6 ms·

Or, just do drugs. I mean, LSD is great, and people should try it. Smoking pot is also nice, I've done some great writing while stoned. Heck, Paul Erdos did amp

Or, just do drugs. I mean, LSD is great, and people should try it. Smoking pot is also nice, I've done some great writing while stoned. Heck, Paul Erdos did amphetamines his whole life. Why are we trying to convince everyone not to do drugs again?

philwelch 11y ago
We're not; it's just one drug cartel trying to push out the competition. Whenever you hear drug use described as "self-medicating", you're hearing the notion that drugs like Zoloft and Ritalin are ok but drugs like marijuana and MDMA aren't.
hristov 11y ago
Nobody has ever done any great writing while stoned. Even Hunter S. Thompson, one of the most pro-drug writers ever, said that pot is the only drug that prevents him from doing any good work. And no, people should not try LSD. LSD leads to a high danger of psychosis or schizophrenia, and that is no fun at all. It is better not to risk it. Just because you may have gotten lucky so far, there is no reason to invite others to take spin on the russian roulette. If you have any mental illness in your family, it is strongly advisable you steer clear, but even if you don't, it is not worth the risk.
- pstuart 11y ago
  > LSD leads to a high danger of psychosis or schizophrenia Citations please. It's a powerful drug but has incredible value when used properly. If you're going to start wringing your hands over dangerous drugs, start with the killers of today: alcohol, tobacco, and prescription drugs.
  - hristov 11y ago
    http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196512022732302 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196512022732302
    - Cryptokeeper 11y ago
      That article is 50 years old. Perhaps this one from 2013: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0063972 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.... "21,967 respondents (13.4% weighted) reported lifetime psychedelic use. There were no significant associations between lifetime use of any psychedelics, lifetime use of specific psychedelics (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, peyote), or past year use of LSD and increased rate of any of the mental health outcomes. Rather, in several cases psychedelic use was associated with lower rate of mental health problems."
      - thrwyycombinatr 11y ago
        But temporary schizophrenia is very common. Cmon guys, this is ridiculous. I've seen it so many times. It literally re-wires your brain. And yes, temporary schizophrenia can be extremely dangerous. This is something no one can argue. I hate pedants.
        throwawaymonoid 11y ago
        Your brain literally re-wires itself constantly. There's no such thing as "temporary schizophrenia." If you're referring to acute psychosis, as you seemingly experienced, then yes it's certainly a possible side effect--though never a permanent one. Bad experiences are usually triggered by an uncomfortable setting, or a dose for which you were not prepared. I'm sorry that was your experience, but concerned your reaction doesn't add to the scientific discussion. LSD increases glutamate and modulates the 5HTA (seratonin) subtypes, as well as having modulatory effects on D2 (dopamine) receptors--it alters conscious processes and lowers the inhibitory threshold of the action potential, allowing "new" neuronal pathways to develop. While we don't know the specific pharmacokinetic MOA, we do know it has a favorable toxicological and therapeutic profile, and that the content of one's hallucinations depend far more on the individual and the setting than the substance. Yes, it can be dangerous. Yes, you can take steps to effectively minimize the danger like you do in every other area of your life (seatbelts? helmets?). Like anything there's a cost-benefit ratio for each individual to consider--are you willing to risk a potentially terrifying experience for a chance at novel insight? I think that's a choice everyone should be able to make for themselves.
  - user_0001 11y ago
    Don't forget the bigger killers * crossing the road * driving a car * choking on <insert any food here> etc etc
- digi_owl 11y ago
  > said that pot is the only drug that prevents him from doing any good work. And this is where i suspect the big anti-pot push is coming from. With alcohol you can go out for some beers after work, get buzzed, get up the next day with a nagging ache, and still come back to work. With pot it is more likely that you go "fuck work!". End result, pot is not good for business. Looking across history, there is a whole mess or barely concealed agenda aimed at maintaining a workforce. Even the modern school system is perhaps put into place to produce and maintain a more useful workforce.
