Outstanding Video on drug use
 

On 2/8/2014 7:57 PM, Califbill wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/8/2014 2:48 PM, Califbill wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/8/2014 10:27 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/8/14, 7:47 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 19:56:36 -0500, KC wrote:

On 2/7/2014 3:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 14:28:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

That's not the problem. The problem is with much more dangerous and
addictive opiates.

The most pervasive opiates these days come from doctors and drug
companies



They say you can get addicted by doing one oxy... I have seen it, it's a
fact...

That could be, if the person gets a little buzz, likes it, and keeps
taking it. I've had both the
oxy's contin and codone recently. If actually taken for the pain,
there isn't a 'high' that goes
along with it, just a reduction in pain. I think if a person is
feeling a 'high', then either they
don't need the pain killer, or they're taking more than necessary.


It appears as if you are trying to extrapolate universal truths from
your limited, individual experiences with painkillers. Perhaps *you*
didn't feel a "high," or perhaps your "high" was masked by pain, or
perhaps not. But for you to state that if a person is feeling a "high"
from taking a pain killer, then they don't need the painkiller or that
they are taking more than necessary, has little if any basis in science.




I took one oxycontin pill following oral surgery. The next morning I
flushed the rest of them down the toilet. I was in some degree of pain
but I sure didn't like the spaced out feeling that one little pill gave
me. I am not exactly a small person either.

Do not flush drugs down the toilet! Take to the police station or other
drug drop off points. Contaminates the water supply. How much of this
girls having periods at 9 years old, or even the ADD from the estrogens and
other crap in the water.


Never thought of that. But I really wonder how much 9 pills flushed into
a 2500 gallon holding tank and then eventually leached into a leaching
field can contaminate the water supply. If it does, the whole concept
of a septic system is questionable to start with.

It is actually a major problem in a lot of places. Do not know how much
from a septic system gets in to the water supply. The drugs seem to not be
filtered out even in municipal water systems. And those 6 drugs multiplied
by 300+ million consumers is a lot of drugs.



I was curious, so I looked up the recommended procedures for disposal of
expired or unused drugs.

You are correct. In general, the Federal guidelines recommend *not*
flushing down the toilet most medicines and drugs and recommend mixing
them with undesirable items in the household trash instead. However,
there is a list of some drugs that they *do* recommend flushing down the
toilet. Opiates like morphine and specifically oxycontin are on that
list. The reason is to further reduce the chance of unauthorized
retrieval and use.

These recommendations seem to be focused more on areas with municipal
waste treatment plants and not private septic systems.

Stil doesn't make any sense to me however. If the drugs end up in
landfills, waste treatment centers or private septic systems, they still
can theoretically contaminate ground water.

BTW ... a private well used for drinking water only has to be 100 feet
from a leaching field in most states.

Outstanding Video on drug use
 

On 2/8/2014 2:52 PM, True North wrote:
On Saturday, 8 February 2014 14:53:02 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 13:49:50 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:



On 2/8/14, 1:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

On 2/8/2014 10:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:

On 2/8/14, 10:52 AM, Poco Loco wrote:

On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 10:43:47 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:



On 2/8/14, 10:23 AM, Poco Loco wrote:

On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 09:22:22 -0500, Wayne.B

wrote:



On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 08:02:34 -0500, Poco Loco

wrote:



We must be coming at it from different angles. I saw the

abstinence being taught as the only

'foolproof' method of preventing pregnancies and STD's, which it is.



===



To me that's like saying that the only foolproof way of avoiding

automobile accidents is to not get in a car.



I agree. But if a kid thinks that rubbers, pills, IUDs, etc are the

'safe surefire way' to prevent

STDs and/or pregnancies, then this might be a worthwhile bit of

information.







Condoms are an effective way to prevent the transmission of venereal

diseases. The other methods you listed are not. Basing sex education

classes on the "wonderfulness" of abstinence tells the students you are

not taking the teaching of sex education seriously. Teaching students

that they need to use a condom every time to prevent the

transmission of

disease and to prevent pregnancy while engaging in sex *is* taking the

teaching of sex education seriously. No, the condoms are not 100%

effective, but if used properly, they are damned close to it.



