome

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-30988643

I usually don't take anything for pain, maybe once a year I'll have a hangover induced headache so bad it requires a couple of ibuprofen, usually works a treat (the only correct solution to this is not to drink so much in the first place).

 

I used to suffer from terrible hay-fever (which also caused asthma) when I was younger, antihistamines did the trick. Very rarely suffer now, my immune system is probably just a lot less sensitive than it once was.

 

There's a million studies claiming to point to the causes of numerous diseases and maladies (alzheimer's in particular has a lot of research money thrown at it, and thus a lot of potential causes), I've noticed you put far too much stock in speculative research in the past. The majority of all these studies fail to prove any link in the long term, it's very easy to find a correlation if you look hard enough.

Edited August 30, 2016 by caze

...also, for that study: "The researchers only looked at older people and found the increased risk appeared when people took drugs every day for three years or more."

Why would you take something that has a correlated risk when there are better options?

For the same reason you leave your apartment, when staying inside is much much safer:

 

Risk is only half the issue

risk is most highly correlated with dosage, taking a handful of ibuprofen/antihistamines every year isn't likely to do anyone any harm. 

 

in fact dose response is almost universally nonlinear (unless a substance bioaccumulates or does damage at very low rates and at a rate greater than any ability of the body to repair that damage, e.g. coeliac disease), so even with proven harmful effects of certain substances, below some given limit there's usually no harm, and in many cases, the opposite, below a limit there's often benefits (see ionising radiation, allergen immunotherapy, vaccines, oxygen).

 

by and large people should let their bodies fix themselves, that's what they've evolved to do, very well for the most part. if you occasionally need to take something that's proven to be effective there's really little reason not to, life's to short to deal with that bulshit.

 

with chronic conditions things get more complicated, and there's good reason to avoid many over-prescribed drugs which have very poor evidence for their efficacy (e.g. SSRIs, most of which are no better than controls in long term studies), and to always use the precautionary principle where possible (look for subtractive cures, lifestyle changes, etc. before falling back on drugs/surgery as a last resort - this is how most doctors in the western world are trained to operate btw, though no doubt there are many bad doctors).

Edited August 30, 2016 by caze

  On 8/30/2016 at 4:15 AM, caze said:

risk is most highly correlated with dosage, taking a handful of ibuprofen/antihistamines every year isn't likely to do anyone any harm. 

 

in fact dose response is almost universally nonlinear (unless a substance bioaccumulates or does damage at very low rates and at a rate greater than any ability of the body to repair that damage, e.g. coeliac disease), so even with proven harmful effects of certain substances, below some given limit there's usually no harm, and in many cases, the opposite, below a limit there's often benefits (see ionising radiation, allergen immunotherapy, vaccines, oxygen).

 

by and large people should let their bodies fix themselves, that's what they've evolved to do, very well for the most part. if you occasionally need to take something that's proven to be effective there's really little reason not to, life's to short to deal with that bulshit.

 

with chronic conditions things get more complicated, and there's good reason to avoid many over-prescribed drugs which have very poor evidence for their efficacy (e.g. SSRIs, most of which are no better than controls in long term studies), and to always use the precautionary principle where possible (look for subtractive cures, lifestyle changes, etc. before falling back on drugs/surgery as a last resort - this is how most doctors in the western world are trained to operate btw, though no doubt there are many bad doctors).

 

I don't want to get in a long debate about this in this thread. 

 

there's better options than nsaid's for pain like aspirin

 

 

  On 8/30/2016 at 4:12 AM, LimpyLoo said:

For the same reason you leave your apartment, when staying inside is much much safer:

 

Risk is only half the issue

 

this is a false equivalency

 

my suggestion was simply that one could choose an option that was less dangerous but reached the same result

Yeah perhaps

That presumes of course that NSAIDS weren't chosen in the first place for the superiority of their effects versus other choices. We'd have to ask "op" about it.

p sure aids is bad for you

it's called "aids" though, might be helpful no?

lol

good observation usagi

saw this in a convenience store the other day, lol?