RE: Mass Drugging

James D. Wilson (
Sun, 12 Dec 1999 14:34:26 -0800

<nit> Amphetamines is plural for the various amphetamine-based chemicals. Stimulants, depressants, etc. are classes not chemicals. Ritalin is a member of the class stimulant, but is not a member of the chemical group amphetamines. Calling it a member of the amphetamines because it has similar effects, side effects etc. is like calling meprobamate a member of the benzodiazapines because it has similar effects, side effects, etc. to those of valium. </nit>

-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of James Rogers Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 10:28 PM To:
Subject: Re: Mass Drugging

On Wed, 08 Dec 1999, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> James Rogers wrote:
> > Ritalin is not amphetamine, and I don't think anyone was asking if it
> Actually, the post I was answering *was* asking if Ritalin was "identical"
> to an old drug called Ritalina which was amphetamine.
> Why not just look up the original post on the archives to see what it

I did. Here it is:

<quote>In the olden days a drug called "Ritalina" existed which contained amphetamines. Would the "Ritalin" be identical to "Ritalina"?</quote>

Amphetamines (with an "s") commonly refers to the entire class of amphetamine-like drugs, of which "Ritalin" is one. The quote did not say that "Ritalina" contained amphetamine (the chemical). Therefore, it is plausible that "Ritalin" and "Ritalina" are in fact identical as both appear to contain amphetamines (the class).

This mostly a confusion resulting from a class and an instance having the same name. A reference to amphetamine, as opposed to an amphetamine (member of the set), would presumably have been written without the "s".

In any case, I don't see what the fuss is over.

-James Rogers