What do you think about "study drugs"?

The military has been using amphetamines for some time now to allow pilots the ability to fly multiple missions over the span of days. I think the issue is one of addiction, which might be hard to tailor away from the activity of the drug.

If there were really and truly no adverse side effects, then I can’t see any moral downside to chemically enhancing cognition. There could, however, be moral issues related to equallity of access to that enhancement and the societal advantages that it would offer.

Niki, I think that would be so convenient! I would definitely try it!

So many issues:
Why do you feel you need them; could poor time management be an issue for you?
How would a pharmacist know who should be able to buy them (or are you suggesting they be OTC for anyone)?
shilolo’s point is also important: addiction isn’t much fun.
Why can’t you get what you want illegally?

JVGR, to answer your “issues”:

Why do I feel I need them? I obviously don’t think I need them, but I could always use better grades! They are pretty much my top priority.

Yes, poor time management could be an issue, in fact, I get on myself all the time for time management. I’m sure a lot of people do, but none of us will ever be perfect. If I had better time management maybe I wouldnt get so many colds or headaches, but that’s not going to stop me from taking advil. The hypthetical is that the drug is completely safe, so what does it matter if you have poor time management?

Is she suggesting they be OTC for anyone? Yes, she used the words, “over the counter” in the question. That implies that they be available to everyone.

Shilo’s points are always true and important ones.

I don’t understand your last question at all. Personally I have a friend with ADD who has offered me ritalin plenty of times. I don’t take it because I don’t know if it’s safe for me. But that doesn’t even matter because the question is hypothetical. It assumes that the study drugs are legal and without side effects.

La_chica_gomela “Is she suggesting they be OTC for anyone? Yes, she used the words, “over the counter” in the question. That implies that they be available to everyone.”
-Actually this is what she said:
“Do you think people should be able to buy drugs like Adderall and Ritalin over the counter for studying purposes?”
The “for studying purposes” is a qualifier which implies NOT everyone.

“It assumes that the study drugs are legal and without side effects.”
Since virtually every drug has some side effect and side effects are complicated by individual physiology and other chemicals that may be ingested by a person for other conditions, assuming no side effects isn’t even feasible.

I don’t know what your point is JVGR.

All drugs have “indications” as in reasons you take them. To me, the phrase “for studying purposes” is very obviously supposed to connote the purpose that one would take the drug, not a restriction on who it is available to. If nikipedia wants to clarify, perhaps she will.

If you want to answer the question, then the issue of whether the scenario is “feasible” or not is irrelevant. If you want to go on a tangent about the effects of drugs, then be my guest.

La_chica_gomela: “I don’t know what your point is JVGR.”
My point was simply to address the issues you rose.

“To me, the phrase “for studying purposes” is very obviously supposed to connote the purpose that one would take the drug…:
I never presume to read meaning into someone’s words. I just read the words.
”...buy…OTC…for studying purposes” is quite specific.

She could have easily said: Do you think people should be able to buy drugs like Adderall and Ritalin over the counter. But she didn’t. She qualified it very specifically.

I’m getting tired of going on this tangent with you. You’re just saying the same thing over and over again.

What is this supposed to mean:
“To me, the phrase “for studying purposes” is very obviously supposed to connote the purpose that one would take the drug…:
I never presume to read meaning into someone’s words. I just read the words.

You rephrased my words, and then responded to your own paraphrasing of my words?

I was saying that to me the word purpose indicates the purpose. I don’t know how you can possibly argue with that. I think it’s great that you “never presume to read meaning into someone’s words. I just read the words._

I read too! Yay! And the word purpose is one of the words that I read.

Having ADD, and a husband and child with ADHD, I can tell you that there is no magic study benefit from the medication, unless you need it. Otherwise it will make you want to climb the walls. It’s speed. If you have a chemical imbalance, it has the opposite effect and calms you down so you can focus. If you don’t need it, you drive everyone crazy. A friend’s daughter tried it before a big test, and drove her mom’s car out of the garage with the driver door open, ripping the door off.

La_chica_gomela: “I’m getting tired of going on this tangent with you. You’re just saying the same thing over and over again.

What is this supposed to mean:
“To me, the phrase “for studying purposes” is very obviously supposed to connote the purpose that one would take the drug…:
I never presume to read meaning into someone’s words. I just read the words.

You rephrased my words, and then responded to your own paraphrasing of my words?:

Sorry chica, I didn’t rephrase your words, I copied and pasted them.
One more time: Her question was-“Do you think people should be able to buy drugs like Adderall and Ritalin over the counter for studying purposes?”

This is a very specific sentence. It doesn’t imply OTC for anybody, just those who want the drugs for study.

As for your getting tired…Your decision to get involved was optional.

@jvgr: Sorry but LCG’s interpretation was correct. You are splitting semantic hairs. Something tells me you didn’t do so hot on the reading comprehension portion of your SAT.

nikipedia: well I got 1413 on my composite and math/reading-writing were fairly well balanced. How’d you do.

Are we talking about the non-medical use of drugs?

There seem to be so many examples. Steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs are not supposed to be used by athletes in some sports, but it isn’t illegal to take them. Now you’re suggesting the performance-enhancing posibilities of speed-like drugs, assuming, of course they don’t hurt you.

Well, there’s the thing. Steroids and amphetamines do hurt you. If you go without sleep for too long, you can seriously hurt yourself. Over-use of steroids seems to cause a plethora of other health problems.

Well, the people, in their wisdom, as expressed through legislators, have decided that a lot of drugs should only be dispensed with a prescription, and other drugs can be safely used by the average person.

In my mind, education is the key. People must use any drug—from aspirin to heroine, with full knowledge of indications and side-effects, and possible consequences. Drug companies now put all these warnings in their advertisements for drugs. It’s the law.

So, do we believe in personal agency? Can people make the right choices for themselves, given proper information? We wouldn’t want people to get sick as a result of use, especially if the public has to pay for the medical care and upkeep.

But, we already are willing to subsidize the use of drugs that can make it difficult for people to work, or drive, and gives them liver problems, and can cut short their lives, and cause all kinds of other problems. That drug is alcohol. There are hundreds of thousands of people who are indigent and have alcohol problems, and we already pay for their health care.

So, if we trust people to self-medicate with alcohol, and are willing to absorb the cost when they misuse the drug, then why should any drug be treated differently? So, either we sell ritalin over the counter, or we make alcohol illegal. Any other position is hypocritical. I vote for selling everything over the counter.

@jvgr: I try not to brag about my standardized test scores because they make other people feel badly about themselves. The SAT is scored in ten point increments so I am sort of skeptical of your 1413.

Nikipedia & Jvgr: Are we seriously busting out our SAT scores?
You guys are giving me flashbacks to being in the dorms again.
What’s your major?

ritalin shoud never be sold to anyone witout a diagnosis

@jvgr: You couldn’t have gotten a 1413.

P.S. I don’t mind making some people feel badly about themselves (nikipedia is kinder than I), so to answer your question, we both beat you.

I did.
You mean your 2 combined scores was higher?

@jvgr: SAT scores are given in 10-point increments only. Thus, it is impossible to have received a 1413.

Each of our scores, individually, were higher.

That subject as a study the drugs, can be fine for that one who is trying to help but for the another part of those users could be a challenge.

You can always get addicted. I don’t think its worth it. Americans are stressed as it is, taking drugs to enhance activities is gonna make people crazier.

You cannot get addicted to ritalin, but it’s still abuse and it has a lot of terrible side effects.

I think you can get addicted to Ritalin.