>>16523354
Sometimes that's completely true. However other times it's a reasonable tradeoff to extend life. If you have a little dry cough but your blood pressure is lowered, well that's a lot better than getting kidney and cardiovascular disease.

>>16523354
it's a semantics debate. the medications you take can have adverse effects on you depending on a variety of factors. sometimes these are worth the benefits of the medications, other times not. whether you want to call them "side effects" or "poisonous effects" isn't really relevant. no remedy is without drawbacks.

>>16523354
Define "poisoning" otherwise it's just a word meant to excite negative emotions and isn't productive to a reasonable discussion. All drugs, including hard street drugs and prescription medications, are drugs because they have an effect on the body. Some drugs are psychotropic, some improve blood flow to your dick. Drugs undergo a process of research to find a use/purpose for them and are continuously refined until they manage to do their job with minimal unintended impact, however due to the nature of chemistry some things cannot be prevented. If the negatives outweigh the benefits, there is no incentive to use the drug. This determination is made first by regulatory agencies who will conditionally approve medical human usage of drugs after a decade worth of expensive research providing that it won't be a net negative, then once that filter is cleared the same must be done by pharmaceutical manufacturers who want a drug that wont cause them bad PR, then by insurance companies who will only pay for things that have been shown to work, then by pharmacists who use their education in pharmacology to determine whether to stock the drug, then on a case by case basis by your physician when determining what the best medication in your situation with your medical history and other potentially conflicting concurrent drugs may be.

Also, if you drink 20 gallons of water in a day you will die from "water poisoning."

>>16523403
Nobody takes doctors seriously. Your latin naming scheme covers up the childhood naivety, but not body believes bigfootitis or brainitis. You only apply glorified bandages like moms. And moms are women. You are a woman.

>>16523403
>if you drink 20 gallons of water in a day you will die from "water poisoning."
thats not what you'll die from

>>16523354
Someone enlighten me on the psychology of some people getting so mad over vaccines?

It's definitely got to do something with their own feeling of inadequacy.

>>16523354
the poisoning due to pharmaceuticals and vaccination is not a side effect. it's not even an effect. it's the effect.

>>16524634
there is no drug that cures cancer

Even chemotherapy is highly fallible and often causes the death before the cancer gets the patient.

all meds are poisons that taken in the right dosage under the right circumstances can have positive effects that outweigh the negative. everyone should do research before they start a new med regardless of what your dr told you.

>>16524681
>this antibiotic targets potentially fatal infections of C. diff.
>some patients also experience nausea
>BIG PHARMA WANTS TO POISON YOU!!!!
Happy?

"Side effects" and "poisoning" essentially describe the same phenomenon

>>16525950
Incorrect. As an example, the placebo effect is a side effect, but it isn't poisoning by any definition.

>>16524691
/thread

>>16525970
>the placebo effect is a side effect
no it isn't.
>but it isn't poisoning by any definition.
it is if you die from it

>>16526623
>no it isn't.
Yes it is. Placebos are specifically given to not cause effects. The placebo effect is a side effect.

>it is if you die from it
No it isn't, any more than getting hit by a car would be. Also you can't die from the placebo effect.

>>16526711
Another day, another retard that thinks naming = reality

>>16523354
The dose makes the poison

>>16526836
>Another day, another retard that thinks naming = reality
What placebos are called has fuck all to do with why they are given. Unless you think placebo effects aren't caused by placebos.

Also the nocebo effect and the placebo effect aren't the same thing. Also also, your own source doesn't report any deaths from placebos. You know, cause you can't fucking die from the fucking nocebo effect.

In summary, I have no fucking idea what point you were trying to make cause you're so fucking stupid. Fuck off, you dumb monkey.

>>16527326
You are a complete retard. Nocebo is experiencing worse results even when taking inert substances. Only the most gorilla brained monkey nigger would jump up and down at the distinction when this is quite definitively the topic in question.

>>16527590
>Nocebo is experiencing worse results even when taking inert substances.
Yes. And? I said the placebo effect isn't poison. I didn't say placebos can't cause negative effects.

The argument made was all side effects are poison, not all treatments can cause negative side effects. My counter argument was that there are non-negative side effects, and as an example, I gave the placebo effect.

To counter my counter argument, you'd have to claim placebo effects don't exist, not that nocebo effects do.

Fucking shit for brains. I swear to fuck this is why logic should be required teaching in public school.

