22 Mar 09
1 edit
A German researcher has found a gene linked to cocaine addiction - coke addicts were 25 per cent more likely to have the gene than those who do not use the drug.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/11/dna_cokeheads/
Why should other pressure groups have unfounded inalienable rights when drug users
are suffering all of the consequences of a genetic disposition?
22 Mar 09
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraDrug addiction has become one of the most serious problems in the world. It has been estimated that genetic factors contribute to 40%–60% of the vulnerability to drug addiction, and environmental factors provide the remainder
A possible correlation of 25% is hardly a genetic predisposition.
In any case, it's hardly news either that your personality is influenced by your genetic code.
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2174978
No it's not news but what I don't understand is why other abnormal behaviour which currently does not have any genetic markers and leads to the deaths of more people is readily accepted?
22 Mar 09
Originally posted by Thequ1ckWell, I guess people just think religion is important.
Drug addiction has become one of the most serious problems in the world. It has been estimated that genetic factors contribute to 40%–60% of the vulnerability to drug addiction, and environmental factors provide the remainder
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2174978
No it's not news but what I don't understand is why other abn ...[text shortened]... does not have any genetic markers and leads to the deaths of more people is readily accepted?
22 Mar 09
Originally posted by Thequ1ckWhy the fascination with "abnormal behaviour"?
Drug addiction has become one of the most serious problems in the world. It has been estimated that genetic factors contribute to 40%–60% of the vulnerability to drug addiction, and environmental factors provide the remainder
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2174978
No it's not news but what I don't understand is why other abn ...[text shortened]... does not have any genetic markers and leads to the deaths of more people is readily accepted?
22 Mar 09
Originally posted by Thequ1ckThat same argument has been used for alcoholics. Just because one has a predisposition for booze doesn't give one any more excuse to imbibe. The same can be said of coke-heads. There are alternatives to using cocaine (or booze or any other addiction). From personal experience, I can tell you that addiction is also an indicator of a lack of personal reponsibility, character, conscience, and in some cases a sociopathic disregard for other peoples' lives, i.e. drunk driving. Another answer to your question, cocaine abusers, and other abusers of illegal substances, DO have the inalienable right to treatment, but they also have the inalienable responsibility to seek help any way they can. Just because there is a 'supposed' gene which predisposes one to drug/alcohol abuse, it doesn't trump other predispoded genes to other diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, etc. People in this catagory must take care of their health in order to prevent the onset of disease. The same must be said for potential drug/alcohol addicts.
A German researcher has found a gene linked to cocaine addiction - coke addicts were 25 per cent more likely to have the gene than those who do not use the drug.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/11/dna_cokeheads/
Why should other pressure groups have unfounded inalienable rights when drug users
are suffering all of the consequences of a genetic disposition?
22 Mar 09
Drug use should be treated like a medical condition instead of a crime. Some pot smokers have very good character and are ethical, they just don't see the harm in smoking it. What harm are they doing sitting in their armchair eating too much every once and awhile?
People who smoke tobacco are more likely to do other drugs. Some people are predisposed to addiction. Depression could also be a factor many people ignore. A lot of people will say that the drugs came before the depression but it also works the other way around.
We should not kick people when they are down. It is best to help them rather than punish them for being unhappy.
22 Mar 09
2 edits
Originally posted by Metal BrainVery good Metal Brain, you're living up to your name.
Drug use should be treated like a medical condition instead of a crime. Some pot smokers have very good character and are ethical, they just don't see the harm in smoking it. What harm are they doing sitting in their armchair eating too much every once and awhile?
People who smoke tobacco are more likely to do other drugs. Some people are predisposed ...[text shortened]... k people when they are down. It is best to help them rather than punish them for being unhappy.
But please tell me, how is accepting homosexual acts, which cause disease,
helping people deal with the massive increase in HIV?
22 Mar 09
Originally posted by Thequ1ckThanks.
Very good Metal Brain, you're starting to live up to your name.
But please tell me, how is accepting homosexual acts, which cause disease,
helping people deal with the massive increase in HIV?
What does homosexuality and HIV have to do with it? Aren't you off topic?