  - Bouncingsoul1 11y ago
    For me it is quite the opposite, I prefer to stay at home if I have nagging headache after having to much, on the other hand I never had such an issue with pot.
  - Broken_Hippo 11y ago
    This isn't true for me. I'm more likely to get a good night sleep and wake up well-rested, without a headache ready to go to work after a night of smoking. I'm more likely to call off work if I am feeling sick from drinking the night before: In fact, I'm more likely to simply not go out after work to drink. I can smoke some and do my household stuff in the evening, walk to a coffee shop afterwards and talk with folks, draw, read, etc, most of which is impossible when drinking. I'm gonna guess absenteeism is higher among chronic alcohol users than it is among chronic pot users, but I don't have the citation to back it up.
- Cthulhu_ 11y ago
  To everyone, you should read The Episode (http://www.stilldrinking.org/the-episode-part-1 http://www.stilldrinking.org/the-episode-part-1), a series of blog posts by Peter Welch, most famous for his 'Programming Sucks' post, in which he describes his experiences with going completely batshit insane after a week without sleep plus LSD. It's a great piece of one person's experiences with LSD use gone wrong. edit: actually he's published it as as an ebook too, titled "And Then I Thought I Was A Fish": http://www.amazon.co.uk/And-Then-Thought-Was-Fish-ebook/dp/B008DZEWF8/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/And-Then-Thought-Was-Fish-ebook/dp/B...
  - Broken_Hippo 11y ago
    I've not time to read a book and reply to this comment in a timely manner, however: I'd note that lack of sleep in itself can cause some pretty freaky stuff to happen to people's minds in itself. If that is the experience I'm reading about - with an overtone of LSD - I cannot hold that representative of a bad trip. Occsionally,people do have bad trips, however, there is truth in that. For me, that goes back to making informed decisions. Legal sales from trained folks, with stableized ingredients and dosages helps with such things. Yes, a few people are gonna be stupid, but that basically happens with everything.
- throwawaymonoid 11y ago
  I'd encourage you to re-think your views. "Drugs" is a legal delineation, not one of substance. Like every substance you consume, amount, frequency--and sometimes intent--matter far more than molecular composition. In regard to LSD specifically, please note that the link to schizophrenia has since been proven null, and the individuals studied were already displaying signs of the disorder. Further research in more recent years, while limited, has been unable to find any correlation between incidents of mental illness and the use of hallucinogenics. As per cannabis... without it I'd most certainly be addicted to Rx painkillers. I like knowing that if I travel or go somewhere it's prohibited, I won't suffer crippling withdrawals. In fact, aside from the return of a dull aching pain from chronic hyper-flexion, I wouldn't notice anything other than increasingly vivid dreams caused by REM rebound. For me it's a clear choice. It allows me to function, and unlike other pain management regimens, after 7 years its minimum effective dose (MED) despite daily administration remains unchanged; if I skip a day or 6 months, my pain is not magnitudes above baseline. I'm not here to tout the benefits of marijuana, but to explain how drugs are an indifferent tool, and just because they are harmful in one context doesn't mean we should discount their usefulness in another. Their value is relative. Because of a substance, I can function. Because I can function, I've been able to nurture my business from 3 people to >500, and into the Fortune 1000. For others with traumatic disorders like PTSD, hallucinogenic therapy may hold promises anti-depressants have been unable to actualize. Regardless, generalizations like yours (while in good faith) prevent the regulatory changes needed to once again allow for open research. In respect to the diversity of the human condition, I'd implore you to take a more laissez-faire approach: decide what's right for yourself, not for others.
  - thrwyycombinatr 11y ago
