Talk:Controlled Substances Act

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Why are the most addictive drug are placed on Schedule IV?[edit]

Out off all psychiatric medications, Benzodiazepines and some barbiturates are the most addictive and develop a very high dependence potential when prescribed. However, some non-addictive medications such as Methylphenidate or Ketamine are placed on Schedule II and III. According to citations from the drug articles, some medications such as the ones placed on Scheduled II and III do not produce an addictive potential in low doses when prescribed.

Usually, addictive medications are strictly controlled than those of Schedule IV. I am very confused. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 00AgentBond93 (talkcontribs) 20:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The CSA is the primary legal munition for the "War on Drugs", which is a facade for what should really be called the "War on Minority Groups the Government is Not Fond". Placement within the schedule is purely political. Schedule I is reserved for drugs associated with minority groups the government wanted to control (in 1970) -- "marihuana" for Latin Americans, heroin for African Americans, LSD for the hippies, etc. Drugs are placed based on how dangerous they are for the government, not for their users. Schedule II contains the drugs that they want to put into Schedule I, many which most people believe are illegal street drugs, but unfortunately have undeniable medical value (cocaine, morphine, codeine, opium, oxycodone, fentanyl, PCP, Ritalin, methamphetamine, etc). Schedule III mostly contains drugs that the government doesn't like, but are of somewhat less concern than Schedule II. Not a lot of people need them, so they are more restricted. Schedule IV contains highly prescribed medications that are highly addictive. The reason they less controlled is because so many people legitimately need to take them to function in modern society, and would cause problems if not properly sedated. Schedule V shouldn't even exist. It's there for "monitoring purposes".
To summarize, the more likely for a substance to cause a person to deviate from being what the state defines as an "upstanding, law abiding citizen", the closer to Schedule I it will be placed, and the more likely for a substance to cause a person to shut up and stay in their place, the closer to Schedule IV it will be placed. Thoric (talk) 23:55, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for the explanation, because it does not make sense, like: "Cannabidiol, only in a marijuana-derived pharmaceutical formulation marketed by GW Pharmaceuticals as Epidiolex. Other CBD formulations remain Schedule 1, except for those derived from hemp which are unscheduled but still FDA-regulated.[55]", So it is "schedule 1 or 5, or unscheduled, depending on our mood when we get up in the morning." The same with some things in schedule 1, instead of listing the actual serious dependency or harm, if there are any, the explanation is just empty with "just because". Other than that... metabolic precursors of schedule-1 substances are... unscheduled. What the heck? None of the schedule list makes medical sense, I guess the list is purely based on economical metrics, such as how much black market there is for the substance, etc. Which makes sense, with LSD it would be 300000 USD per gram. And as someone else said, I'd like to see the phase-out of benzodiazepines and opioids and opiates into more controlled categories, where they belong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.64.7.200 (talk) 17:39, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Controlled Substances Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:24, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Controlled Substances Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:30, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

quick facts needs to be fixed[edit]

It displays "Quick facts: Long title, Acronyms .mw-parser-output .nobold{font-weight:normal}(colloquial) …" in the box. I do not know how to fix this but I am convinced the code bits shouldn't be there. 178.232.43.153 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:46, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


I just checked the infobox and not seeing that error. Are you still seeing it? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:36, 20 November 2018 (UTC)