LD50 vs effective dose still matters. Some drugs are inherently more dangerous than others. (This is not a jab at illicit substances — tylenol is problematic.)
But yes, we're very much realizing that DEA scheduling is not based in evidence (and actually prevents gathering of further evidence).
Tylenol/acetaminophen/APAP/paracetamol immediately came to mind for me as well. It's flat-out amazing to me that shit is still allowed on the market.
It hammers your liver really hard, especially in combination with alcohol. In fact, it's the foremost cause of acute liver failure in the entire western world.
The kicker: it doesn't even work very well. Other pain relievers are much more effective, and have a much higher margin of safety.
The funny thing is that if you ask the average American whether Tylenol or aspirin is safer, they'd probably say Tylenol unless they specifically know about the liver issue. I think this ultimately comes from acetaminophen having remarkably few interactions, but has been spun by marketing into a general sense of "safety".
What pain relievers are much more effective than acetaminophen, and much higher in terms of safety? NSAIDs are a huge cause of bleeding and renal insufficiency. Tylenol is actually pretty good at treating pain in appropriate doses. Definitely a bummer when people overdose on it, fulminant liver failure is very unpleasant, but we have a great antidote for it.
we've known this for a very long time that legality of drugs had very little to do with their actual danger to society or individuals and much more to do with fear mongering and racism
Fear mongering, as we have the same attitude in the UK, but not the race divide that the States has (we have a very similar divide along the lines of class however).
But yes, we're very much realizing that DEA scheduling is not based in evidence (and actually prevents gathering of further evidence).