Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

PabloX said:
To be honest, I'm not sure how they prescribe it. Are you certain about that? Microdosing is all the buzz, but not sure if that's to do with prescribed consumption
Click to expand...

its the future my mans.

If you're an investor type, check out IHL on the asx. imo pioneering using Psilocybin as a treatment . Already in stage 3 trial and bff's with the FDA. The PSI-GAD trial for general anxiety has the chance to be a real game changer in a huuuuuge market.

They also play in the cannabinoid space with OSA but I think the really money spinner is the magic mushrooms.
 
Last edited:
Kelce68 said:
Caffeine, paracetamol, alcohol, not safe in small quantities, huh?

MDMA, cannabis, morphine, psilocybin are all administered by doctors to treat a variety of issues from chronic pain to insomnia to anxiety. Not safe, eh?

EVERYTHING is dose dependent.

C'mon now, Daz, this isn't Reagan-era United States here..
Click to expand...
My comment was somewhat flippant and we were talking about "illicit" drugs and not prescribed or "approved" drugs - and drugs under medical supervision is usually fine, although, since you brought it up - paracetamol for example, because it is such an old drug detailed studies have largely not been done until recently. These studies have shown that paracetamol use is associated with increased rates rates of death, heart attack, stomach bleeding and kidney failure. Paracetamol is known to cause liver failure in overdose, but it also causes liver failure in people taking standard doses for pain relief. The risk is only about one in a million, but it is a risk. All these different risks stack up. So, as I said no drug is "safe" but also needed in a lot of cases, under medical supervision. Illicit drugs, not under the supervision of a medical professional is not safe, no.
 
liltiger said:
Pretty sure even though third party agreements aren't policed they must be disclosed to the N.R.L. It would make for very interesting reading, if say the Tigers sign player A for 450k and Brydens throw in a top up of 200k.
How would the club explain our chairman's company offering a tpa, when the agreements are supposed to be at arms length from the clubs.
This would be rife throughout the N.R.L.
I would love to know how many tpas can be traced back to the Roosters board members.
Click to expand...
Brydens can’t fun WT players with TPA’s as any TPA’s have to be at arms length from any club sponsor.
That’s why the NRL knocked back Harry T even after he stopped being the club’s major sponsor.
 
bathursttiger1 said:
Brydens can’t fun WT players with TPA’s as any TPA’s have to be at arms length from any club sponsor.
That’s why the NRL knocked back Harry T even after he stopped being the club’s major sponsor.
Click to expand...

Still do not understand why Harry can't do TPA's now that he does not sponsor Wests Tigers officially in any way, as far as I am aware at least.

I'm sure he tips in some money somewhere and he must still be regarded as a sponsor by the NRL even though he or his business no longer feature on any of our jerseys.

Can somebody shed some light on this or did Harry spit the dummy when he was not allowed to take over the whole show and run it his way?
 
dazza65 said:
My comment was somewhat flippant and we were talking about "illicit" drugs and not prescribed or "approved" drugs - and drugs under medical supervision is usually fine, although, since you brought it up - paracetamol for example, because it is such an old drug detailed studies have largely not been done until recently. These studies have shown that paracetamol use is associated with increased rates rates of death, heart attack, stomach bleeding and kidney failure. Paracetamol is known to cause liver failure in overdose, but it also causes liver failure in people taking standard doses for pain relief. The risk is only about one in a million, but it is a risk. All these different risks stack up. So, as I said no drug is "safe" but also needed in a lot of cases, under medical supervision. Illicit drugs, not under the supervision of a medical professional is not safe, no.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with most of what you're saying, but, in order for something to be 'safe', it doesn't need to be risk-free. Air travel for example is considered by and large a 'safe' way to travel, but there are still fatalities. Whether something is considered safe is largely down to whether the prevalence of an adverse outcome is statistically significant.

Illicit drugs, not under the supervision of a medical professional is not safe, no.

This is not true. At all. It is the dosage administered that entirely determines whether taking a particular substance or not is safe, not who is supervising your dose. There is no better example of this fallacy than the fact that nurses and doctors have, and unfortunately on occasion will continue to, administered incorrect dosages to patients leading to illness or death.

Anyway, as I said before to someone else, I think this is all good chat, but we've highjacked the wrong thread again.
 
hank37w said:
Still do not understand why Harry can't do TPA's now that he does not sponsor Wests Tigers officially in any way, as far as I am aware at least.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure he gives money to us. I remember Pascoe went and talked him and gave him a jersey once. It might have been in that documentary. He must be chucking in. The question is how much ?
 
Kelce68 said:
Caffeine, paracetamol, alcohol, not safe in small quantities, huh?

MDMA, cannabis, morphine, psilocybin are all administered by doctors to treat a variety of issues from chronic pain to insomnia to anxiety. Not safe, eh?

EVERYTHING is dose dependent.

C'mon now, Daz, this isn't Reagan-era United States here..
Click to expand...
Drugs are more dangerous because they're illegal. Look at the fentanyl contaminated heroin epidemic in the US, it would be much better to have a harm minimization model because kids (and adults) will do illicit drugs regardless.
 
Kelce68 said:
Caffeine, paracetamol, alcohol, not safe in small quantities, huh?

MDMA, cannabis, morphine, psilocybin are all administered by doctors to treat a variety of issues from chronic pain to insomnia to anxiety. Not safe, eh?

EVERYTHING is dose dependent.

C'mon now, Daz, this isn't Reagan-era United States here..
Click to expand...
 
jadtiger said:
Interesting you mention Stalin being a massive drinker but part of the reason was to see if he could trust his advisors and generals when they had a large amount of alcohol.More than a few were arrested for saying the wrong thing (a week or 2 later) and if you did not drink with him he also saw it as grounds for suspicion and arrest.
Hitler was evil but Stalin was just as bad.
Click to expand...

He started watering down his alcohol because the doctors warned he was in bad health. He also used that as an opportunity as you say to weed out the apparent conspirators.

Guys like Kruschev literally drank themselves to the point where they piss themselves while blacked out. Listen to the behind the bastards pod about him. It's an absolute hoot.
 
TillLindemann said:
Also I think it can be dangerous to not take drugs, or at least alcohol, as there's a chance you could end up bored, miserable and angry, and end up going on a murderous rampage. Hitler was a teetotaller, Osama Bin Laden was a teetotaller, there is a common denominator among such people - if only they got on the piss with mates and had a bit of a laugh more often they might have turned out differently.
Click to expand...

Osama didnt get on it due to religious
reasons, but Hitler was a well documented
drug abuser. He was on speed/meth,
there's some good books & docos on it -
the guy was a tweaker. There's a YT
archive video of him off his nut at the
1936 Berlin Olympics too, horrible man

*sorry for hijacking the thread again.
Interesting topic given Crichton's sitch
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 807 (members: 19, guests: 788)
Back
Top