why I believe these drugs don't negatively impact a person's productivity.
You could launch this argument from the purely sociological advantage caffeine and nicotine have: Illegal or gray-area drug use is bound to be sketchy, and unless you have a pharma source choosing caffeine and nicotine has the assurance of being free of dangerous impurities. But this arises from caffeine and nicotine being regulated, meaning if other drugs were to become regulated too, caffeine and nicotine would no longer have this comparative advantage.
I expect an argument from biochemistry, but there I don't see how the traditional tea from coca leaves I read about is worse for you than coffee. Among other examples, I've also heard DXM in the 45-99 mg range seems therapeutic. What I mean is I don't see why drugs used at low doses should be more harmful than nic & caff. Are long-term SSRIs as recommended by a doctor even okay by your book?
I expect an argument from biochemistry, but there I don't see how the traditional tea from coca leaves I read about is worse for you than coffee. Among other examples, I've also heard DXM in the 45-99 mg range seems therapeutic. What I mean is I don't see why drugs used at low doses should be more harmful than nic & caff. Are long-term SSRIs as recommended by a doctor even okay by your book?