The health of the people in our country

[Fryowa]

The key is decreasing demand through education and treatment.

I'd love for that to be true but it isn't. The education thing has been going on since the early 80s and it's just as bad now (or worse) than it was then.

Treatment only works if the person receiving it wants it. Unfortunately most addicts do not and don't have the willpower to maintain it. Relapse rates of drug and alcoholism are up towards 85-90%. It's biology...our brains are literally wired to make ourselves feel as much pleasure as possible. Treatment has also been around for generations and only works for a tiny portion of the target audience.

Take away the supply rather than the demand and you don't need treatment in the first place. We have the means to do that. There has never been a more powerful operational or logistical force in the entire history of the world than the US military. Going into Mexico to weed out cartel members and meth producing operations would take less than a generation. You just have to make the decision and commit. Would some innocent people get caught in the cross fire? I have no doubt. But would tens of millions of people not be in graves, rehabs, prisons, and homeless shelters if we did it? Also yes. That's a lesser evil in my opinion.

Radical Islamists and the like aren't killing millions of Americans and destroying the lives of tens of millions of Americans...meth and opiates are. It's time we start with the low-hanging fruit which are Mexican and Central American cartels.

I'm sorry, D.A.R.E. and rehab stuff hasn't worked on a large scale, and it isn't going to. There are people who benefit from treatment, but there are many, many more who don't. And those people who don't unfortunately have offspring who are almost certainly going to continue down those same paths to no fault of their own.

Telling kids not to take candy from strangers is a great idea to the insulated, wealthy idealists who've never been in the trenches of addiction or seen it in their families up close...really up close. You have to get rid of the stranger offering candy to the kids.

 

[Fryowa]

I don't know if your conclusion is valid (I also have no basis to conclude it isn't), but I appreciate the effort you put in to get there!

Not a lot of effort, just some Googlizing.

 

[PCHawk]

I have no idea how long I'll live, but my guess would be sub 70 years old. My dad's side is terrible, I don't know if I can think of a male who lived past 62. But all were overweight and smoked etc.

I'm not worried about it at all, you can only do what you can do and the rest is up to the roll of the dice.

But I do know that smoking is by far the most deadly thing that people commonly do to themselves that's preventable. More so than even shitty diets. Shitty diets are real, real bad, but smoking is worse.

Thats what I'm saying. If they were all overweight and smokers, hopefully that has nothing to do with your longevity.

 

[PCHawk]

I think educating on cigarettes has had a very positive impact. I don't know many young people who smoke compared to 20 years ago.

 

[Hay Man]

Unfortunately the younger generation has moved over to vaping, which can't be any better.

 

[HuckFinn]

Correct. I've never had a cigarette in my mouth but I effectively smoked every day from birth to 19 years old.

Clearly, you are controlling what you can control. I am betting you will live a lot longer than you predict. I certainly hope I am right.

 

[Fryowa]

The key is decreasing demand through education and treatment.

What makes you think that after 50 plus years of trying to educate people about drugs not working, and treatment being 85+% unsuccessful, that it’s going to work now? Honest question.

How many more generations of Americans have to die, end up in prison, lose their friends & family to drugs, and experience all the other societal effects too numerous to mention here while a bunch of "experts" in a cozy university somewhere who've never experienced the dark side of addiction try to come up with novel ideas about treatment and education?

Killing en masse the criminals hell bent on producing and bringing those drugs here will have an immediate effect. Destroying their facilities just like we have in the middle east will have an immediate impact. They know now there are absolutely no repercussions for what they’re doing. If they see enough of their cohorts turned to vapor by a force that has no equal and no restrictions on hunting them, they will think twice eventually. Will it be expensive and a massive undertaking? Absolutely. But think about the positive things that will come from it if meth isn't hauled across our southern border by the trailer load. Opiates--same thing. Chinese fentanyl isn't coming directly from China, it's coming through Mexico.

There will always be illegal things brought into this country. But if you don't think 99% of it is coming from cartel organizations in Mexico and Central America you have your head in the sand.

They are profiteering, terrorist murderers who deserve no quarter and no mercy. We have the intelligence capabilities and the resources to turn that country into Mars if need be to eradicate the disease. If we can use our intelligence to track and kill Islamic militants and facilities with precision, we can just as easily wipe out Mexican drug lords and their employees.

People need to get beyond only looking at this from the perspective of the "technicality" of whether or not we'd be "at war" with a country, or whether it's legal according to some other countries half a world away in Europe. There is a well-defined problem that has not been solvable through many, many decades of trying non-violent means. The murderers have left no other option than violent means in return, and they certainly are not afraid to use violence to reach their own goals.

It's time. It's been long enough and we have exhausted all other means.

 

[Fryowa]

I think educating on cigarettes has had a very positive impact. I don't know many young people who smoke compared to 20 years ago.

