I know people who happily smoke pot, drink beer, and use other recreational drugs with no apparent concern, but who would not take an Ibuprofen because it’s bad for your liver. This confuses me. Yes, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are bad for your liver. So are many, many other mainstream drugs, like antidepressants and birth-control pills. (Here’s a list.)
But what is the reasoning that lets hippy-friendly drugs off the hepatotoxicity hook? It seems to be that these drugs are “natural” and so they are trustworthy, as if God wouldn’t make such righteous substances poisonous. This is not rational.
It’s true that there isn’t as much research on the hippy-friendly drugs as there is on medical drugs. The FDA makes pharmaceutical companies do a bunch of expensive research on the drugs trying to go the legitimate route, but they don’t get involved in the illegal stuff. There is some research, though, and we do know that even hippy drugs are made out of chemical compounds that the liver has to metabolize before we can pee them out. It is safe to assume that pot, acid, mushrooms, ecstasy, cocaine, and the rest of your recreational drug list are bad for your liver. (And alcohol, duh.)
I will happily support you in not taking over-the-counter pain meds, but if an Ibuprofin is a drop in the hepatotoxic-lifestyle bucket, your priorities confuse me. If you are willing to ingest any number of chemicals in order to feel good, why not ingest one or two more to feel a little less pain?
May 28, 2010 at 8:14 pm
I just had an argument over pesticides and noxious weeds that was remarkably reminiscent of this argument.
It’s frustrating, because once you look at it as a cost/benefit analysis, it all makes sense…
May 29, 2010 at 7:56 am
Hmm. Say more! Describe that argument a little.
May 28, 2010 at 10:36 pm
I agree.
This topic also goes to those having a baby. They spend 9 months not putting anything in their bodies that might possibly be bad for baby and then then basically mainline the stuff for the birth, putting mass amounts into the kid. Again, after the birth they’re worried about giving their kiddo acetaminophen. It makes no sense to me at all.
May 29, 2010 at 7:56 am
Good point, Pauli.
June 1, 2010 at 2:48 pm
With chemical exposure there is a difference between regular use and a one time exposure. One of the arguments against using antidepressants and other daily meds during pregnancy is the body changes in response to repeat exposure (presumably the number or response of brain receptors change) since these haven’t been studied in pregnant women and their children taking these substances is essentially an uncontrolled experiment.
With a one time dosage there will be an acute response but it doesn’t fundamentally change the brain structure. It could be argued in some cases the drugs from an epidural (because of delivery technique) will cause less problems for the baby then the adrenalin and cortisol the mom is producing.