Drugs, Inc. Airing on National Geographic Channel

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 05:27:34 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The National Geographic has a new series for TV, Drugs, Inc. Tonight there's a meth episode, followed by one on heroin and one on medical marijuana.

The description of the meth and heroin episodes sound like they were produced by the DEA. I'd rather watch The Bachelorette.

As for the marijuana episode , we'll have to wait and see. The fact page is a little less slanted. Although I don't think the statement "cannabis polarizes public opinion" is demonstrated by the two examples given: "cannabis revolutionaries trying to legitimize the plant" vs "law enforcement is trying to wipe it off the planet." Public opinion doesn't appear to be polarized, and I don't think the views of law enforcement or activists qualify as "public opinion." Public opinion can be affected by the views of both groups, but neither constitute "public opinion" let alone a major segment of it.

[More...]

They also will be featuring cartel violence in the marijuana segment. Will they explore alternatives like legalization to reduce the profit motive and interest of the cartels? Is there anything in this series on the misguided approach of our government to drug issues?

One note on the meth segment: Meth production in Mexico and other countries is way up because we drove it there when we passed the law limiting how many cold pills you could buy. The law didn't stop meth use, and it didn't stop meth production. It just shifted the location of the meth labs.

< Monday Afternoon Open Thread | Lindsay Lohan's New Lawyer Bows Out >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Drugs, Inc. Airing on National Geographic Channel | 15 comments (15 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

You know, Meth and Heroin aren't exactly (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by tigercourse on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 12:38:52 AM EST

great things. You don't exactly need to be a DEA agent to put a negative spin on them.

: They're just things... (none / 0) (#11)
by kdog on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 08:33:27 AM EST

inanimate objects...it is addiction that's not a good thing, and what we should attempt to limit and treat.
Caught a little bit of the meth episode last night...had to change the channel it was so one-sided, as if prohibition is the only way to battle the meth problem and our simple minds can't think outside of the tyrannical box. I saw the cops in Tenn. surveilling and chasing and arresting the little smurfs buying the cold meds to bring to the cook...what total waste of expensive time, but the cops seemed to be having a good time playing cat and mouse.

that whole (none / 0) (#1)
by Capt Howdy on Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 05:32:22 PM EST

NatGeo Discovery network seems to have new law and order/religious overtones way too much.

I dont remember all those bible shows on the network before the last few years. I have wondered, since it is canadian - right? - if they are trying to make up for the whole "science" thing to those in the american audience who dont hold science in the same high regard as I do.

Can't Wait (none / 0) (#2)
by squeaky on Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 05:37:39 PM EST

For the one on the pharmaceutical industry. Seems like the addiction to those is by far the greatest drug abuse problem in the US. And the way it works, is that once you start with one drug, you need other drugs to counteract the side effects of the first drug. Before you know it you are taking 5 pills...

Are you in my house? (none / 0) (#13)
by Slado on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 04:45:17 PM EST

Here is my take from someone who has gone through (4) major/painful surgeries.

There is not enough supervision by doctors once they doll out the meds that are required and in probably 99% of the cases needed for a certain period of time.

However what they don't do is define the period of time and discuss how the patient should properly wean themselves off the medication.

My rule has always been if the amount of medication or dosage makes me feel "good" like a glass of wine makes me feel "good" then I'm taking to much of it.

For instance right now I'm in a little pain but not a lot of pain. My doctors know I know what I'm doing and my dad is a surgeon so If I'm ever a little confused I call him. He does a good job of talking to his patients about their meds and limiting the amount he prescribes at one time so that he doesn't create addicts.

However too many doctors and nurses for that matter write the script and send the patient on their way. Get 50 pills and the patient thinks they need to use all 50 of them even if they only need to take 20 or 30 over the case of a few weeks. If you only need 20 and you wind up using it all then you have a large risk of becoming an addict.

Hello Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and a million other people.

After my last surgery my wife went through our medicine cabinet and found old bottles of pain meds full of pills from the last two surgeries that I hadn't used. I often think, what If I'd used up all those meds? What would have happened since I obviously didn't need them?


: Yeah (none / 0) (#14)
by squeaky on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 05:04:58 PM EST

just had a tooth pulled, was given vicodan and high dose ibuprofrin. Projectile vomiting from the vicodan, alongside an incredible feeling of well being.. MJ for the vomiting, diet pills for the munchies.... sleeping pills to counter the diet pills etc...
the chain is worse than any street drug problem. I ditched the vicodan after vomiting for the fourth time... the mild pain is better, imo, than medicating the medicine.

Those were also on yesterday (none / 0) (#3)
by BTAL on Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 05:42:25 PM EST

The Meth episode shows the extend of the problem and epidemic that drug is reeking on society.

of course (none / 0) (#4)
by Capt Howdy on Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 06:02:02 PM EST

the question is will the pot episode be about "the extend of the problem and epidemic that drug is reeking on society".


: Didn't watch the pot episode (none / 0) (#5)
by BTAL on Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 06:05:33 PM EST

just ~2/3 of the cocaine and all the meth episodes.

i expect (none / 0) (#6)
by cpinva on Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 07:48:56 PM EST

the DEA will have as much success wiping pot off the planet, as the agriculture industry has had eliminating kudzu in the south. not much.

but that won't stop "law enforcement, Inc." from spending billions of our tax dollars trying. talk about government handouts to corporations!

: So long as we let them (none / 0) (#12)
by SeeEmDee on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 11:18:14 AM EST

That is, so long as drug law reformers don't raise a stink about how the money used to chase down pot-heads (by and large the biggest, easiest and safest targets to arrest) could be used for Unemployment Insurance.
Get enough people making that observation, and it politically becomes much harder to justify to all those people on the knife's-edge of insolvency and homelessness that the money they desperately need is still being p!ssed away chasing and incarcerating said pot-heads.

Do you favor legalization of meth? (none / 0) (#7)
by observed on Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 07:53:08 PM EST

decriminalization?

yes (none / 0) (#15)
by Capt Howdy on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 05:53:54 PM EST

: Thank you, Jeralyn, for a (none / 0) (#16)
by observed on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 06:40:47 PM EST

cogent non-answer.
LOL.
I asked two questions, so your "yes" doesn't tell me much.
And I wanted Jeralyn's response, because I am genuinely curious about her stance on drugs besides marijuana.
I want a policy which limits the harm of meth use.
I believe Portugal's new drugs laws even legalized meth, and they are said to be a big success.

National Geographic is owned by News Corp (none / 0) (#8)
by 1980Ford on Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 10:13:39 PM EST

link.

'Nuff said.