Drugs in the Cockpit

[Larry Dighera]

Is this an example of better living through chemistry, or does
chemically altered consciousness of pilots cause more problems than it
cures?



-------------------------------------------------------------------
AVflash Volume 10, Number 14b -- April 1, 2004
-------------------------------------------------------------------

"SMART DRUGS" ON THE WAY
A new generation of, uh, performance-enhancing drugs -- nicknamed
"V!agra for the mind" -- is in the works, and drug companies already
are looking at pilots as a potential market. According to a report in
theage.com, some in the industry are predicting these so-called "smart
drugs," which dramatically improve memory, could be on the market in
five to 10 years. "If [the drug] proves safe and effective, it could
ultimately be used by people who want to learn a language or a musical
instrument or even in schools," said Tim Tully, a professor of
genetics at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/217-full.html#187000

....ALZHEIMER DRUG SHOWN TO BOOST COCKPIT PERFORMANCE...
Scientists already have experimented on pilots with drugs available
today, to see if they can make us better, more alert and more
responsive. Of particular note is a test done at Stanford University
in 2002 with donepezil, which is widely used to ease the memory loss
of Alzheimer patients. It found that pilots taking donepezil performed
better in tests in a Cessna 172 simulator than those given a placebo,
and that the drug-taking pilots were particularly superior at landing
and maintaining a scan of the panel.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/217-full.html#187001

....AS "GO PILLS" FUEL MILITARY PILOTS
Of course, drugs in the cockpit are nothing new. U.S. Air Force flight
surgeons frequently supply amphetamines to pilots for long flights and
in demanding combat situations -- a practice not without controversy.
Also known as "speed," and, in the military, as "go pills,"
amphetamines are considered essential by some in the military to
maintaining a top-notch fighting force. Their use was not publicly
well-known until the drugs were implicated in a friendly-fire incident
in Afghanistan in 2002, in which an American F-16 pilot mistakenly
dropped a laser-guided bomb on Canadian soldiers, killing four of
them.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/217-full.html#187002

[C J Campbell]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Is this an example of better living through chemistry, or does
> chemically altered consciousness of pilots cause more problems than it
> cures?

When I first read it I thought it might be an April Fools joke.

Personally, I want to be able to learn things like in "The Matrix."

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:05:49 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote in Message-Id:
>:

>
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>
>> Is this an example of better living through chemistry, or does
>> chemically altered consciousness of pilots cause more problems than it
>> cures?
>
>When I first read it I thought it might be an April Fools joke.

Look up Cortex Pharmaceuticals: http://www.cortexpharm.com/main.html

>Personally, I want to be able to learn things like in "The Matrix."

At what cost? If the USAF's use of drugs results in frendly-fire
accidents, is it a good idea?

[C J Campbell]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >When I first read it I thought it might be an April Fools joke.
>
> Look up Cortex Pharmaceuticals: http://www.cortexpharm.com/main.html
>
> >Personally, I want to be able to learn things like in "The Matrix."
>
> At what cost? If the USAF's use of drugs results in frendly-fire
> accidents, is it a good idea?

Has it resulted in friendly-fire accidents? Yes, there have been
friendly-fire accidents. Yes, some of those pilots have been on 'go' pills.
But I have never seen an incident where it was established that the use of
'go' pills was the primary cause or even a significant factor in the
accident. It can even be argued the heightened alertness of the pilots
actually prevents these accidents from happening more often.

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:55:46 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote in Message-Id:
>:

>Has it resulted in friendly-fire accidents? Yes, there have been
>friendly-fire accidents. Yes, some of those pilots have been on 'go' pills.
>But I have never seen an incident where it was established that the use of
>'go' pills was the primary cause or even a significant factor in the
>accident. It can even be argued the heightened alertness of the pilots
>actually prevents these accidents from happening more often.

From the original article:

Also known as "speed," and, in the military, as "go pills,"
amphetamines are considered essential by some in the military to
maintaining a top-notch fighting force. Their use was not publicly
well-known until the drugs were implicated in a friendly-fire
incident in Afghanistan in 2002, in which an American F-16 pilot
mistakenly dropped a laser-guided bomb on Canadian soldiers,
killing four of them.

So while not yet an established cause of frendly-fire incidents, "go
pills" (amphetamines) seem to have been implicated as causal.

[Dennis O'Connor]

Ya know, of airline pilots involved in a fatal crash, in excess of 95% of
them had caffeine in their bloodstream at autopsy... Now, there is a
definite causal relationship between a drug and crashes that is being swept
under the rug - I smell a scandal here, a Pulitzer even... Where are
Bernstein and Woodworth, they must be sleeping at the switch...

