Iron
-
I've spent a time homeless.
Did my best to stay as far away from all that as best as possible, but uh... nah, it is mainly smoked.
Sure, you can try some other method, you're a lot more likely to OD, get an infection that never heals and goes gangrene... but you can try...
Unless your definition of 'meth' is so broad that it also includes like, taking adderol as prescribed... yeah, most people smoke meth.
Snorting and IV is just way, way too fucking dangerous given how anything could be cut with god knows how much of what.
Saw people find that out the hard way... still got PTSD from doing my best as basically the only homeless person at the shelter/encampment that knew how to do any real level of first aid.
Snorting would be the other I've generally seen, nobody wants to IV that shit though.
You could also eat it. No methhead does, but they could
-
They are not forced to take it, they can just not take the meth and have children.
I would really like your opinion on children being "forced" to have MMR vaccination in order to attend pre-school? Do you think it's immoral to take that bodily autonomy away in order to make it safer for all the rest of the children?
no, because MMR vaccines have been proven to be safe, and you are informed that your child must be vaccinated to go school; it’s not like the kid is vaccinated against their knowledge once they get there
birth control pills can have side effects, sometimes very detrimental, and in this hypothetical scenario they’re hidden in the meth, so you don’t even know it’s there
-
Snorting would be the other I've generally seen, nobody wants to IV that shit though.
You could also eat it. No methhead does, but they could
I tried to dissuade a strung out guy from crushing it, mixing it with some liquid, and then shooting it up.
He died, despite my best attempts both pre and post OD.
-
It's always lovely to be reminded that eugenics remains a popular idea so long as you don't call it that.
We already practice eugenics. Its a term that covers a lot of things. There's a line between good eugenics and bad eugenics. I'd say secretly bputting birth control in drugs to control population is bad eugenics.
-
am i reading too much into a shitpost or is this essentially saying "sterilize drug users"
I disagree with the eugenics involved here. but the real solution is free healthcare with accessible birth control.
-
Your interpretation presupposes malice and lack of transparency.
Almost anything can be made to look really bad with that attitude.
malice is irrelevant
-
This is only because the word "eugenics" has been made a bad word because people assume that anything called "eugenics" must be similar to the horrible things the Nazis did. It's the non-central fallacy -- such things are eugenics only in the same way that Martin Luther king is technically a criminal (he did violate the law by protesting) or abortion is murder (a "human being" does "die").
Polygenic scoring on embryos is legal and eminently doable if you're wealthy enough to afford it; it's a very effective way to eliminate the risk of debilitating genetic diseases like Down's Syndrome, and can greatly reduce the risk of things like Alzheimer's or some types of cancer. It also can improve the IQ of your child by up to ~8 points or so, which correlates (plausibly causally) with higher education and income in life. So basically, it's an effective way to help make your child more privileged. Right now it's only affordable by the very wealthy though, but perhaps in ten years it will be very cheap.
Notice though that it's unrelated to race pseudoscience and murder, even though race pseudoscientists and nazis like to talk about genetics and IQ.
jsomae, do you want Gattaca ? Because that’s how you get Gattaca !
And next for sale we have this worker with very small hands, through multiple generation of human breeding we have developped this fine pure bred specimen perfectly adapted to reaching into tight spaces and machinery, its mind is docile and obedient and doesn't get spooked easily by the loud sound of working high speed hydraulic presses. Very agile with tools and can read schematics but no artistic ability nor speech as a side effect of the genetic modification, on the plus side, they cannot form unions.
-
This is only because the word "eugenics" has been made a bad word because people assume that anything called "eugenics" must be similar to the horrible things the Nazis did. It's the non-central fallacy -- such things are eugenics only in the same way that Martin Luther king is technically a criminal (he did violate the law by protesting) or abortion is murder (a "human being" does "die").
Polygenic scoring on embryos is legal and eminently doable if you're wealthy enough to afford it; it's a very effective way to eliminate the risk of debilitating genetic diseases like Down's Syndrome, and can greatly reduce the risk of things like Alzheimer's or some types of cancer. It also can improve the IQ of your child by up to ~8 points or so, which correlates (plausibly causally) with higher education and income in life. So basically, it's an effective way to help make your child more privileged. Right now it's only affordable by the very wealthy though, but perhaps in ten years it will be very cheap.
Notice though that it's unrelated to race pseudoscience and murder, even though race pseudoscientists and nazis like to talk about genetics and IQ.
There are other hazards and i don't trust this society to deal with any of them in healthy ways.
-
I disagree with the eugenics involved here. but the real solution is free healthcare with accessible birth control.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the idea of eugenics is that someone controls who can re-produce. Using drugs is a personal choice, and there are already drugs that screws up your re-production system.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the idea of eugenics is that someone controls who can re-produce. Using drugs is a personal choice, and there are already drugs that screws up your re-production system.
it is eugenicsy if people in power arbitrarily decide that all drug (only those that poor people use) users shouldn't breed.
