Is Anti-Suicide Spray Ethical?

by AdriHead Posted 2012/08/21 23:00:00

Related Topics: Anti Suicide Nasal Spray, suicide, U.S. Army, Army, U.S. Soldiers

1,032 votes
Read all 674 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes	405 votes	39%
	No	627 votes	61%

According to statistics, the army currently has the highest rate of suicide among soldiers ever, with 116 U.S. soldiers dying of suspected suicide this year alone. So, the U.S. Army wants to change its reputation... with a nasal spray.

The U.S. Army has given a grant to a scientist who will develop a nasal spray specifically intended to rid suicidal thoughts. According to Mashable, the spray would "deliver an extra dose of thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH)," which is a drug that causes a "euphoric, calming, antidepressant effect." Do you think the anti-suicide spray is ethical?

MASHABLE.COM reports:
A scientist has been awarded a grant from the U.S. Army to design a nasal spray designed to suppress thoughts of suicide.

scientist awarded grant army design nasal spray designed suppress suicide

+33

Add a comment above

JMCC 2012/08/21 23:21:50

No

+31
It would be better spent working out WHY soldiers have these thoughts and preventing it that way...

Like pulling out.
>> See Replies

More polls by AdriHead

kevracer 2012/08/21 23:35:37

No

+7
another example of why the phrase "military intelligence" is an oxymoron

reply
Sayer Stewart 2012/08/21 23:34:56

No

+6
No

reply
JMCC 2012/08/21 23:21:50

No

+31
It would be better spent working out WHY soldiers have these thoughts and preventing it that way...

Like pulling out.

reply
democoach to JMCC 2012/08/21 23:45:07

+13
maybe this illegal war where they slaughter innocent lives coul dbe a part in why they have those thoughts, they go and kill on command without thinking, then realize what they did!

reply
jlott069 to democoach 2012/08/22 16:15:29

+2
well, aparently someone has never been a solder. nothing about the war is illegal. they are not slaughtering innocent lives. they do not just go and kill on command. grow up a little bit.

reply
MayLin to jlott069 2012/08/25 08:11:51

+2
stop sailing down denial..democoach and Walter are right.

reply
MayLin to jlott069 2012/08/26 09:12:55

+3
If they don't follow orders to, for example, "go in and kill everybody," they get court martialed, don't they? And not that anyone matured at the command to "grow up", may I respectfully suggest that you smarten up?

reply
democoach to jlott069 2012/08/30 01:53:07

my bad, i forgot to mention this is NOT a DECLARED WAR! its an invasion!

they are killing innocent lives! but like hitler your government tells you they are the enemy and deserve it!

reply
Walter ... to democoach 2012/08/22 19:53:10

+3
killing isn't the problem. Being ordered to wipe out an entire village for the hell of it will not sink in with it anyone. It is inhumane to say the least.

reply
democoach to Walter ... 2012/08/30 03:56:02

kikling is the problem! a gang killing another gang gang is not axceptable, you or i killing someone on personal vendetta's is wrong! why is it any different when its the government who does it? its wrong to kill one person..its sure as hell wrong to kill thousands and thousands!

reply
SW to JMCC 2012/08/22 12:04:55

+2
Ideally yeah, but the probalem is already there... We didn't "pull out" and now the bitch is knocked up and we're stuck with the bill. er... so to speak!

reply
Motley to JMCC 2012/08/22 16:12:15

+3
a lot of these soldiers WANT to go to war, they get PAID to be there, if they come back, no more paycheck, and then that many more people looking for jobs that arent there. what happens over there will always haunt them no matter how much they talk about it, might as well help them ignore it...

reply
JMCC to Motley 2012/08/22 16:16:46 (edited)

+4
The British went into Afghanistan in 1812 and the Afghan people have resisted all attempts to bring peace to that region since then - irrespective as to who has tried...

After 200 years do you not think that it is time to accept it is not only an impossible task, but none of our business?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

reply
MayLin to JMCC 2012/08/25 08:16:26

+3
British did not come to "bring" anything, hahaha, certainly not peace, 1812, you say? The British were firmly locked into imperial thug mode in 1812, as were the French under Napoleon

reply
JMCC to MayLin 2012/08/25 09:23:54

+1
Precisely.