Teenagers are going to engage in sexual activity. There's no question

about that. The "science" on that is settled. What responsible adults

need to do is make sure that the teens know to use a condom.







Back when I was 16, one of my after school jobs was working at a small

pharmacy in a pretty rough neighborhood. I was the combination soda

jerk, delivery boy, and salesman of booze and condoms. The latter two

activities were illegal for a kid my age, of course, but the

pharmacist/owner said no one from the alcohol board had ever been in

his

store. Condoms were a grey area back then in Connecticut. They were

kept

behind the counter and when someone came in to buy some, I had to go

fetch them. Some of the buyers were high school kids. That made the

pharmacist smile because, he said, there would be fewer teen

pregnancies

in the neighborhood if the boys were "wearing a raincoat."



I understand that many Americans have sexual hangups. I managed to grow

up without them.







Where did anyone say anything about *basing* sex education on

'abstinence', Harry?



When you were 16, as now, you were perfect.





Hardy, but no one taught or told me that "sex is dirty."



Where and who in this discussion every said or suggested that "sex is

dirty"? Freudian slip?



I get the impression that John is somewhat repressive on the subject.



I'll confess, I've not done the job, as well as some here, of describing my sexual prowess!



(But, in Vietnam my First Sergeant made sure there was a box of condoms on his desk free for the

taking- up to three a day.)

Was their use restricted to the officer's showers?

You're even creepier than Krause or slammer sometimes.

Outstanding Video on drug use
 

On Saturday, 8 February 2014 22:08:39 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 8 Feb 2014 15:20:10 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:



There was nothing wrong with my post, Johnny.

I was just asking a simple question that you seem to be very uncomfortable with.



Don, the correcting of your erroneous assumptions and grammar/spelling is not a comfort indicator.

So.. all your weaseling around means the answer is ... YES...?

Outstanding Video on drug use
 

On Saturday, 8 February 2014 22:48:19 UTC-4, HanK wrote:
On 2/8/2014 2:52 PM, True North wrote:

On Saturday, 8 February 2014 14:53:02 UTC-4, John H. wrote:

On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 13:49:50 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:







On 2/8/14, 1:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



On 2/8/2014 10:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:



On 2/8/14, 10:52 AM, Poco Loco wrote:



On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 10:43:47 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:







On 2/8/14, 10:23 AM, Poco Loco wrote:



On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 09:22:22 -0500, Wayne.B



wrote:







On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 08:02:34 -0500, Poco Loco



wrote:







We must be coming at it from different angles. I saw the



abstinence being taught as the only



'foolproof' method of preventing pregnancies and STD's, which it is.







===







To me that's like saying that the only foolproof way of avoiding



automobile accidents is to not get in a car.







I agree. But if a kid thinks that rubbers, pills, IUDs, etc are the



'safe surefire way' to prevent



STDs and/or pregnancies, then this might be a worthwhile bit of



information.















Condoms are an effective way to prevent the transmission of venereal



diseases. The other methods you listed are not. Basing sex education



classes on the "wonderfulness" of abstinence tells the students you are



not taking the teaching of sex education seriously. Teaching students



that they need to use a condom every time to prevent the



transmission of



disease and to prevent pregnancy while engaging in sex *is* taking the



teaching of sex education seriously. No, the condoms are not 100%



effective, but if used properly, they are damned close to it.







Teenagers are going to engage in sexual activity. There's no question



about that. The "science" on that is settled. What responsible adults



need to do is make sure that the teens know to use a condom.















Back when I was 16, one of my after school jobs was working at a small



pharmacy in a pretty rough neighborhood. I was the combination soda



jerk, delivery boy, and salesman of booze and condoms. The latter two



activities were illegal for a kid my age, of course, but the



pharmacist/owner said no one from the alcohol board had ever been in



his



store. Condoms were a grey area back then in Connecticut. They were



kept



behind the counter and when someone came in to buy some, I had to go



fetch them. Some of the buyers were high school kids. That made the



pharmacist smile because, he said, there would be fewer teen



pregnancies



in the neighborhood if the boys were "wearing a raincoat."