    Since you used some anecdotal evidence, I felt I could provide some anecdotal stuff back. LSD: I've tried it a handful of times. The last time resulted in a strip so strongly horrifying I nearly stole a car with people in it to escape my extreme schizophrenic trip. Note: I've never had any symptom of it before in my life, and it doesn't run in my family. Nor do I believe I ever will. It was so extremely out of character, I know for a fact it was induced by the drug. In fact I think the dealer who gave it to my gave me a hugely high dose, which is a big danger of taking LSD from dealers. Cannabis: It may be good for pain relief, I had stomach issues that I used it to help with for years. Then a doctor told me it could be causing my stomach pain. Look up "cannabinoid hyperemesis". It was horrifying. The worst stomach flu you could imagine that lasted for weeks, and didn't leave me for years. I don't know if it was the weed, but I stay away from it now. I've had three different doctors talk about it (in different states), and all told me they have seen big spikes in stomach problems due to weed. So, yea. Nothings black and white. Drugs are an "arbitrary" definition (as all definitions are) for "something that affects you strongly". And anything that effects you strongly deserves a massive warning: if at all possible, don't rely on it.
- Broken_Hippo 11y ago
  To be fair: Using hallucinogens has been one of the most positive life experiences I've done. While you say things about mental health, the previous poster is correct: It merely can make symptoms more clear, but the cause isn't linked and is often reversed. Hallucinogens also tend to have the opposite effect on depression. One strand of pot isn't nice to anxiety, but if we are honest and open about stuff, affected people can avoid it (or use minimal amounts to test, or try it in the company of a trusted friend)... you know, using information and self-knowledge to try to make wise choices. And that was Thompson's experience with pot - in which case, he should have learned thereafter not to do pot and expect good work from himself: Others find that pot makes them more productive, and yet others find that it is good for some portions of the work, but not others. Simply because his words seem to uphold the stereotype doesn't make it any more true.
  - throwawaymonoid 11y ago
    While I'm a proponent, research has made a fairly solid case for THC's ability to trigger latent psychological illness. As you stated, making informed choices relative to your medical history is both critical and necessary to avoid unintended permanent consequences. It's interesting how vastly different everyone's qualitative experiences are when the physiological states are fairly uniform... I think observing those altered processes with next-gen EEG tech may offer some illumination in our current, limited model of neuroplasticity.
Houshalter 11y ago
C0nc0rdance is a scientist who makes well researched videos about various subjects, and did a few videos on the health effects of marijuana: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnNPm5cG85c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnNPm5cG85c It may not be the most harmful drug, but it's certainly not harmless or non-addictive. LSD can cause mental illness to emerge in some people. I also remember a study that gave LSD to 10 people during a religious sermon. 9 of them went on the be preachers or priests later in life. That doesn't necessarily mean it's bad. But anything with that powerful an effect on the mind is concerning. Amphetamines certainly seem pretty cool. Especially if you have ADHD. But it definitely has side effects and potential for addiction. It's long term effects are not well studied, and a few studies I did see were concerning. E.g. brain damage in monkeys, and a group of kids taking it did worse than the control group after 3 years. I think people should be educated on the risks and facts before they decide to take a drug. If they still want to do it, fine. But at least they know the risks. And it's not enough just to put a warning sticker on the back of it that no one reads. Even widespread education that a drug is dangerous isn't enough. Everyone knows cigarettes cause cancer, but why do new people take up smoking?
- forgetsusername 11y ago
  >It may not be the most harmful drug, but it's certainly not harmless I'm no advocate of the claims that marijuana is "harmless" or, as some even claim, "good for you". But harm is relative. Sitting in your chair all day is harmful. Eating half the food we do is harmful, as are most medications. Arguing that marijuana is "not harmless" isn't much of an argument at all.
  - Houshalter 11y ago
    According to that video, it increases cancer risk at a higher rate than cigarettes, and it is very addictive to some percent of the population.
