|
|
|
|
|
|
by 93po
1124 days ago
|
|
|
> unless they had a street value because that indicates they do something that people value This usually only means that doctors restrict access to those drugs because they have a potential for addiction and abuse, and people seek them out on the street once they're addicted and their doctor has recognized this/declined to continue them on it/they want an abusable quantity. Exceptions for things like insulin which has other unique reasons. Potential for abuse and addiction is not a good sign of value. It's a sign of it's potential to ruin or end your life. |
|
|
All the anti-depressants come with a warning label that says may end your life, yet they have no street value and I've never heard them referred to as addictive (although they seem to have withdrawal).
Ketamine, mushrooms, LSD, etc. have street value and you hear way more "mushrooms helped my depression/ketamine is like a light-switch for depression" on the internet than you ever hear positive stories about SSRI's and the like which is more likely to have stories around sexual dysfunction or withdrawal syndrome than glowing reviews. Nobody says psychedelics are addictive.
Street value represents demand and lack of street value represents lack of demand and lack of demand represents lack of effect.
So I think the idea that potential for abuse is what drives street value is wrong, wrong in the sense that there is an element of truth, but it isn't the truth.
I think that reasoning is sound.
I think there is a fine dunning kruger line to be walked here and as I admitted (in the context of what you quoted) that I think there is truth to what I just wrote, but I don't think it is the truth.