> "Don't worry the doc said to the mother, Ritalin is as safe as cocaine, it's well proven in human studies."

Is this some quote you made up to explain a point, or are you referencing something I am happening to miss? It doesn't invalidate what you said either way, I just want to make sure we are on the same page.

> I'm not talking about big pharma, I talking about the bogus but common theory where drugs are hailed as good and bad based on supposed pharmacological properties. The differences are not pharmacology but society.

How about a different drug? Alcohol has great pharmacological properties. If I am not mistaken, alcohol is one of the best anxiolytics known to man, but oooh boy does it have some awful short-term and long-term side effects. Hence where benzos come into play. They work on the same parts of the brain, and while they do have side-effect (some similar to alcohol), I'd argue they are healthier both in the short and long-term than alcohol.

It's crazy to me, how people (not you) get all bent out of shape over drugs that actually help people due to some misinformed idea about the dangers of said drug. Sure, not all drugs are perfect nor is anybody's biological make-up.

However, I imagine few people are aware that NSAIDs are related to more negative health effects and have a higher mortality rate than medically prescribed stimulants, like Ritalin, at therapeutic dosages (I'd wager even street stimulants too -- at least in the short term considering those are rarely taken in "therapeutic" dosages) though finding data on this stuff can be somewhat tricky.