Gawd I love statistics, I can prove anything!

denny
"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:55:46 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> > wrote in Message-Id:
> >:
>
> >Has it resulted in friendly-fire accidents? Yes, there have been
> >friendly-fire accidents. Yes, some of those pilots have been on 'go'
pills.
> >But I have never seen an incident where it was established that the use
of
> >'go' pills was the primary cause or even a significant factor in the
> >accident. It can even be argued the heightened alertness of the pilots
> >actually prevents these accidents from happening more often.
>
> From the original article:
>
> Also known as "speed," and, in the military, as "go pills,"
> amphetamines are considered essential by some in the military to
> maintaining a top-notch fighting force. Their use was not publicly
> well-known until the drugs were implicated in a friendly-fire
> incident in Afghanistan in 2002, in which an American F-16 pilot
> mistakenly dropped a laser-guided bomb on Canadian soldiers,
> killing four of them.
>
> So while not yet an established cause of frendly-fire incidents, "go
> pills" (amphetamines) seem to have been implicated as causal.
>
>

[curious12357]

Lol, I agree Dennis,

Yep, a lot of people confuse correlation with causation.

If it rained the last four times you washed your car, there's a
100% correlation between you washing your car and it raining.
But you washing your car has 0% causation.

As the old saying goes....

figures dont lie
but liars figure



On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 13:43:19 -0500, "Dennis O'Connor"
> wrote:

>Ya know, of airline pilots involved in a fatal crash, in excess of 95% of
>them had caffeine in their bloodstream at autopsy... Now, there is a
>definite causal relationship between a drug and crashes that is being swept
>under the rug - I smell a scandal here, a Pulitzer even... Where are
>Bernstein and Woodworth, they must be sleeping at the switch...
>
>Gawd I love statistics, I can prove anything!
>
>denny
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:55:46 -0800, "C J Campbell"
>> > wrote in Message-Id:
>> >:
>>
>> >Has it resulted in friendly-fire accidents? Yes, there have been
>> >friendly-fire accidents. Yes, some of those pilots have been on 'go'
>pills.
>> >But I have never seen an incident where it was established that the use
>of
>> >'go' pills was the primary cause or even a significant factor in the
>> >accident. It can even be argued the heightened alertness of the pilots
>> >actually prevents these accidents from happening more often.
>>
>> From the original article:
>>
>> Also known as "speed," and, in the military, as "go pills,"
>> amphetamines are considered essential by some in the military to
>> maintaining a top-notch fighting force. Their use was not publicly
>> well-known until the drugs were implicated in a friendly-fire
>> incident in Afghanistan in 2002, in which an American F-16 pilot
>> mistakenly dropped a laser-guided bomb on Canadian soldiers,
>> killing four of them.
>>
>> So while not yet an established cause of frendly-fire incidents, "go
>> pills" (amphetamines) seem to have been implicated as causal.
>>
>>
>

[Tom Sixkiller]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> > At what cost? If the USAF's use of drugs results in frendly-fire
> > accidents, is it a good idea?
>
> Has it resulted in friendly-fire accidents? Yes, there have been
> friendly-fire accidents. Yes, some of those pilots have been on 'go'
pills.
> But I have never seen an incident where it was established that the use of
> 'go' pills was the primary cause or even a significant factor in the
> accident. It can even be argued the heightened alertness of the pilots
> actually prevents these accidents from happening more often.

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/217-full.html#187002

[C J Campbell]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:55:46 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> > wrote in Message-Id:
> >:
>
> >Has it resulted in friendly-fire accidents? Yes, there have been
> >friendly-fire accidents. Yes, some of those pilots have been on 'go'
pills.
> >But I have never seen an incident where it was established that the use
of
> >'go' pills was the primary cause or even a significant factor in the
> >accident. It can even be argued the heightened alertness of the pilots
> >actually prevents these accidents from happening more often.
>
> From the original article:
>
> Also known as "speed," and, in the military, as "go pills,"
> amphetamines are considered essential by some in the military to
> maintaining a top-notch fighting force. Their use was not publicly
> well-known until the drugs were implicated in a friendly-fire
> incident in Afghanistan in 2002, in which an American F-16 pilot
> mistakenly dropped a laser-guided bomb on Canadian soldiers,
> killing four of them.
>
> So while not yet an established cause of frendly-fire incidents, "go
> pills" (amphetamines) seem to have been implicated as causal.

