Alcohol should be banned in the UK

if people want to die as a result of substance misuse then thats just natural selection at work.

My guess is that because drink isn't necessarily as harmful as certain drugs.

I don't know about you but I'd much rather greet someone who's drunk than someone who's hallucinating.

Furthermore, drink may well damage you physically and, to an extent, mentally but that's nothing compared to the damage some drugs can do to you.

I've yet to hear of anyone becoming schizophrenic, bi polar or hallucinate because of a vodka and coke. I know two schizophrenics and both of them ended up in that state because of drugs.

Drugs are more addictive too. Many say that you can get addicted to heroine from your first time. I've never met someone who's become an alcoholic from their first shot.

It's also easier to die of a drug related overdose than drink related overdose. I'm not saying drink related overdosed don't happen but they aren't half as common as drug related ones. I'm sure I don't have to explain that one any further.

Most drugs that get banned are used by few people, you nip it in the bud before it becomes bigger.

That's an interesting chart, but it may tell the whole story. The ratio of an effective dose to a lethal dose isn't the only thing to consider when determining how dangerous drugs are. Some of these drugs may have harmful (but not immediately lethal) effects at their effective dose; this damage can accumulate over time. It's also important to look at what effect the drugs have on peoples' minds, both in terms of addiction and fixation and the mindset that the drug puts a person in when they've taken it. I'm sure everyone's heard horror stories about what people occasionally do when under the influence of LSD.

i went to some 'alcohol and society' lecture and the speaker was showing how over the years all type of illnesses have decreased and take less lives now including Heart disease and cancer
all except liver disease, which has been increasing over the years matching the increase in alcohol consumption in the uk

This is the graph you are referencing. The effect is solely a result of our governments cowardice to tackling alcohol

That's an interesting chart, but it may tell the whole story. The ratio of an effective dose to a lethal dose isn't the only thing to consider when determining how dangerous drugs are. Some of these drugs may have harmful (but not immediately lethal) effects at their effective dose; this damage can accumulate over time.

It's also important to look at what effect the drugs have on peoples' minds, both in terms of addiction and fixation and the mindset that the drug puts a person in when they've taken it. I'm sure everyone's heard horror stories about what people occasionally do when under the influence of LSD.

The Government should also ban fast-food places, nationalize biscuit/sweets/chocolate companies and have a total ban on sugar to reduce the obesity epidemic that is ravaging the UK.

But the Government is putty in the hands of the "food and drinks lobby".


If you want to get anything decriminalized and legalized, all you have to do is to have a shitload of money and send out people to lobby ministers on your behalf.

The Government no longer works in the interests of people, just big corporations.

The Conservatives have made illegal a huge amount of drugs, some potentially safe and useful, in a single blanket ban. This is supposedly due to the cost to society of these drugs.

Why are we banning drugs that kill less than a hundred people a year between them for their cost to society? Surely we should be banning alcohol, which caused over 6000 deaths in 2012 and costs the NHS £3.5 BILLION a year.

I really can't fathom how the cost to society can be used to justify banning drugs when it's a normal occurrence for people to binge drink every week.

1. The drunken brawls aren't simply down to drink, they're down to those who drink and are stupid. It's the combination that's lethal. I've lost a few friends over my short life span, many of the attacks were actually by high folk not drunk folk. People who are pretty drunk lack the co-ordination to successfully murder someone 90% of the time. Violent people will be violent no matter what.

2. Okay, for you to ask why schizophrenia is worse than liver disease... I'm guessing you've never been personally affected by the illness and don't know what it actually is. I'm sorry but schizophrenia is one of the most horrible things on the face of the planet.

3. Heroine isn't the only exception though. LSD? Cocaine? As for cannabis not being addictive I know that's *******s. There was a UK Cannabis related death not so long ago in the press, feel free to look it up. As for addictiveness, my weed smoking friends themselves have admitted it's addictive but nearly everything is. Junk food, shopping, the internet, coffee, etc so before you think I'm picking holes for the sake of it I'm really not. I just think it's excessively addictive and dangerously so.

