Difference between revisions of "Talk:Drugs"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(reply) |
(→Liberal??: Some are good.) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
: It created an impression that drugs are a good thing, and in its introduction blurred the distinction between prescription medication and illegal drugs.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 07:50, 25 January 2008 (EST) | : It created an impression that drugs are a good thing, and in its introduction blurred the distinction between prescription medication and illegal drugs.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 07:50, 25 January 2008 (EST) | ||
| + | :: Well, ''some'' drugs are a good thing (taken properly). But surely any problems in that regard could have been fixed by some rewording or rearrangement, rather than outright deletion which makes it look like there's no such thing as medicinal drugs. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:21, 25 January 2008 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 13:21, January 25, 2008
I added medicinal drugs, the section could use a bit more info, like the dates and people involved in the discovery of penicillin and the synthesis of aspirin. Also, what the heck are those new pain killers called? My memory fails me... Human 17:36, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
Liberal??
Andy,
What was "liberal" about this that you removed. It looks pretty factual to me.
Philip J. Rayment 07:31, 25 January 2008 (EST)
- It created an impression that drugs are a good thing, and in its introduction blurred the distinction between prescription medication and illegal drugs.--Aschlafly 07:50, 25 January 2008 (EST)
- Well, some drugs are a good thing (taken properly). But surely any problems in that regard could have been fixed by some rewording or rearrangement, rather than outright deletion which makes it look like there's no such thing as medicinal drugs. Philip J. Rayment 08:21, 25 January 2008 (EST)