Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
|
According to drugs.com the effects are simalar to those of tobacco. They both bring with them risks of cancer as well. Like tobacco, betel nut relieves the positive symptoms of schizophrenia in men (women are not mentioned in this article) making way for the possibility of a future medication to help relieve symptoms of this brain disorder.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
|
"...i'm curious why people are allowed to consume betel nuts..." Some people still value liberty. If an adult human being is not free to decide for him or herself what he/she will ingest into his/her own body, then how can anyone be considered "free." If I have to choose between freedom and safety, I will choose freedom every time.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
|
Then why are illicit drugs illicit then
N why bother with labelling and then banning harmful food additives? some of the banned food additives do not downright kill but are carcinogenic, like betel nuts. One can jolly well just put up a warning. Betel nuts don't even carry warnings like cigarettes do on their packaging. Double-standard then, I call it, if one is to say this is all just about freedom of choice. |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|