> I argue that it is not. The destructiveness of opiates derives from their very nature, not the context surrounding their existence in a society.

As someone who has both studied pharmacology and worked in drug policy, I've seen this common misconception before.

Opiates, as a class, are not inherently any more destructive than any other class of drugs. It's possible to synthesize very potent forms of opiates, but it's also trivial to synthesize or distill very potent forms of other drugs as well, including drugs which are either loosely regulated or completely unregulated.

Opiates are, in certain ways, less addictive than alcohol. That's not an endorsement of opiate drug use, but it does mean that we can't say that "the destructiveness of opiates derives from their very nature" without saying that "the destructiveness of alcohol derives from its very nature", and questioning the implications of what that would mean.

A lot of good research on addiction, including opioids, shows that societal context absolutely matters.

A good example is heroin use in servicemen after the Vietnam war.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2012/01/02/1444317...

It's interesting research, but taking the entire heroin addicted US population on an extended vacation to try to rid them of their addiction is impractical. They would need to return home eventually too. Where they would be much more likely to relapse.

The findings of the Vietnam study tell us something interesting about the particulars of Vietnam and maybe war zones in general, but I doubt they hold much relevance to the general addict population.