- pantalaimon 11y ago
  > anything with that powerful an effect on the mind is concerning. I find that statement absurd, anything with an effect that powerful should be cherished! Would life be desirable if it were stripped from all emotions, as they too have a powerful effect on the mind? Even if you agreed to that, it wouldn't be feasible as we are biological creatures and not pure rational beings. Denying that our biological self exists, with feelings and all, doesn't solve anything. The spiritual experience you describe is just another part of the human condition, I don't quite believe that 9 out of 10 people on LSD would become preachers, but I see how it can lead to a better understanding of religion. This doesn't require superstition, quite the opposite. When you know that those effects are caused by LSD or substances contained in Mushrooms, ferns or cacti, you don't need a higher power as an explanation for this peculiar state of mind. You might however find yourself coming to conclusions about life that other people on similar states of mind (whether induced by drugs or other means is irrelevant here) had before you, and who used the vehicle of religion to transport them. So yes, psychedelics, as well as most drugs, should not be taken lightly, but banning them is like razing the Niagara Falls because someone might fall over the edge.
qmalxp 11y ago
I think it's a bit misleading to simply say "LSD is great and you should try it". It can be interesting, but also can be scary as fuck, and you should be in a good place mentally before trying it.
- visarga 11y ago
  I read an article yesterday about micro-dosing LSD at a level where no hallucinations appear, but a boost in energy and creativity is felt. Like a different kind of coffee that doesn't wane after only two hours.
  - ryanlol 11y ago
    Microdosing of psychedelics isn't very well (or at all?) researched and it's hard to tell whether what people are experiencing is a placebo or not.
- astazangasta 11y ago
  "Snorkeling is great and you should try it," is a similar statement I might make with no qualifications or equivocation from you. Many pleasurable activities have attendant dangers that you should be aware of before engaging in them. Drugs are no different, except we surround them with the stink of moral judgment and refuse to educate people on how to use them safely.
  - s73v3r 11y ago
    Snorkeling and psychotropic drugs are two completely different things.
  - qmalxp 11y ago
    The difference is most people snorkeling for the first time do it with an instructor who is very much interested in their well-being. I don't think the guy who sells you LSD is gonna lose sleep if you happen to develop a lifelong mental condition.
jeffdavis 11y ago
"Why are we trying to convince everyone not to do drugs again?" I guess you could say that occasional use is not a big problem for most drugs. But I wouldn't recommend it, because most people go through some vulnerable time when they could become addicted (or otherwise abuse drugs), and at that time you don't want to have the stuff in your house or a dealer friend ready to supply. We dismiss people who join cults that sound crazy -- an alien ship coming to rescue them or something -- but I think a high percentage of people could be recruited if the cult appears at just the right time in their lives. If you are a regular user of drugs, it's like always having the cult recruiter in your house, just waiting for the right time.
- visarga 11y ago
  > most people go through some vulnerable time when they could become addicted (or otherwise abuse drugs), and at that time you don't want to have the stuff in your house or a dealer friend ready to supply Sometimes people do drugs to cope with their other problems in life. They need drugs as a reprieve. Life can be hard and people have used alcohol, pot and many other substances to create a refuge. Of course that doesn't solve the problem, but solving the problem is not always the top priority, and many times the problem has no solution. Why should we morally deny a refuge from anxiety and suffering to other people?
  - jeffdavis 11y ago
    Sure, they can help, too. But I wouldn't recommend it, because I have no idea which drugs would help and which would make things worse. I'm not suggesting we deny anyone anything. I'm answering the question: "why do we try to convince people not to use drugs?".
andrepd 11y ago
"LSD is great, and people should try it" is as dishonest and misleading and agenda-pushing as "pot makes your teeth fall off".