The problem is the same educational methods about narcotics have been used since the 70s and it's had no effect on that. It's actually gotten worse. We can't afford as a country to waste more time on it while people are still getting sucked into that black hole of narcotics. Do we spend 20 more years of scourge trying to figure out how to "educate" people that meth and opiates are bad, or do we go after the people producing it and bringing it here with the full force of our servicepeople?

Our military is constitutionally bound to protect our country from all enemies, foreign or domestic. Let them do it.

 

[Fryowa]

Unfortunately the younger generation has moved over to vaping, which can't be any better.

I agree that vaping is a bad deal and bad for your health, but so is a cheeseburger.

Vaping isn't killing millions of people, destroying families on a massive scale, or filling our prisons up with people who'd have led great, productive lives if they didn't have easy access to meth and pain pills from Mexico.

We pretty much eradicated meth production in the US with restrictions on Sudafed. But all of that didn't do a single thing to decrease its use. The production simply shifted to Mexico and Central America.

 

[Hay Man]

The problem is the same educational methods about narcotics have been used since the 70s and it's had no effect on that. It's actually gotten worse. We can't afford as a country to waste more time on it while people are still getting sucked into that black hole of narcotics. Do we spend 20 more years of scourge trying to figure out how to "educate" people that meth and opiates are bad, or do we go after the people producing it and bringing it here with the full force of our servicepeople?

Our military is constitutionally bound to protect our country from all enemies, foreign or domestic. Let them do it.

I agree with you that it's been going on way too long and it needs to be eradicated, but invading a foreign country would be very touchy. Do we need Mexico's full acceptance of the U.S. armed forced coming in to do it's business? Does the United Nations have a say? How does this get accomplished without starting a border war? What international laws could be an issue? I'm all for going in.

 

[Westernhawk]

I'd love for that to be true but it isn't. The education thing has been going on since the early 80s and it's just as bad now (or worse) than it was then.

Treatment only works if the person receiving it wants it. Unfortunately most addicts do not and don't have the willpower to maintain it. Relapse rates of drug and alcoholism are up towards 85-90%. It's biology...our brains are literally wired to make ourselves feel as much pleasure as possible. Treatment has also been around for generations and only works for a tiny portion of the target audience.

Take away the supply rather than the demand and you don't need treatment in the first place. We have the means to do that. There has never been a more powerful operational or logistical force in the entire history of the world than the US military. Going into Mexico to weed out cartel members and meth producing operations would take less than a generation. You just have to make the decision and commit. Would some innocent people get caught in the cross fire? I have no doubt. But would tens of millions of people not be in graves, rehabs, prisons, and homeless shelters if we did it? Also yes. That's a lesser evil in my opinion.

Radical Islamists and the like aren't killing millions of Americans and destroying the lives of tens of millions of Americans...meth and opiates are. It's time we start with the low-hanging fruit which are Mexican and Central American cartels.

I'm sorry, D.A.R.E. and rehab stuff hasn't worked on a large scale, and it isn't going to. There are people who benefit from treatment, but there are many, many more who don't. And those people who don't unfortunately have offspring who are almost certainly going to continue down those same paths to no fault of their own.

Telling kids not to take candy from strangers is a great idea to the insulated, wealthy idealists who've never been in the trenches of addiction or seen it in their families up close...really up close. You have to get rid of the stranger offering candy to the kids.

You make some valid points, but let me ask you... do you smoke?

Edit: I think there are merits to interdiction efforts and targeted elimination of drug producing centers, but we've tried that before to a certain extent, and had limited success.

This would be a great discussion topic, as it is complex and challenging. American companies and unfortunately health care providers have been a massive part of the problem. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the story of oxycontin (Purdue pharma) and how it was touted as non-addictive. Their sales efforts, coupled with the Joint Commission's treatment of pain as a "vital sign" required providers to aggressively treat pain. It caused the physical dependence on opiates to skyrocket. When folks finally figured this whole mess out, scores more people were dependent on opiates. When states cracked down on the prescription of opiates through the use of mandated provider registries, the supply of prescribed opiates in the US (a MAJOR source of opiate addiction), dried up. People turned, in desperation, to heroin, and now, fentanyl. The demand skyrocketed from mislabeling,selling, inappropriate prescribing, and the like. It's fascinating, and terrible.

 

[Hawkboys]

I think educating on cigarettes has had a very positive impact. I don't know many young people who smoke compared to 20 years ago.

Check out some of the vaping #s? It's scary high for teens and actually more harmful than cigarettes.

 

[thedukeofearl]

I agree with you that it's been going on way too long and it needs to be eradicated, but invading a foreign country would be very touchy. Do we need Mexico's full acceptance of the U.S. armed forced coming in to do it's business? Does the United Nations have a say? How does this get accomplished without starting a border war? What international laws could be an issue? I'm all for going in.

We might be a bit busy with the Greenland invasion and the consequent war with Denmark

Mexico might be put on the back burner

 

[Westernhawk]

I don't drink, but alcohol can be consumed at a level not detrimental to your health. Lots of people choose to have a couple beers watching a game, a glass of wine at supper, or a couple mixed drinks at a Christmas party. I have lots of friends and acquaintances who do just that. I don't think those people should be penalized for those who choose to go crazy with booze or can't choose not to go crazy with it.

