An Unexpected Finding Among Commercial Pilots

"Morgans" wrote in news:21H4j.90$gJ2.33
@newsfe05.lga:

You keep talking about drugs. What drugs are you talking about?

Alcohol, in this case.


Why, what are you on?

The question should be, "what drugs are you _not_ on, that you should be
taking?

That says volumes.

I prescribe a 2X4 upside the head..


Bertie

"Tina" wrote

Which of course raises an interesting point. His website offers his
services as a tour guide. Potential customers, doing due diligence, if
they google him, will learn something of the personality he presents
here compared to the one he uses when he offers his services there.

They will have to decide if they want this arrogant obese shorts and
hiking boot wearing person serving as their guide. .

He's really augering in, isn't he?

This brings up an important fact that he does not realize.

The first rule for getting yourself out of a hole, is to stop digging.
--
Jim in NC

"Wolfgang Schwanke" wrote

Addicts get so used to the positive feelings induced by the drug that
they get strong depressions when sober. They need to take the drug
again and again to to protect them from these depressions and to go on
with their lives at all. It's a vicious circle, that's what drug
addiction is all about. The euphoria they originally took the drug for
has long gone.

You are talking about addiction all in a recreational sense.

Prescribed narcotics for pain control are just as addictive, and difficult
to withdraw from, and euphoria is not a sensation that is present, or
desired.

This fact does not make the withdrawal process any less difficult.

There are very real physical sensations that make ordinary living quite
impossible, if the withdrawal of the narcotic is too sudden. It is quite
incapacitating.

That being said, the use of the narcotic is the only thing that makes life
possible, for some people in some situations. Without them, I suspect that
there would be many suicides, because the pain of the subject is so severe,
that any escape from the pain would be considered, including the taking of
one's life.
--
Jim in NC

"Stefan" wrote in message
. ..
Neil Gould schrieb:

Aside from countries where consumption of alcohol may be
illegal, which countries have a zero tolerance for drinking and driving?

An overview of the Situation in Europe:
http://www.tcs.ch/etc/medialib/main/...emie_carte.gif

Man, you can get pretty drunk in most of western Europe and Great Britain,
and still be legal, compared to the USA. I'm surprised, but not surprised.
--
Jim in NC

Wolfgang Schwanke writes:

Addicts get so used to the positive feelings induced by the drug that
they get strong depressions when sober.

But that is their choice, not an effect of the drug. It's part of the
addictive personality.

Morgans writes:

Prescribed narcotics for pain control are just as addictive, and difficult
to withdraw from, and euphoria is not a sensation that is present, or
desired.

Prescription narcotics are incompatible with flying and driving if they impair
the pilot/driver. However, opioids are generally less impairing than alcohol,
so it makes little sense to worry about prescription painkillers unless
alcohol is completely excluded first.

Antihistamines are fairly harmless overall but they can cause considerable
impairment in the form of drowsiness, a good example of an innocuous drug that
is nevertheless incompatible with operation of a vehicle.

There are very real physical sensations that make ordinary living quite
impossible, if the withdrawal of the narcotic is too sudden. It is quite
incapacitating.

Opioid withdrawal is less debilitating than alcohol withdrawal. And neither
is impossible; if they were impossible, nobody would ever be able to stop
taking these drugs, and yet people manage to do so every day.

The primary barrier is psychological, particularly in people who are
predisposed to addictive behaviors. If they aren't hooked on booze, they are
hooked on pot, or something else.

That being said, the use of the narcotic is the only thing that makes life
possible, for some people in some situations. Without them, I suspect that
there would be many suicides, because the pain of the subject is so severe,
that any escape from the pain would be considered, including the taking of
one's life.

There is no reason to skimp on the use of painkillers just because of taboos
over their use. Morphine and the other opioids are still the gold standard
for pain relief, and when used legitimately for pain relief there isn't any
reason to be nervous about them. Most people who take opioids only for pain
relief do not become addicted, even though they develop a dependence on the
drugs in time. And even if they did become addicted, that would still be
preferable to a life of severe pain.

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Tina" wrote

Which of course raises an interesting point. His website offers his
services as a tour guide. Potential customers, doing due diligence, if
they google him, will learn something of the personality he presents
here compared to the one he uses when he offers his services there.

They will have to decide if they want this arrogant obese shorts and
hiking boot wearing person serving as their guide. .

He's really augering in, isn't he?

This brings up an important fact that he does not realize.

The first rule for getting yourself out of a hole, is to stop digging.

He's addicted to digging.

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 19:39:56 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

John Mazor writes:

If it is habitual and not a rare event, then yes, but you
didn't specify that.

Is daily consumption of alcohol habitual?



This from someone who lives in France.

In fact, until fairly recently, French pilots were allowed to have a glass
of wine with theiir dinner inflight..



Fjukkwit.

Bertie
----------------

Bertie

errata

I was liaison aboard the French Aircraft Carrier, Joan D'Arc (sp) and
they had two 20,000 gallon stainless tanks built into ship for wine.
Crew drank 1000 liters of wine each day.

Just glad they were not driving a super tanker.

They figured the wine would last to Australia and there they told me
they would fill the tanks with Aussie beer to go the rest of the way
home to France )

From my experience, the French turn a blind eye to drinking.

Big John

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
John Mazor writes:

Did you specify "daily" in your sweeping statement?

Answer my question first.

Why? It's not relevant to your error.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
John Mazor writes:

Then they must get a lot of cases that go to court because that's bad science.

They get a lot of cases because some people still cannot prevent themselves
from drinking and driving. Those people often go to jail. There's nothing
wrong with the science.

If the law will convict anyone on 0.01% BAC then the law is a ass.

You can get a non-zero reading without consuming alcohol, even with
lab-grade equipment.

All you have to do is prove that it's not alcohol.

1. One kind of false positive doesn't involve ingestible alcohol.
2. And "consuming" is a clue to a second source of false positives.

That's why the FAA allows up to a .02% BAC reading before flying.

It should be zero.

Nope. That would be bad science.