philwelch 11y ago

We're not; it's just one drug cartel trying to push out the competition. Whenever you hear drug use described as "self-medicating", you're hearing the notion that drugs like Zoloft and Ritalin are ok but drugs like marijuana and MDMA aren't.

hristov 11y ago

Nobody has ever done any great writing while stoned. Even Hunter S. Thompson, one of the most pro-drug writers ever, said that pot is the only drug that prevents him from doing any good work. And no, people should not try LSD. LSD leads to a high danger of psychosis or schizophrenia, and that is no fun at all. It is better not to risk it. Just because you may have gotten lucky so far, there is no reason to invite others to take spin on the russian roulette. If you have any mental illness in your family, it is strongly advisable you steer clear, but even if you don't, it is not worth the risk.

pstuart 11y ago
> LSD leads to a high danger of psychosis or schizophrenia Citations please. It's a powerful drug but has incredible value when used properly. If you're going to start wringing your hands over dangerous drugs, start with the killers of today: alcohol, tobacco, and prescription drugs.
- hristov 11y ago
  http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196512022732302 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196512022732302
  - Cryptokeeper 11y ago
    That article is 50 years old. Perhaps this one from 2013: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0063972 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.... "21,967 respondents (13.4% weighted) reported lifetime psychedelic use. There were no significant associations between lifetime use of any psychedelics, lifetime use of specific psychedelics (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, peyote), or past year use of LSD and increased rate of any of the mental health outcomes. Rather, in several cases psychedelic use was associated with lower rate of mental health problems."
    - thrwyycombinatr 11y ago
      But temporary schizophrenia is very common. Cmon guys, this is ridiculous. I've seen it so many times. It literally re-wires your brain. And yes, temporary schizophrenia can be extremely dangerous. This is something no one can argue. I hate pedants.
      - throwawaymonoid 11y ago
        Your brain literally re-wires itself constantly. There's no such thing as "temporary schizophrenia." If you're referring to acute psychosis, as you seemingly experienced, then yes it's certainly a possible side effect--though never a permanent one. Bad experiences are usually triggered by an uncomfortable setting, or a dose for which you were not prepared. I'm sorry that was your experience, but concerned your reaction doesn't add to the scientific discussion. LSD increases glutamate and modulates the 5HTA (seratonin) subtypes, as well as having modulatory effects on D2 (dopamine) receptors--it alters conscious processes and lowers the inhibitory threshold of the action potential, allowing "new" neuronal pathways to develop. While we don't know the specific pharmacokinetic MOA, we do know it has a favorable toxicological and therapeutic profile, and that the content of one's hallucinations depend far more on the individual and the setting than the substance. Yes, it can be dangerous. Yes, you can take steps to effectively minimize the danger like you do in every other area of your life (seatbelts? helmets?). Like anything there's a cost-benefit ratio for each individual to consider--are you willing to risk a potentially terrifying experience for a chance at novel insight? I think that's a choice everyone should be able to make for themselves.
- user_0001 11y ago
  Don't forget the bigger killers * crossing the road * driving a car * choking on <insert any food here> etc etc
digi_owl 11y ago
> said that pot is the only drug that prevents him from doing any good work. And this is where i suspect the big anti-pot push is coming from. With alcohol you can go out for some beers after work, get buzzed, get up the next day with a nagging ache, and still come back to work. With pot it is more likely that you go "fuck work!". End result, pot is not good for business. Looking across history, there is a whole mess or barely concealed agenda aimed at maintaining a workforce. Even the modern school system is perhaps put into place to produce and maintain a more useful workforce.
- Bouncingsoul1 11y ago
  For me it is quite the opposite, I prefer to stay at home if I have nagging headache after having to much, on the other hand I never had such an issue with pot.
- Broken_Hippo 11y ago
  This isn't true for me. I'm more likely to get a good night sleep and wake up well-rested, without a headache ready to go to work after a night of smoking. I'm more likely to call off work if I am feeling sick from drinking the night before: In fact, I'm more likely to simply not go out after work to drink. I can smoke some and do my household stuff in the evening, walk to a coffee shop afterwards and talk with folks, draw, read, etc, most of which is impossible when drinking. I'm gonna guess absenteeism is higher among chronic alcohol users than it is among chronic pot users, but I don't have the citation to back it up.
Cthulhu_ 11y ago
To everyone, you should read The Episode (http://www.stilldrinking.org/the-episode-part-1 http://www.stilldrinking.org/the-episode-part-1), a series of blog posts by Peter Welch, most famous for his 'Programming Sucks' post, in which he describes his experiences with going completely batshit insane after a week without sleep plus LSD. It's a great piece of one person's experiences with LSD use gone wrong. edit: actually he's published it as as an ebook too, titled "And Then I Thought I Was A Fish": http://www.amazon.co.uk/And-Then-Thought-Was-Fish-ebook/dp/B008DZEWF8/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/And-Then-Thought-Was-Fish-ebook/dp/B...