The article that I posted "The Great Game" details how the great empirical powers have tried to control Afghanistan as a cornerstone to dominating the middle east.

reply
MayLin to JMCC 2012/08/25 22:30:35

+2
I guess they still haven't learned from history, didn't Alexander the Great have similar problems there? Nobody has ever succeeded in conquering the terrain,.. .

reply
JMCC to MayLin 2012/08/25 22:36:17

+1
Correct - it is a hellish crucible where we send good young people to die and only serves to create martyrs and a recruiting tool for Jihadiis..

reply
MayLin to JMCC 2012/08/26 09:06:44

+2
Good young people who lack rich parents.....structural poverty seems kind of necessary to build armies to protect the interests of a few

reply
JMCC to MayLin 2012/08/26 10:33:12

+1
I agree.

Wouldn't it be nice if those voting for war had to physically lead the troops from in front? Perhaps it would give them pause for thought...

reply
MayLin to JMCC 2012/08/26 16:21:04 (edited)

+2
War would be over in a New York Nanosecond, please. The rich and powerful demand more comfort than war zones usually provide. Sheeple need to wake up, until then, we'll keep on hanging separately until we can learn to hang together. I second the suggestion mentioned on this thread that people boycott the music industry for a week...

reply
MayLin to JMCC 2012/08/26 16:26:37

+1
Your original premise said it all. Strange, it is a little bit, that the anti-suicide spray seems more controversial than the existence of war itself.

reply
jlott069 to JMCC 2012/08/22 16:14:09

Yes, because up and leaving people who want us there and can not defend themselves is always the right answer, right?

reply
JMCC to jlott069 2012/08/22 16:19:51

+1
Why not allow the innocent to leave and allow the others to kill themselves in combat?

Our societies are by no means perfect, perhaps our priorities lie there first?

reply
MayLin to jlott069 2012/08/26 09:20:26

+1
The US government cares about strategical advantage, and that's it. Did you see the US military anywhere near Rwanda during the genocide, of course not, They Don't Have Oil! They were begging the international community for help for at least a year before the bloodbath started. It's a little sad how many people still believe in political fairy tales., like Democracy, hahaha, who actually Voted to be Poor?

reply
Charlie to JMCC 2012/08/22 17:19:15

+1
Studying one mans reason for suicide does little to help thd next. We are people we only work like nechanics to an extent and no ones the same so we would be waistjng time. It needs to ne encoraged for men who have these thoughts to search for aide.

reply
JMCC to Charlie 2012/08/22 17:24:46

+1
From my experience from my friends who have been there is that it is much harder to do the things they are being asked to do when they feel that their presence is not a solution to the problem or defending their own soil - especially since they are being asked to lay their lives on the line on foreign soil...

reply
LittleS... to JMCC 2012/08/22 20:21:08 (edited)

+2
Who wouldn't be thinking suicidal thoughts if they were fighting for a nation that upholds the religion of money, unless delusional?

http://www.LittleScroll.com

reply
Dawn to JMCC 2012/08/22 22:16:36

+1
But... imagine what this could do for the field of brainwashing! Nah just kidding if they just talked to each soldier every day and made them feel alright then they'd atleast not kill themselves.

reply
JMCC to Dawn 2012/08/22 22:20:22

It would not be the first time that chemicals have been used to affect the mood of soldiers, during WWII the first Royal Marines were given amphetamines prior to sorties behind enemy lines.

reply
Dawn to JMCC 2012/08/23 03:03:47

+2
Exactly. Those defending our country shouldn't be betrayed by it but besides that, drugs for mental problems are just brain washing pure and simple there's no way around it.

reply
JMCC to Dawn 2012/08/23 08:30:32

I agree ;)

reply
roman.r... to Dawn 2012/08/25 02:03:01

+1
"drugs for mental problems are just brain washing pure and simple there's no way around it."

Are you a Scientologist, by any chance? You clearly know nothing about mental illness, in any case. :)

reply
Dawn to roman.r... 2012/08/25 02:48:43

+1
No I'm not. Changing someone's personality for better or worse is brain washing them. If someone decides after they try to cope with their problems and still want to try the drugs that's one thing but other wise pushing someone to be on drugs instead of trying to help them deal with them is just trying to change them to what society wants them to be.

reply
ellomotto to JMCC 2012/08/23 22:30:28

+2
Good analogy

reply