The trouble is that even AVweb has not said how these drugs were implicated.
In the incident they cite, the pilots were using 'go' pills. Nothing in the
investigation has shown any causal relationship with the accident. You might
as well say that the pilots' helmets or the fillings of their teeth were
implicated.

[C J Campbell]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
>
> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> > > At what cost? If the USAF's use of drugs results in frendly-fire
> > > accidents, is it a good idea?
> >
> > Has it resulted in friendly-fire accidents? Yes, there have been
> > friendly-fire accidents. Yes, some of those pilots have been on 'go'
> pills.
> > But I have never seen an incident where it was established that the use
of
> > 'go' pills was the primary cause or even a significant factor in the
> > accident. It can even be argued the heightened alertness of the pilots
> > actually prevents these accidents from happening more often.
>
> http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/217-full.html#187002

Ah. Because AVweb says they were implicated, they must have caused the
accident. Wouldn't be the first time that AVweb has gone out on a limb and
sawed it off.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> > http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/217-full.html#187002
>
> Ah. Because AVweb says they were implicated, they must have caused the
> accident. Wouldn't be the first time that AVweb has gone out on a limb and
> sawed it off.

What part of the article states that? They report only what the Air Force
and ABC News have stated. They take no position. Pretty fair reporting I'd
say.

[C J Campbell]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
>
> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> > > http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/217-full.html#187002
> >
> > Ah. Because AVweb says they were implicated, they must have caused the
> > accident. Wouldn't be the first time that AVweb has gone out on a limb
and
> > sawed it off.
>
> What part of the article states that? They report only what the Air Force
> and ABC News have stated. They take no position. Pretty fair reporting I'd
> say.

And all that they stated was that the pilot had taken one of the pills an
hour before the flight. He might have taken a dump, too. Where does the Air
Force say that this caused the accident?

[Tom Sixkiller]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > > http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/217-full.html#187002
> > >
> > > Ah. Because AVweb says they were implicated, they must have caused the
> > > accident. Wouldn't be the first time that AVweb has gone out on a limb
> and
> > > sawed it off.
> >
> > What part of the article states that? They report only what the Air
Force
> > and ABC News have stated. They take no position. Pretty fair reporting
I'd
> > say.
>
> And all that they stated was that the pilot had taken one of the pills an
> hour before the flight. He might have taken a dump, too. Where does the
Air
> Force say that this caused the accident?

No on in the issue says it CAUSED the accident; they're questioning whether
it CONTRIBUTED to the accident.

[C J Campbell]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
>
> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "C J Campbell" > wrote in
message
> > > ...
> > > > > http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/217-full.html#187002
> > > >
> > > > Ah. Because AVweb says they were implicated, they must have caused
the
> > > > accident. Wouldn't be the first time that AVweb has gone out on a
limb
> > and
> > > > sawed it off.
> > >
> > > What part of the article states that? They report only what the Air
> Force
> > > and ABC News have stated. They take no position. Pretty fair reporting
> I'd
> > > say.
> >
> > And all that they stated was that the pilot had taken one of the pills
an
> > hour before the flight. He might have taken a dump, too. Where does the
> Air
> > Force say that this caused the accident?
>
> No on in the issue says it CAUSED the accident; they're questioning
whether
> it CONTRIBUTED to the accident.

The article provides no evidence that the pills even contributed to the
accident.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > "C J Campbell" > wrote in
> message
> > > > ...
> > > > > >
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/217-full.html#187002
> > > > >
> > > > > Ah. Because AVweb says they were implicated, they must have caused
> the
> > > > > accident. Wouldn't be the first time that AVweb has gone out on a
> limb
> > > and
> > > > > sawed it off.
> > > >
> > > > What part of the article states that? They report only what the Air
> > Force
> > > > and ABC News have stated. They take no position. Pretty fair
reporting
> > I'd
> > > > say.
> > >
> > > And all that they stated was that the pilot had taken one of the pills
> an
> > > hour before the flight. He might have taken a dump, too. Where does
the
> > Air
> > > Force say that this caused the accident?
> >
> > No on in the issue says it CAUSED the accident; they're questioning
> whether
> > it CONTRIBUTED to the accident.
>
> The article provides no evidence that the pills even contributed to the
> accident.

The article (it's not even an "article", just a "blurb") isn't doing an
analysis, only reporting the Air Force and ABC News reports. Sort of a
"heads up" in conjunction with the Alzheimer's drugs.

Quite trying to read into it something that isn't there.