- Broken_Hippo 11y ago
  I've not time to read a book and reply to this comment in a timely manner, however: I'd note that lack of sleep in itself can cause some pretty freaky stuff to happen to people's minds in itself. If that is the experience I'm reading about - with an overtone of LSD - I cannot hold that representative of a bad trip. Occsionally,people do have bad trips, however, there is truth in that. For me, that goes back to making informed decisions. Legal sales from trained folks, with stableized ingredients and dosages helps with such things. Yes, a few people are gonna be stupid, but that basically happens with everything.
throwawaymonoid 11y ago
I'd encourage you to re-think your views. "Drugs" is a legal delineation, not one of substance. Like every substance you consume, amount, frequency--and sometimes intent--matter far more than molecular composition. In regard to LSD specifically, please note that the link to schizophrenia has since been proven null, and the individuals studied were already displaying signs of the disorder. Further research in more recent years, while limited, has been unable to find any correlation between incidents of mental illness and the use of hallucinogenics. As per cannabis... without it I'd most certainly be addicted to Rx painkillers. I like knowing that if I travel or go somewhere it's prohibited, I won't suffer crippling withdrawals. In fact, aside from the return of a dull aching pain from chronic hyper-flexion, I wouldn't notice anything other than increasingly vivid dreams caused by REM rebound. For me it's a clear choice. It allows me to function, and unlike other pain management regimens, after 7 years its minimum effective dose (MED) despite daily administration remains unchanged; if I skip a day or 6 months, my pain is not magnitudes above baseline. I'm not here to tout the benefits of marijuana, but to explain how drugs are an indifferent tool, and just because they are harmful in one context doesn't mean we should discount their usefulness in another. Their value is relative. Because of a substance, I can function. Because I can function, I've been able to nurture my business from 3 people to >500, and into the Fortune 1000. For others with traumatic disorders like PTSD, hallucinogenic therapy may hold promises anti-depressants have been unable to actualize. Regardless, generalizations like yours (while in good faith) prevent the regulatory changes needed to once again allow for open research. In respect to the diversity of the human condition, I'd implore you to take a more laissez-faire approach: decide what's right for yourself, not for others.
- thrwyycombinatr 11y ago
  Since you used some anecdotal evidence, I felt I could provide some anecdotal stuff back. LSD: I've tried it a handful of times. The last time resulted in a strip so strongly horrifying I nearly stole a car with people in it to escape my extreme schizophrenic trip. Note: I've never had any symptom of it before in my life, and it doesn't run in my family. Nor do I believe I ever will. It was so extremely out of character, I know for a fact it was induced by the drug. In fact I think the dealer who gave it to my gave me a hugely high dose, which is a big danger of taking LSD from dealers. Cannabis: It may be good for pain relief, I had stomach issues that I used it to help with for years. Then a doctor told me it could be causing my stomach pain. Look up "cannabinoid hyperemesis". It was horrifying. The worst stomach flu you could imagine that lasted for weeks, and didn't leave me for years. I don't know if it was the weed, but I stay away from it now. I've had three different doctors talk about it (in different states), and all told me they have seen big spikes in stomach problems due to weed. So, yea. Nothings black and white. Drugs are an "arbitrary" definition (as all definitions are) for "something that affects you strongly". And anything that effects you strongly deserves a massive warning: if at all possible, don't rely on it.
Broken_Hippo 11y ago
To be fair: Using hallucinogens has been one of the most positive life experiences I've done. While you say things about mental health, the previous poster is correct: It merely can make symptoms more clear, but the cause isn't linked and is often reversed. Hallucinogens also tend to have the opposite effect on depression. One strand of pot isn't nice to anxiety, but if we are honest and open about stuff, affected people can avoid it (or use minimal amounts to test, or try it in the company of a trusted friend)... you know, using information and self-knowledge to try to make wise choices. And that was Thompson's experience with pot - in which case, he should have learned thereafter not to do pot and expect good work from himself: Others find that pot makes them more productive, and yet others find that it is good for some portions of the work, but not others. Simply because his words seem to uphold the stereotype doesn't make it any more true.
- throwawaymonoid 11y ago
  While I'm a proponent, research has made a fairly solid case for THC's ability to trigger latent psychological illness. As you stated, making informed choices relative to your medical history is both critical and necessary to avoid unintended permanent consequences. It's interesting how vastly different everyone's qualitative experiences are when the physiological states are fairly uniform... I think observing those altered processes with next-gen EEG tech may offer some illumination in our current, limited model of neuroplasticity.

