Reasonably interesting, but doesn't make much sense
Surely each drug/substance should be a line/collection of points, rather than a circle?

i.e. if I have an arbitrary dependence level of '3' on tobacco (whatever that means), does it do me no harm as this graph seems to indicate?
(Son of Sam-i-am We're all as mad as hatters here, Tue 23 Dec 2008, 10:13, 2 replies)

I don't think that's what this means
They are a measure of how harmful the drug is (on average/to a normal person/similar disclaimer) plotted against how addictive they are.

Generally being drugs that are nearer the origin (the bottom left hand corner) are less 'bad' than ones in the top right. (Roughly speaking - the graph doesn't cover everything. If you added another axis called 'rapeyness' GHB would probably look worse)

So eating razorblades would be in the bottom right hand corner, because it isn't addictive, but is very deathy. I'm trying to think what would go in the top left. QOTW maybe.
(teebie jeebie, Tue 23 Dec 2008, 10:42, closed)

Oh, I see now
I was reading it as 'for a given dependence on a drug, how much harm does it do you'

Now I understand it, I'd query the relative placements of quite a few of the substances.
(Son of Sam-i-am We're all as mad as hatters here, Tue 23 Dec 2008, 10:47, closed)

I was reading it as
the more dependent you are on a given drug, the more self-harm you do...
(bamboozled Can hear you getting fatter, Tue 23 Dec 2008, 10:57, closed)

...
You can't have a dependance of 3 on tobacco. the circles denote the area in which the points fall, so tobacco is about 2.2-2.4 on the dependance scale, and 1.1-1.2 or so on the physical harm scale.

The graph just shows how the different things relate to one another.
(Gazebo will eat you on, Tue 23 Dec 2008, 10:43, closed)

...
That would only be true if the circles were different sizes.

And not circles.
( argyleblanket The man on the roof works for me, Tue 23 Dec 2008, 10:46, closed)