Forget it; the take-away is that I disagree with almost every single word you said; it's all propaganda.
First of all, propaganda isn't necessarily false; it seems you correlate an "anti-drug" position to propaganda, which in your mind means it has no credibility. This is also part of what gets me in this thread. There is this ambient "we know much better than the general consensus -- we know what's dangerous and what isn't -- we're smarter than that" attitude; "it's illegal, most people wouldn't want to try,
but we know better and that's something we all have in common". People are generally really attracted this type of anti-establishment group mentality -- especially since it gives them the sensation that they are more intelligent, more informed, and more daring than those outside of the group. It also encourages those within the group to progress with whatever they are doing -- to be the first to try something new and report back their experiences.
Now, having written that, a lot of the anti-drug propaganda is nonsense. I imagine most people who have gone through many years of schooling and then first try pot, will think "wow, those people were full of shit". This sentiment then mutates into the vague position that anyone with a concern for an activity involving drugs or with an anti-drug message has an agenda, hasn't experienced many drugs, or is just wrong.
But now let's go back to what I said and see whether it is propaganda. Here is the definition for you: "information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc." Generally, I was claiming that people here were moving towards heavy, irresponsible, and dangerous drug use, and seemed to be vaguely proud of what they were doing with their lives. In many cases, this type of movement was just for show -- "look, I can chug 24 ounces of beer in seconds", even though hard liquor would do just as well for the desired effect. In my opinion, they are becoming undignified losers who will have regrets. I then made the specific claim that sucking on whipit could result in poisoning or asphyxiation. Your response?
"You've bought in to the scare tactics that police officers use to keep impressionable children off of drugs."
That seems pretty much what I would expect given the group mentality I described above -- in fact, I would even use it as an example of that mentality if I were to write something longer on this subject. First, I'm not particularly in touch with police scare tactics. Not to say that any scare tactic a policeman might use would be necessarily untrue -- you are simply repeating a meaningless group mantra when encountered with a position you don't like. Most of my positions come from people I have observed, my own experiences, and my scientific background. I work in a highly scientific environment, and have directly studied the effects of some drugs via Positron Emission Tomography (PET). Now, here is what wikipedia says:
"While nitrous oxide is not a dangerous substance per se, recreational users typically do not mix it with air or oxygen (a 70/30 mix of nitrous oxide and oxygen, respectively (which is the same amount of oxygen in normal air) is standard procedure in a dentist's office) and thus may risk injury, or in worst case: death, from lack of oxygen (anoxia). Nitrous oxide, when inhaled using a home made system consisting of a mask and/or regulator, presents the highest potential danger due to the automatic, continuous application. This may in turn prevent adequate oxygen from reaching the user, rendering him unconscious, subsequently leading to death due to asphyxiation."This is pretty much a paraphrase of what I said. I suppose Wikipedia is being maintained by police officers and their arsenal of scare tactics. Propaganda? I don't think this a widespread message to hurt or help -- if anything it would be to help. Deliberately untrue? I don't see why. Untrue? Again, I don't see why.
Keep discussing the next way you've found to get a high. I don't think you guys have tried glue or gasoline yet. The whole "I'm young" is the worst justification for the attitude in this thread -- it's basically just "other people did this when they were young and had a good time and cleaned up so why can't I?". Of course there is a lot wrong with that position, but what gets me most is when you are "young" (e.g. in your early twenties) you are in the prime of your life. You are at a time when you can still pretty much reach your full potential at anything -- soon you will get to an age where you can't pursue interests and become good at them any longer. And this time is being given away with the idea that either you'll mature out of what you're currently doing, or you'll be trapped doing it forever.
