And depression, as well as other mental health problems can often be a direct outcome of being overworked, and having to deal with poor working conditions.
Yeah, you absolutely should hate the fact that you need to have insurance from companies. Organizing irl is not mutually exclusive with pointing obvious things out online either.
And there’s absolutely no problem with that. The issue I’m highlighting is using drugs to paper over problems that are a direct result of shitty working conditions.
if i get injured on the worksite and i’m given drugs & care to recover it is ‘papering over’ the mistakes & conditions that led to my injury, and getting me back to work faster. but i rather prefer that to having a longer convalescence–>possible unemployment & future medical consequences. don’t you? even state-run medical systems can be critiqued for prioritizing getting people back to work over the best interests of the patients, but i don’t see how complaining about novel therapies being offered to some privileged workers is a good way to make that point
Again, I’m not arguing against legitimate use cases for drug therapy here. 🤷
What I’m saying is that working conditions need to be improved, and then any psychological problems people have that are not a result of exploitation should absolutely be treated using therapy. I’m not sure how much more clear I can make this.
I get what you’re saying, but you keep wording it in a way that like, implies you think health issues caused by exploitation don’t still need to be treated, regardless of their origin. This stuff should be covered for anyone that needs it full stop. AND working conditions need to improve. Unless there’s evidence that the medical treatment is actually improper (using much higher than therapeutic doses for example), there’s no issue here really (with the covering of novel therapies, specifically)
You can say the increased need for treatment is a sign of damaging exploitative conditions and I’d agree but that isn’t what the article is about
No, I’m not implying anything of the sort. Nowhere am I arguing against treating health issues, and I’ve been as explicit as humanly possible regarding that point.
psychological problems people have that are not a result of exploitation should absolutely be treated using therapy
This sentence specifically excludes people whose conditions are a result of exploitation. A condition can be caused by exploitation and still be a health issue (and worth noting, it won’t often just go away if the bad working conditions go away).
The issue […] is using drugs to paper over problems that are a direct result of shitty working conditions.
Again, framing genuine medical treatment as “papering over” is harmful.
When you say in response to this article that “drugging people up shouldn’t be used to paper over brutally exploitative working conditions that cause psychological damage.” you’re implying that what is being done here isn’t legitimate treatment and is merely “drugging people up”. Which from the article doesn’t seem to be the case.
Of course I wouldn’t put it past capitalists to push that sort of scheme, but you’re framing it as “this is happening” not “this could be happening/would be bad if it did”. What is described in the article is just bog standard, physician supervised ketamine therapy, nothing day to day, and nothing during the work day.
FWIW I don’t think you necessarily intended for your comments to be taken this way, but several people have now pointed out that they took it that way to you so continuing to argue you didn’t say it isn’t especially helpful.
people getting therapy included in their healthcare is good, its just that everyone should get it without having to rely on the caprice of employers
Also, drugging people up shouldn’t be used to paper over brutally exploitative working conditions that cause psychological damage.
They’re not taking ketamine to be high during the work day, it helps as an anti-depressant like medication
And depression, as well as other mental health problems can often be a direct outcome of being overworked, and having to deal with poor working conditions.
So we should hate healthcare insurance from companies?
We still live in a capitalist society
Just go organize irl if this bothers you so much
Yeah, you absolutely should hate the fact that you need to have insurance from companies. Organizing irl is not mutually exclusive with pointing obvious things out online either.
Of course? Insurance is one of the biggest scams of all time right beside rent
I meant like over not having it from a company
idk this post just seems insanely circlejerky considering we’re all commies here
drugs help people beyond workplace productivity?
And there’s absolutely no problem with that. The issue I’m highlighting is using drugs to paper over problems that are a direct result of shitty working conditions.
if i get injured on the worksite and i’m given drugs & care to recover it is ‘papering over’ the mistakes & conditions that led to my injury, and getting me back to work faster. but i rather prefer that to having a longer convalescence–>possible unemployment & future medical consequences. don’t you? even state-run medical systems can be critiqued for prioritizing getting people back to work over the best interests of the patients, but i don’t see how complaining about novel therapies being offered to some privileged workers is a good way to make that point
Again, I’m not arguing against legitimate use cases for drug therapy here. 🤷
What I’m saying is that working conditions need to be improved, and then any psychological problems people have that are not a result of exploitation should absolutely be treated using therapy. I’m not sure how much more clear I can make this.
I get what you’re saying, but you keep wording it in a way that like, implies you think health issues caused by exploitation don’t still need to be treated, regardless of their origin. This stuff should be covered for anyone that needs it full stop. AND working conditions need to improve. Unless there’s evidence that the medical treatment is actually improper (using much higher than therapeutic doses for example), there’s no issue here really (with the covering of novel therapies, specifically)
You can say the increased need for treatment is a sign of damaging exploitative conditions and I’d agree but that isn’t what the article is about
No, I’m not implying anything of the sort. Nowhere am I arguing against treating health issues, and I’ve been as explicit as humanly possible regarding that point.
This sentence specifically excludes people whose conditions are a result of exploitation. A condition can be caused by exploitation and still be a health issue (and worth noting, it won’t often just go away if the bad working conditions go away).
Again, framing genuine medical treatment as “papering over” is harmful.
When you say in response to this article that “drugging people up shouldn’t be used to paper over brutally exploitative working conditions that cause psychological damage.” you’re implying that what is being done here isn’t legitimate treatment and is merely “drugging people up”. Which from the article doesn’t seem to be the case.
Of course I wouldn’t put it past capitalists to push that sort of scheme, but you’re framing it as “this is happening” not “this could be happening/would be bad if it did”. What is described in the article is just bog standard, physician supervised ketamine therapy, nothing day to day, and nothing during the work day.
FWIW I don’t think you necessarily intended for your comments to be taken this way, but several people have now pointed out that they took it that way to you so continuing to argue you didn’t say it isn’t especially helpful.