Artistic License Pharmacology: Difference between revisions

Line 31:

== [[Comic Books]] ==

* Pretty much every comic-book use of drugs fails miserably at pharmacology, but special mention goes to the [[Batman]] villain Scarecrow, since his entire gimmick is a hallucinatory "fear gas." Hallucinogens take ~~30-90~~ minutes to circulate to the brain and actually cause hallucinations (and almost all are administered orally). Hallucinations are also extremely unpredictable and are usually caused by setting and expectations before ingesting the drug and most people can easily tell a hallucination from reality. In short, the drug onset is unlikely, the route of administration is atypical, and most importantly, the effects are wrong. Some drugs ''might'' fit:

* Pretty much every comic-book use of drugs fails miserably at pharmacology, but special mention goes to the [[Batman]] villain Scarecrow, since his entire gimmick is a hallucinatory "fear gas." Hallucinogens take 30–90 minutes to circulate to the brain and actually cause hallucinations (and almost all are administered orally). Hallucinations are also extremely unpredictable and are usually caused by setting and expectations before ingesting the drug and most people can easily tell a hallucination from reality. In short, the drug onset is unlikely, the route of administration is atypical, and most importantly, the effects are wrong. Some drugs ''might'' fit:

** [http://www.erowid.org/plants/salvia/salvia_effects.shtml Salvia Divinorum], which can be smoked. Inhalable, rapid onset, etc etc. Not nearly nasty enough to use as a weapon... but such chemicals [[wikipedia:3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate|do exist]] and can have [[wikipedia:Ergotism|most unpleasant effects]].

*** If you think the effects of salvia are not capable of inducing fear to the degree that it could be used as a weapon, you've obviously never smoked it. "Rapid onset" means literally just a few seconds, a minute at most. The reason it hasn't caught on as a party drug is that large doses (which are actually still very small) can cause the person to experience horrifying hallucinations.

Line 58:

== Meta ==

* Addiction has three aspects: habituation, tolerance and withdrawal. Marijuana, for example, doesn't fit the classic model for any of these categories. (Some have referred to a "reverse tolerance" effect, probably due to novice users not knowing they need to inhale and (for a little while holding their breath. Some tolerance occurs, but even daily users find the effects readily obtainable.) Ceasing use of cannabis causes no withdrawal symptoms whatsoever: unless you include minor insomnia among those who use it as a sleep aid (people prone to insomnia ''before'' ever using marijuana). Strong ~~habituation--in~~ which people will endure tedious, difficult or risky situations to obtain the drug (similar to with heroin or cocaine)--''does'' happen, but only for a tiny percentage of users: most of whom have problems with impulsive behavior in many areas of their lives. Needless to say, many other "addictive" substances don't meet those three aspects. This is why, even more [[~~Egregious|egregiously~~]], writing someone as being physically and biologically addicted to [[Frothy Mugs of Water]] or the [[G-Rated Drug]] is, therefore, failing pharmacology forever. Emotional addiction, on the other hand, would be somewhat more believable.

* Addiction has three aspects: habituation, tolerance and withdrawal. Marijuana, for example, doesn't fit the classic model for any of these categories. (Some have referred to a "reverse tolerance" effect, probably due to novice users not knowing they need to inhale and (for a little while holding their breath. Some tolerance occurs, but even daily users find the effects readily obtainable.) Ceasing use of cannabis causes no withdrawal symptoms whatsoever: unless you include minor insomnia among those who use it as a sleep aid (people prone to insomnia ''before'' ever using marijuana). Strong habituation—in which people will endure tedious, difficult or risky situations to obtain the drug (similar to with heroin or cocaine)--''does'' happen, but only for a tiny percentage of users: most of whom have problems with impulsive behavior in many areas of their lives. Needless to say, many other "addictive" substances don't meet those three aspects. This is why, even more [[egregious]]ly, writing someone as being physically and biologically addicted to [[Frothy Mugs of Water]] or the [[G-Rated Drug]] is, therefore, failing pharmacology forever. Emotional addiction, on the other hand, would be somewhat more believable.

** This theory of addiction can be a [[Discredited Trope]] nowadays, as a number of substances now known not to cause physical dependence (cocaine being the big one, along with methamphetamine and MDMA) can indeed cause horrifying psychological dependence. For what it's worth, the DSM-IV actually does include "cannabis dependence" among its list of substance abuse disorders.

*** Athough 'psychological dependence' is also a contested concept because there is evidence that it is not drug-dependent state. In other words, if one starts to take drug that does not cause physical dependence to alleviate unwanted emotional state this may lead to dependence on any substance with similar result (with a preference to the best known drug). Think uncontrolled self-medication of anxiety and depression. In other words, the source of the problem is not the drug itself but rather a underlying psychological problem that needs to be addressed directly.

Line 134:

[[Category:Did Not Do the Research]]

[[Category:Artistic License Indexes]]

[[Category:~~index~~]]

[[Category:Index]]

[[Category:Artistic License Pharmacology]]