I understand that many Americans have sexual hangups. I managed to grow



up without them.















Where did anyone say anything about *basing* sex education on



'abstinence', Harry?







When you were 16, as now, you were perfect.











Hardy, but no one taught or told me that "sex is dirty."







Where and who in this discussion every said or suggested that "sex is



dirty"? Freudian slip?







I get the impression that John is somewhat repressive on the subject.







I'll confess, I've not done the job, as well as some here, of describing my sexual prowess!







(But, in Vietnam my First Sergeant made sure there was a box of condoms on his desk free for the



taking- up to three a day.)



Was their use restricted to the officer's showers?



You're even creepier than Krause or slammer sometimes.

Take that back, Hanky!

Outstanding Video on drug use
 

On Friday, February 7, 2014 8:33:01 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:


flagged for the spam **** it is.

Outstanding Video on drug use
 

On Friday, February 7, 2014 11:34:39 AM UTC-5, John H. wrote:

Do you agree that marijuana is a stepping stone to more potent stuff?

Nope....and anyone else who does, doesn't know his ass from his ****ing elbow !

Outstanding Video on drug use
 

True North wrote:
On Saturday, 8 February 2014 22:08:39 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 8 Feb 2014 15:20:10 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:



There was nothing wrong with my post, Johnny.

I was just asking a simple question that you seem to be very uncomfortable with.



Don, the correcting of your erroneous assumptions and grammar/spelling
is not a comfort indicator.

So.. all your weaseling around means the answer is ... YES...?

Are you that knowledgeable about this subject? Your lifestyle?

Outstanding Video on drug use
 

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/8/2014 7:57 PM, Califbill wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/8/2014 2:48 PM, Califbill wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/8/2014 10:27 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/8/14, 7:47 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 19:56:36 -0500, KC wrote:

On 2/7/2014 3:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 14:28:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

That's not the problem. The problem is with much more dangerous and
addictive opiates.

The most pervasive opiates these days come from doctors and drug
companies



They say you can get addicted by doing one oxy... I have seen it, it's a
fact...

That could be, if the person gets a little buzz, likes it, and keeps
taking it. I've had both the
oxy's contin and codone recently. If actually taken for the pain,
there isn't a 'high' that goes
along with it, just a reduction in pain. I think if a person is
feeling a 'high', then either they
don't need the pain killer, or they're taking more than necessary.


It appears as if you are trying to extrapolate universal truths from
your limited, individual experiences with painkillers. Perhaps *you*
didn't feel a "high," or perhaps your "high" was masked by pain, or
perhaps not. But for you to state that if a person is feeling a "high"
from taking a pain killer, then they don't need the painkiller or that
they are taking more than necessary, has little if any basis in science.




I took one oxycontin pill following oral surgery. The next morning I
flushed the rest of them down the toilet. I was in some degree of pain
but I sure didn't like the spaced out feeling that one little pill gave
me. I am not exactly a small person either.

Do not flush drugs down the toilet! Take to the police station or other
drug drop off points. Contaminates the water supply. How much of this
girls having periods at 9 years old, or even the ADD from the estrogens and
other crap in the water.


Never thought of that. But I really wonder how much 9 pills flushed into
a 2500 gallon holding tank and then eventually leached into a leaching
field can contaminate the water supply. If it does, the whole concept
of a septic system is questionable to start with.

It is actually a major problem in a lot of places. Do not know how much
from a septic system gets in to the water supply. The drugs seem to not be
filtered out even in municipal water systems. And those 6 drugs multiplied
by 300+ million consumers is a lot of drugs.



I was curious, so I looked up the recommended procedures for disposal of
expired or unused drugs.

You are correct. In general, the Federal guidelines recommend *not*
flushing down the toilet most medicines and drugs and recommend mixing
them with undesirable items in the household trash instead. However,
there is a list of some drugs that they *do* recommend flushing down the
toilet. Opiates like morphine and specifically oxycontin are on that
list. The reason is to further reduce the chance of unauthorized retrieval and use.