>>16523354
No, it's not accurate. Side effects can be negative, positive or neutral. Minoxidil used to be a blood pressure medication, until we noticed that one of its side effects is increased hair growth, which is neutral at worst or a positive in case of hair loss. It is now used to treat hair loss, with lowered blood pressure being a possible side effect, which again can be either a negative, positive or neutral depending on what your blood pressure is to begin with.

I shouldn't have to explain this to you. Get a fucking grip.

>>16530178
I'm sorry sir, how much do I owe you

>>16523669
This isn't medicine, it's biochemistry.

>>16530276
you've made it clear that you're upset and suffering emotional distress over this issue by your use of profanities, the emotional discomfort you're experiencing is cognitive dissonance, you've exposed yourself to irrefutable information that conflicts with your worldview and now you're trying to protect your worldview instead of accepting the new information and modifying your views in accordance with the new information.
modifying your views in accordance with the newfound information is also known as 'learning'

>>16531413
>you've made it clear that you're upset
You've made it clear you don't have a counter argument.

>>16531413
>placebo effect isn't poisoning by definition
This is what you said.
>a gargatuan list of negative effects is given for placebo drugs
rekt.
>hurrdurr those are not placebos those are nocebos
This is your response.

>>16531652
I'm sorry, did you have a point? I never claimed placebos can't cause nocebo effects. I said placebo effects, ie the positive effects of placebos, are not poisoning.
>placebo effect isn't poisoning by definition
You literally fucking quoted me.

>a gargatuan list of negative effects is given for placebo drugs
Those are nocebo effects.

>hurrdurr those are not placebos those are nocebos
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/placebo%20effect
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nocebo%20effect
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antonym

>>16523354
>Thing that alters bodily function sometimes causes unrelated thing?
>AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! I'M GOING INSANE!!1!
Taking your ivermectin to cure your covid, you'll say your resulting sterility is just a fluke

>>16524655
tsmt

>>16531668
you just too low iq to understand the difference between legitimate poisoning and psychosomatic symptoms

>>16534751
But I'm not claiming they're the same? I think you replied to the wrong post.

>>16526956
Nice cliche, but it doesn't apply here, the dosages are calculated based on the outcome desired from the drugs' primary effects

>>16523354
"side effects" is pretty much just a polite euphemism for poisoning

>>16523354
No it's retarded as fuck. If you paid attention in middle school biology then you would know that every substance in the body is part of a huge network of chain reactions such that a substance whether increased or decreased has both stimulating and inhibiting effects down the line which then leads to counter reactions and so on. This is all so complex and variable that the end results of all those reactions exist on a bell curve which can be fine-tuned to be desirable for most people most of the time but of course basic biology teaches that there are trade-offs always. So the question is whether these trade-offs are short-term and/or long-term better or worse than your current health condition.

These picrels are for /pol/tards.

>>16523354
by that logic the primary effect is also a poisoning effect
a side effect is something that comes along for the ride with the primary (desired) effect. what is considered primary or side effect is largely a matter of opinion.
using a drug because it makes one feel good is an example of a "side effect" that is really the primary effect that is being sought

>>16538894
>by that logic the primary effect is also a poisoning effect
No it isn't

>>16540998
the desired effect is completely subjective

>>16541003
>the desired effect is completely subjective
No. It isn't. Learn the fucking difference between objective and subjective. Personal and subjective aren't the same thing. People can make subjective value judgments that govern their motives, but they objectively have those motives.

"I took the drug to relieve pain." is objective.
"The drug feels good." is subjective.

>>16541003
no it isn't

>>16537288
Its a polite euphemism for "Even though we claim to be medical and pharmaceutical experts, we can't figure out how to make the drug not do that"

>>16544449
>Even though we claim to be medical and pharmaceutical experts, we can't figure out how to make the drug not do that
we're waiting until the patent expires and then we'll release a slightly less toxic version

>>16523354
Semantics and NLP are powerful tools

>>16523403
>if you drink 20 gallons of water in a day you will die from "water poisoning."
correct

>>16537288
So what do you call it when a chinese royal is assassinated? An "intentional side effect"?

>>16553163
They work particularly effectively on people with mental monologues because language controls their thought processes and thinking abilities

>>16523403
How can people possibly disagree with what you just said? These are actual facts. This is how it works and somehow you have people bickering and squabbling. You didn't pick a side, you just explained how the development of these drugs works and for some reason that ruffles feathers.

>>16555627
>>16523403
pathetic samefagging

>>16555601
Its funny how rhetorical tricks that would never work on "dumb animals" are effective on humans

>>16559117
animals are just as trainable as people are, they just don't have the same capacity to learn as many tricks as people can