Shouldn't that be up to bodily autonomy? If someone feels that cocane relieves their symptoms then who is the doctor to say that they don't. Perhaps releaving those symptoms even for a short period of time is worth the consequences.

▲

XorNot a day ago | parent [-]

That's just arguing for drug legalization with extra pseudoscience.

I am all for people doing however much cocaine they feel they need. In broad daylight - let's just drag that into the light and let people go to the dispensary for cocaine hydrochloride, metered, measured and with warning labels.

Because the war on drugs is a stupid waste of time and lives, but no doctor or medical professional has to justify your own stupid actions.

▲

ryandrake a day ago | parent [-]

It’s also an argument for quackery and snake oil, as long as the salesman declares “some people said it works!”

“People should be allowed bodily autonomy to take whatever chemicals they want” easily and dangerously turns into “People should be able to advertise and sell miracle cures that don’t work as long as their victims are gullible.”

Every snake oil fraudster hides their fraud behind principles like bodily autonomy.

	▲	Jach a day ago \| parent [-]
		There is already much snake oil sales and marketing going on, it's already enabled by arguments that are not based on bodily autonomy, which suggests that a move towards more respect to bodily autonomy will not noticeably increase such snake oil. The resistance to homeopathy has not gone well. I actually believe the resistance is actively harmed by making legit chemicals harder to get instead of easier. When people can easily get the good stuff that works there's not much of a market for the easy to get snake oil that doesn't.