4. Safe source of drugs? No such thing.That in itself is a contradiction. Do you want a safe source of bleach? A safe source of tobacco? A safe internet virus?

Can't attatch links on my phone.

But seriously just Google it, it literally takes 5 seconds.

The evidence is weak, the evidence for the other side of the coin is far stronger and more convincing.

Smokers pay more in tax, not alcoholics.

'The main psychological triggers of schizophrenia are stressful life events, such as a bereavement, losing your job or home, a divorce or the end of a relationship, or physical, sexual, emotional or racial abuse. These kinds of experiences, though stressful, do not cause schizophrenia, but can trigger its development in someone already vulnerable to it.Drugs do not directly cause schizophrenia, but studies have shown drug misuse increases the risk of developing schizophrenia or a similar illness.Certain drugs, particularly cannabis, cocaine, LSD or amphetamines, may trigger symptoms of schizophrenia in people who are susceptible. Using amphetamines or cocaine can lead to psychosis and can cause a relapse in people recovering from an earlier episode.'

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Schizophrenia/Pages/Causes.aspx

You're taking what I said out of context. I said I knew two schizophrenics who had ended up that way through drugs, not that all schizophrenics end up that way through drugs. Both used heavy amounts of cannabis and cocaine. Neither had anything traumatic happen to them (one's a relative I grew up along side, the other a best friend I know inside and out). They did drugs together and both suffered the same result.

I'm not such an ass that I won't admit that everything above is correct though, and that would apply to the majority, but they went around using drugs thinking they were invincible because they'd never encountered trauma - those two fools messed their life up. They genuinely thought that because they hadn't had anything like depression or high levels of stress before that they'd be alright, completely ignoring the fact that humans are pretty damn fragile.

As I said earlier, it's stupidity and abuse combined that's dangerous.

1. Are you suggesting these brawls would occur if people weren't drunk? Because I think we both know that's simply not true. Alcohol can make people aggressive and, far more importantly, it lowers inhibitions, so people that wouldn't hurt a fly sober end up making violent drunken decisions. Very, very few street drugs lower inhibitions like this, and the ones that do will make you calm and less aggressive.

And to suggest that people can't cause serious damage to each other when drunk is ludicrous.

2. I know people with serious schizophrenia and it's a horrible disease. But I'm sure someone with liver disease would argue that it's worse. And unlike schizophrenia, liver disease will kill you, unless you get a liver transplant which could have gone to someone else. They're both chronic diseases and I think you're wrong to say one is worse than the other.

3. You misunderstand. I'm talking about addiction in the medical sense. Cannabis is addictive in the same way that TV shows and World of Warcraft are addictive. As is literally anything else. But it's not addictive in a medical sense, nor is LSD, or mushrooms, or a lot of the drugs banned by this new legislation. They don't cause physical dependency, they don't cause withdrawals. A lot of popular street drugs are less addictive than alcohol. These are facts.

As for a cannabis related death, this doesn't mean it was caused by cannabis. You literally cannot physically take enough cannabis to overdose. It's impossible. LSD is also extremely hard to OD on. Someone linked a chart earlier in the thread showing that most drugs are harder to OD on than alcohol. 'Cannabis related death' just means someone was using cannabis.

4. Safe source, not safe drugs. When you buy tobacco it's safe, it hasn't been mixed with arsenic and rat poison (oh, wait). But you know what you're buying, it's highly regulated, it hadn't been tampered with by dodgy dealers. A lot of illegal drug deaths aren't due to the drugs, they're due to substances mixed in with the drugs. Legalising them, and providing a safe and regulated source, would eliminate this entire problem.

I've yet to hear of anyone becoming schizophrenic, bi polar or hallucinate because of a vodka and coke. I know two schizophrenics and both of them ended up in that state because of drugs.

Evidence please. And how do you know it's not a chicken and egg situation - people with underlying mental health problems turning to drugs?



How about drink related accidents like drink driving, fights and other trouble people get into when drunk? And all the deaths from alcoholism related illnesses. If you count all of that I bet it would be a knockout blow in terms of deaths vs drugs.