Smoking on the other hand, is horrendous for every part of your body from the first drag. There's literally nothing that can come from it that isn't destructive and costly to the health care system and by association the insurance rates we pay. For those who can buy a pack of cigarettes and have it last them a month or two, a $30 pack of cigarettes isn't going to hurt them financially.

However, even with a huge tax cigarettes will just start coming from Mexico instead and be even cheaper than they are in stores. The reason it's expensive to smoke is because of the taxes already in place. Put a $20 tax on legally produced cigarettes and in about 6 months you'll be able to buy them indirectly from the cartel for 75 cents a pack. The problem won't get any better.

Smoking has decreased dramatically through legal pressure on tobacco companies, public education (which was huge), and cost. All approaches have mattered.

I'm not sure if you're keeping up with the latest research on alcohol, but the Surgeon General is advocating for putting a warning label on ETOH because alcohol (specifically acetaldehyde, a breakdown product) is a known carcinogen. It's thought to cause 100,000 cases of cancer per year in the US. So, I'm not sure if your conclusion is entirely accurate about alcohol.

Alcohol, tobacco, poor dietary habits, and a sedentary lifestyle are all massive drains to our healthcare system and overall wellness.

 

[CP87]

Check out some of the vaping #s? It's scary high for teens and actually more harmful than cigarettes.

Vaping was looked at (very reasonably) as a good alternative to cigarettes, judged through a harm-reduction lens. Some have said of cigarettes and nicotine, "Good drug, terrible method of delivery." Nicotine itself is not that bad, other than being incredibly addictive. If you can get it without the combustion products associated with burning a cigarette, it should be a safer option.

But here's the problem: smoking prevalence among young people was going down fast starting in 1997 when states started to enter into agreements with the big tobacco companies (as part of settlements) to better control their product (the graph below shows prevalence of use in 18-24 year olds according to data from 2 different surveys):




So, great progress was being made. Smoking was become costlier, more inconvenient, and less cool. We did not really have a need to introduce a smoking-replacement product as a harm-management intervention (the situation could have been very different in other countries with much higher smoking rates).

So, instead of vaping being a replacement for current smokers (a very limited market available for companies that sell e-cigarettes and vapes), the industry had to create an entirely new consumer base. They marketed largely to youth with an assortment of flavors and flashy looking devices. Now a whole new generation has been addicted to nicotine products that would not otherwise have even tried them:



Some recent progress has been made in regulating the market better, and youth prevalence of use has trended down over the past couple of years.

 

[CP87]

Smoking has decreased dramatically through legal pressure on tobacco companies, public education (which was huge), and cost. All approaches have mattered.

I'm not sure if you're keeping up with the latest research on alcohol, but the Surgeon General is advocating for putting a warning label on ETOH because alcohol (specifically acetaldehyde, a breakdown product) is a known carcinogen. It's thought to cause 100,000 cases of cancer per year in the US. So, I'm not sure if your conclusion is entirely accurate about alcohol.

Alcohol, tobacco, poor dietary habits, and a sedentary lifestyle are all massive drains to our healthcare system and overall wellness.

To be specific on order:

#1 --> smoking
#2 --> obesity (definitely gaining on smoking in this country, still lagging substantially in many other countries with more smoking and less obesity)
#3 --> consumption of alcohol

Probably a decent gap between #2 and #3.

Obesity is not an act, like smoking and drinking are. Rather, it is the result of the interplay of food environment, genetics, dietary choices, and physical activity level.

 

[Hay Man]

We might be a bit busy with the Greenland invasion and the consequent war with Denmark

Mexico might be put on the back burner

Come on, we can take care of it on our way down to the Panama Canal

 

[Hay Man]

I work with a guy who is originally from Kentucky. He owned a tobacco farm and he said you wouldn't believe the amount of the chemicals used for insects and pests. They had to coat it on. He got out of the business years ago because the price of the crop never went up, but his inputs did.

 

[Westernhawk]

To be specific on order:

#1 --> smoking
#2 --> obesity (definitely gaining on smoking in this country, still lagging substantially in many other countries with more smoking and less obesity)
#3 --> consumption of alcohol

Probably a decent gap between #2 and #3.

Obesity is not an act, like smoking and drinking are. Rather, it is the result of the interplay of food environment, genetics, dietary choices, and physical activity level.

Thanks for the post. I listed them not intending for them to be ranked in order. Your clarification is a good one.

 

[CP87]

Thanks for the post. I listed them not intending for them to be ranked in order. Your clarification is a good one.

Yeah, I knew that wasn't your intention, but I thought it would be a good extension of the discussion.

The WHO lists hypertension as the leading preventable cause of death, which like obesity, is the result of many other potential factors (including smoking, obesity, stress, physical inactivity, etc.).