Houshalter 11y ago

C0nc0rdance is a scientist who makes well researched videos about various subjects, and did a few videos on the health effects of marijuana: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnNPm5cG85c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnNPm5cG85c It may not be the most harmful drug, but it's certainly not harmless or non-addictive. LSD can cause mental illness to emerge in some people. I also remember a study that gave LSD to 10 people during a religious sermon. 9 of them went on the be preachers or priests later in life. That doesn't necessarily mean it's bad. But anything with that powerful an effect on the mind is concerning. Amphetamines certainly seem pretty cool. Especially if you have ADHD. But it definitely has side effects and potential for addiction. It's long term effects are not well studied, and a few studies I did see were concerning. E.g. brain damage in monkeys, and a group of kids taking it did worse than the control group after 3 years. I think people should be educated on the risks and facts before they decide to take a drug. If they still want to do it, fine. But at least they know the risks. And it's not enough just to put a warning sticker on the back of it that no one reads. Even widespread education that a drug is dangerous isn't enough. Everyone knows cigarettes cause cancer, but why do new people take up smoking?

forgetsusername 11y ago
>It may not be the most harmful drug, but it's certainly not harmless I'm no advocate of the claims that marijuana is "harmless" or, as some even claim, "good for you". But harm is relative. Sitting in your chair all day is harmful. Eating half the food we do is harmful, as are most medications. Arguing that marijuana is "not harmless" isn't much of an argument at all.
- Houshalter 11y ago
  According to that video, it increases cancer risk at a higher rate than cigarettes, and it is very addictive to some percent of the population.
pantalaimon 11y ago
> anything with that powerful an effect on the mind is concerning. I find that statement absurd, anything with an effect that powerful should be cherished! Would life be desirable if it were stripped from all emotions, as they too have a powerful effect on the mind? Even if you agreed to that, it wouldn't be feasible as we are biological creatures and not pure rational beings. Denying that our biological self exists, with feelings and all, doesn't solve anything. The spiritual experience you describe is just another part of the human condition, I don't quite believe that 9 out of 10 people on LSD would become preachers, but I see how it can lead to a better understanding of religion. This doesn't require superstition, quite the opposite. When you know that those effects are caused by LSD or substances contained in Mushrooms, ferns or cacti, you don't need a higher power as an explanation for this peculiar state of mind. You might however find yourself coming to conclusions about life that other people on similar states of mind (whether induced by drugs or other means is irrelevant here) had before you, and who used the vehicle of religion to transport them. So yes, psychedelics, as well as most drugs, should not be taken lightly, but banning them is like razing the Niagara Falls because someone might fall over the edge.

qmalxp 11y ago

I think it's a bit misleading to simply say "LSD is great and you should try it". It can be interesting, but also can be scary as fuck, and you should be in a good place mentally before trying it.

visarga 11y ago
I read an article yesterday about micro-dosing LSD at a level where no hallucinations appear, but a boost in energy and creativity is felt. Like a different kind of coffee that doesn't wane after only two hours.
- ryanlol 11y ago
  Microdosing of psychedelics isn't very well (or at all?) researched and it's hard to tell whether what people are experiencing is a placebo or not.
astazangasta 11y ago
"Snorkeling is great and you should try it," is a similar statement I might make with no qualifications or equivocation from you. Many pleasurable activities have attendant dangers that you should be aware of before engaging in them. Drugs are no different, except we surround them with the stink of moral judgment and refuse to educate people on how to use them safely.
- s73v3r 11y ago
  Snorkeling and psychotropic drugs are two completely different things.
- qmalxp 11y ago
  The difference is most people snorkeling for the first time do it with an instructor who is very much interested in their well-being. I don't think the guy who sells you LSD is gonna lose sleep if you happen to develop a lifelong mental condition.

jeffdavis 11y ago

"Why are we trying to convince everyone not to do drugs again?" I guess you could say that occasional use is not a big problem for most drugs. But I wouldn't recommend it, because most people go through some vulnerable time when they could become addicted (or otherwise abuse drugs), and at that time you don't want to have the stuff in your house or a dealer friend ready to supply. We dismiss people who join cults that sound crazy -- an alien ship coming to rescue them or something -- but I think a high percentage of people could be recruited if the cult appears at just the right time in their lives. If you are a regular user of drugs, it's like always having the cult recruiter in your house, just waiting for the right time.

visarga 11y ago
> most people go through some vulnerable time when they could become addicted (or otherwise abuse drugs), and at that time you don't want to have the stuff in your house or a dealer friend ready to supply Sometimes people do drugs to cope with their other problems in life. They need drugs as a reprieve. Life can be hard and people have used alcohol, pot and many other substances to create a refuge. Of course that doesn't solve the problem, but solving the problem is not always the top priority, and many times the problem has no solution. Why should we morally deny a refuge from anxiety and suffering to other people?
- jeffdavis 11y ago
  Sure, they can help, too. But I wouldn't recommend it, because I have no idea which drugs would help and which would make things worse. I'm not suggesting we deny anyone anything. I'm answering the question: "why do we try to convince people not to use drugs?".

andrepd 11y ago

"LSD is great, and people should try it" is as dishonest and misleading and agenda-pushing as "pot makes your teeth fall off".