I do think that people in objectively shitty conditions should wait to get better before having children. but straight up sneaking birth control in their drugs? that's eugenics,.give poor people access to free healthcare? that's better.
-
jsomae, do you want Gattaca ? Because that’s how you get Gattaca !
And next for sale we have this worker with very small hands, through multiple generation of human breeding we have developped this fine pure bred specimen perfectly adapted to reaching into tight spaces and machinery, its mind is docile and obedient and doesn't get spooked easily by the loud sound of working high speed hydraulic presses. Very agile with tools and can read schematics but no artistic ability nor speech as a side effect of the genetic modification, on the plus side, they cannot form unions.
Imagine if we got genetic engineering back when everybody inherited their parent's job. People named Smith would look like dwarves.
-
We already practice eugenics. Its a term that covers a lot of things. There's a line between good eugenics and bad eugenics. I'd say secretly bputting birth control in drugs to control population is bad eugenics.
This isn't an ethnic group or permanent, though. I think the bigger ethical issue is that birth control can have dangerous side effects.
-
Rendering people infertile (even temporarily) without their informed consent is unethical. Doing it to a class of people due to your perception that people like them shouldn’t breed is eugenics. This would qualify. The black socks thing probably would too, but it sounds ridiculous because that’s a class of people nobody would realistically target for elimination from the breeding pool.
Offering free birth control to drug users- fine! Dosing them without their consent- no bueno.
What about just telling them that the meth is laced with birth control now?
-
What about just telling them that the meth is laced with birth control now?
Seems more dangerous and less feasible than just offering free birth control. Handing out meth to addicts is a bad idea, even if it’s laced with something beneficial. Most women take b.c. willingly, no need to mix them together to coerce them.
-
It's always lovely to be reminded that eugenics remains a popular idea so long as you don't call it that.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Looks like it’s time to reinvent the Torment Nexus from famed science fiction novel “Don’t Invent The Torment Nexus”. Maybe it will go well this time!
-
"no no you see, in this case, eugenics is justified!"
i don’t care. it’s still wrong.
Eugenics would be doing this because you believe drug users have "inferior" genetics which shouldn't be allowed to propagate through the population, but this clearly isn't how the joke is meant. You get to have children once you're off the meth, thank you.
-
no, because MMR vaccines have been proven to be safe, and you are informed that your child must be vaccinated to go school; it’s not like the kid is vaccinated against their knowledge once they get there
birth control pills can have side effects, sometimes very detrimental, and in this hypothetical scenario they’re hidden in the meth, so you don’t even know it’s there
Who says they are hidden? Other than your imagination
-
it is eugenicsy if people in power arbitrarily decide that all drug (only those that poor people use) users shouldn't breed.
I do think that people in objectively shitty conditions should wait to get better before having children. but straight up sneaking birth control in their drugs? that's eugenics,.give poor people access to free healthcare? that's better.
But the post does not say "sneakily". In fact, this could be a great anti-drug campaign, choose between having kids or drugs. Post also said meth, which makes me imply hard drugs only, not weed
-
no, because MMR vaccines have been proven to be safe, and you are informed that your child must be vaccinated to go school; it’s not like the kid is vaccinated against their knowledge once they get there
birth control pills can have side effects, sometimes very detrimental, and in this hypothetical scenario they’re hidden in the meth, so you don’t even know it’s there
Once again, the hypothetical that it's hidden, is only in your head, that sign doesn't say "hide birth control in meth", it's also fucking unrealistic, if it were to happen the only way it happens if it's legalized, controlled meth that has birth control added to it, or rather it could be that the users can get meth as long as they also take the birth control when they get the meth.
Also your worry about birthcontrol side effects with fucking meth users is goddamn laughable.
It's like going back to ww2 and telling the soldiers not to smoke because it's bad for their health, like the fucking bullets and explosives are way more detrimental to their health, don't you think?
-
Rendering people infertile (even temporarily) without their informed consent is unethical. Doing it to a class of people due to your perception that people like them shouldn’t breed is eugenics. This would qualify. The black socks thing probably would too, but it sounds ridiculous because that’s a class of people nobody would realistically target for elimination from the breeding pool.
Offering free birth control to drug users- fine! Dosing them without their consent- no bueno.
Pretty sure that as of recent years, meth is often mixed with fentanyl without being disclosed to a user or probably even a dealer.
But it also funny to see how people say that this should be done yet they somehow forget that (allegedly) it is not government that sells drugs but drug cartels that do. I bet they wouldn't mix birth control into drugs at all. Why would they? That in best case for them does nothing for a higher price of production, and in worst case it will deter customers. Shit's never going to happen.
