Mimicking Logic: The Media Fails Again

As always, the media demonstrates an amazing level stupidity that is inexcusable.

For international readers, recently in Australia, a young man died after taking a legal “party” drug, which has led to questions and, at least short-term bans on such drugs.

It is the language, however, used by the media which has rubbed me up the wrong way.

These drugs are referred to as “synthetic drugs” which “mimic” the effects of LSD. Here’s an example.

Give me a break! What is the difference between these synthetic drugs and Ecstasy or meth? They are all compounds, made in some dodgy hovel, known to undo the better part of the higher faculties that make us modern humans. I may be mistaken, but I never knew Ecstasy berries grew on a bush.

Please, the odd user whom might find themselves sober long enough to feel the need to enlighten me on how natural whatever drug actually is; if it’s a pill, a fine white power or something you are very unlikely to find in nature, it’s atv the least refined and certainly not natural. “Synthetic” is a meaningless term that plays down the reality – these substances are drugs people are using to lose their better senses. What else could the term mean other than to suggest that some how these substances are softer?

Which brings me to my other point. These drugs “mimic” LSD. I’m sorry, but what’s the difference between mimicking the effects of LSD and the effects of LSD? Isn’t the point of drugs to feel the effects of it?

So, to the user, what possible difference can there be if the effects seem the same? Again, the term is meaningless and designed to soften the reality… all of which means little to the individual who recently died under a “mimic” influence.