It’s dangerous to deal drugs to famous people. The police will actually care and investigate if they overdose. Take note, ketamine dealers!
But the money meanwhile must be astronomical!
This is just awful. RIP Chandler Bing.
I was not a fan of Friends, but I’m much more not a fan of preying on people’s addictions for money until you kill them.
I loved him as Oz in The Whole Nine Yards.
He created and starred in a very short-lived TV show called Mr. Sunshine where he managed a sports arena. I really liked it.
Haven’t seen it. I’ll keep a look out for it.
I loved him on Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. Could never understand why it was cancelled.
30 rock came out at the same time with basically the same premise but was actually funny.
Sorkin was going for a “comedy show within a dramatic show” thing and could not make the comedy work, which undercut the drama. It just wasn’t believable.
The cast was stunningly good, but because the dramatic context was so flimsy, it all just sort of collapsed as a concept.
I don’t know. It should be easier to get drugs, and safely. Instead, this is the system we have. I don’t know his situation intimately, but I don’t know how this could have been better if you don’t take off the table that he wanted these drugs.
Having someone else inject you though sounds like a recipe for disaster. Don’t rope people in unnecessarily who could then face legal problems over it.
Some drugs? Sure. Ketamine? I would not go that far. There are certain substances the general public should not have easy access to, general anesthetics being one of them.
If nothing else, ketamine has been used as a date rape drug.
I’m ignorant of a lot of things. But I watched a video of people drinking extracted thc circa probably the 50s given the black and white video. They were asking questions of the test subject throughout. 70 years later it’s finally becoming available. Nothing but lies on lies. I see mdma is being thrown under the bus recently. I’m just saying I’m open to more than what’s been allowed.
And I am too. But not for things that people literally use for date rape because they can pretty quickly cause complete unconsciousness (as that is their purpose).
I have no problem with THC and its derivatives. THC is generally not something rapists use. Same with MDMA. MDMA might make someone extra cuddly, but they’ll still be able to fight back if someone tries to rape them. Because they’re still conscious.
Do you think Rohypnol should be freely available over the counter as well? GHB? Because I’m thinking maybe we don’t create a whole bunch of new Bill Cosbys.
Ketamine is a party drug, it’s not a date rape drug.
You might as well call booze a date rape drug because if you get drunk enough you black out.
Certain drugs, such as Rohypnol, GHB, and Ketamine, are sometimes called “rape drugs” because they can be used to facilitate sexual assault
https://www.butler.edu/well-being/date-rape-drugs/
This article describes the features and effects of the “date rape” drugs of Rohypnol, Gamma Hydroxy Butyrate (GHB), and Ketamine.
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/date-rape-drugs
Since the mid-1990s, the media and researchers have also documented an increased use of drugs such as flunitrazepam and ketamine to facilitate sexual assaults in the context of dating.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_rape_drug#Depressants
Furthermore, this describes what happens to the victim when ketamine is used as a date rape drug: https://www.thehealthsite.com/diseases-conditions/date-rape-drug-ketamine-effects-p114-111164/
You can party with other date rape drugs too. Are you really suggesting general anesthetics should be OTC?
I agree with you, I’ve never heard of ket being used for date rape.
That said, GHB definitely has and it’s one of my favourite party drugs hahaha
Could this BE any worse?
This is just awful. RIP Chanandler Bong.
Sorry, I will see myself out.
“…an anesthesiologist who served as his primary care physician” that seems like the problem right there.
“Uf, that’s a nasty cold you got there, Matthew, let me grab you a few benzos.”
Michael Jackson was taking Propofol as a sleep aid. You’re not far off.
The news source of this post could not be identified. Please check the source yourself. Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
Bad bot. Just don’t comment if you don’t know anything.
Everyone’s got such a huge hate boner for this bot, but I have no idea why.
In this case, by saying it doesn’t have info on the source it clues user into the fact that it’s not a very large or popular source, which is an extra bit of data readers can take with them even if they don’t do any more research beyond that.
If it was my bot, I would probably program it to do that, rather than do nothing in cases like this.
My issues are:
- Limited usefulness: I can visit MBFC on my own if I want to. A single-purpose bot is annoying.
- MBFC rankings out-of-context aren’t helpful: NYTimes can publish the most out-of-touch editorial and the bot says “Highly Factual”, while LGBTQNation can post a hard-hitting investigative piece and the bot says “Mostly Factual”. The bot didn’t read the articles.
- Adding a bias rating to every article creates bias: People who treat the bot’s rating as a prediction of the value of the linked article, aren’t approaching the article with a neutral point of view.
- MBFC is biased. The work they do is important, and the information on their site can be useful, but as with any media organization, it’s got an agenda.
- The bot admin’s “block it if you don’t like it” philosophy shows zero interest in developing a tool that the community wants, just for building a tool that blasts as much MBFC data across Lemmy as possible.
Honestly, if this was just a bot that gave links to information about the source, like MBFC, Wikipedia, the source site’s official about page, info about parent companies, info on the author of the article, etc., I would probably upvote it. A tool that gives me the power to review several different sources of information and come to my own conclusion would be great.
It’s the fact that it tries to steer people’s perception of the article by giving your MBFC’S score of the publisher out-of-context that bothers me. I don’t want a bot telling me how to feel about every media source.
And failing silently is a good failure mode. This top level post here is worthless.
I appreciate you sharing your views on this. You make some good points.