These recommendations seem to be focused more on areas with municipal
waste treatment plants and not private septic systems.

Stil doesn't make any sense to me however. If the drugs end up in
landfills, waste treatment centers or private septic systems, they still
can theoretically contaminate ground water.

BTW ... a private well used for drinking water only has to be 100 feet
from a leaching field in most states.

We have hazardous waste collection centers, and lots of pharmacies in Calif
accept drugs for disposal. I would be more worried about drugs and
chemicals migrating to the well from the leach field, than any normal
organic matter. We have a problem in Livermore, next city over, with some
wells had to be shut down as Tritium from the LLNL contaminating them.

Outstanding Video on drug use
 

Sorry Billy, I've never been involved with the US Army.....except to be exposed to Johnny and his behaviours in this newsgroup.

Outstanding Video on drug use
 

On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 22:25:59 -0600, Califbill wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/8/2014 7:57 PM, Califbill wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/8/2014 2:48 PM, Califbill wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/8/2014 10:27 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/8/14, 7:47 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 19:56:36 -0500, KC wrote:

On 2/7/2014 3:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 14:28:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

That's not the problem. The problem is with much more dangerous and
addictive opiates.

The most pervasive opiates these days come from doctors and drug
companies



They say you can get addicted by doing one oxy... I have seen it, it's a
fact...

That could be, if the person gets a little buzz, likes it, and keeps
taking it. I've had both the
oxy's contin and codone recently. If actually taken for the pain,
there isn't a 'high' that goes
along with it, just a reduction in pain. I think if a person is
feeling a 'high', then either they
don't need the pain killer, or they're taking more than necessary.


It appears as if you are trying to extrapolate universal truths from
your limited, individual experiences with painkillers. Perhaps *you*
didn't feel a "high," or perhaps your "high" was masked by pain, or
perhaps not. But for you to state that if a person is feeling a "high"
from taking a pain killer, then they don't need the painkiller or that
they are taking more than necessary, has little if any basis in science.




I took one oxycontin pill following oral surgery. The next morning I
flushed the rest of them down the toilet. I was in some degree of pain
but I sure didn't like the spaced out feeling that one little pill gave
me. I am not exactly a small person either.

Do not flush drugs down the toilet! Take to the police station or other
drug drop off points. Contaminates the water supply. How much of this
girls having periods at 9 years old, or even the ADD from the estrogens and
other crap in the water.


Never thought of that. But I really wonder how much 9 pills flushed into
a 2500 gallon holding tank and then eventually leached into a leaching
field can contaminate the water supply. If it does, the whole concept
of a septic system is questionable to start with.

It is actually a major problem in a lot of places. Do not know how much
from a septic system gets in to the water supply. The drugs seem to not be
filtered out even in municipal water systems. And those 6 drugs multiplied
by 300+ million consumers is a lot of drugs.



I was curious, so I looked up the recommended procedures for disposal of
expired or unused drugs.

You are correct. In general, the Federal guidelines recommend *not*
flushing down the toilet most medicines and drugs and recommend mixing
them with undesirable items in the household trash instead. However,
there is a list of some drugs that they *do* recommend flushing down the
toilet. Opiates like morphine and specifically oxycontin are on that
list. The reason is to further reduce the chance of unauthorized retrieval and use.

These recommendations seem to be focused more on areas with municipal
waste treatment plants and not private septic systems.

Stil doesn't make any sense to me however. If the drugs end up in
landfills, waste treatment centers or private septic systems, they still
can theoretically contaminate ground water.

BTW ... a private well used for drinking water only has to be 100 feet
from a leaching field in most states.

We have hazardous waste collection centers, and lots of pharmacies in Calif
accept drugs for disposal. I would be more worried about drugs and
chemicals migrating to the well from the leach field, than any normal
organic matter. We have a problem in Livermore, next city over, with some
wells had to be shut down as Tritium from the LLNL contaminating them.

Careful...some here will be saying the WalMart pharmacy repackages and sells those drugs.