3 ms·

Thank you for clarifying that, now I have a better understanding of where you are coming from. My question to you is, do you think psychedelics should be more

Thank you for clarifying that, now I have a better understanding of where you are coming from. My question to you is, do you think psychedelics should be more controlled than alcohol? Given how intoxication by alcohol can cause as much social harm as a bad trip. I'm also wondering if we can create a set of metrics, free from anecdotal evidence and any political context, by which we can use to categorize different drugs (alcohol included) based on social harm, self harm, long lasting damage, etc. and then use this to define which of those we ban/regulate/decriminalize etc. I know that may sound a bit naive, but using a pure scientific approach to this could give us quite different results than the current state of things, where some of the most dangerous substances are legal because there's a lobby behind them. The only thing I found similar to this is this assessment referenced on the LSD wiki page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysergic_acid_diethylamide#/media/File:Rational_harm_assessment_of_drugs_radar_plot.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysergic_acid_diethylamide#/me...

stef25 8y ago
I like the idea of psychedelics being free to use but only in recognised centers or "retreats", under professional guidance Holland did the OTC experiment already and there must be interesting data about this somewhere. I don't think OTC would be a good idea, maybe I'm just overly cautious. At the moment, anyone with sufficient motivation can get psychedelics at the click of a button and here in W-Europe nobody will really face any serious legal consequences for personal use. Testing kits are widely available. The current situation is not a bad one. > Given how intoxication by alcohol can cause as much social harm as a bad trip. I don't think (bad) trips would cause much social harm at all actually. Psychedelics have an unpredictability to them that warrants caution in a way that doesn't apply to alcohol (or sky diving, rock climbing ...) Medical prescriptions are required (in part) because of the potential side effects. If 1% of all paracetamols would drag the person through a mental hell scape, it wouldn't be available OTC either. Just some thoughts, the discussion is a difficult one.
- heavenlyblue 8y ago
  >> If 1% of all paracetamols would drag the person through... Right... But we still sell nuts to people allergic to nuts, and we still sell alcohol to people who end up beating their wives and then think it never happened. I don’t believe your point is reasonable at all.

stef25 8y ago

I like the idea of psychedelics being free to use but only in recognised centers or "retreats", under professional guidance Holland did the OTC experiment already and there must be interesting data about this somewhere. I don't think OTC would be a good idea, maybe I'm just overly cautious. At the moment, anyone with sufficient motivation can get psychedelics at the click of a button and here in W-Europe nobody will really face any serious legal consequences for personal use. Testing kits are widely available. The current situation is not a bad one. > Given how intoxication by alcohol can cause as much social harm as a bad trip. I don't think (bad) trips would cause much social harm at all actually. Psychedelics have an unpredictability to them that warrants caution in a way that doesn't apply to alcohol (or sky diving, rock climbing ...) Medical prescriptions are required (in part) because of the potential side effects. If 1% of all paracetamols would drag the person through a mental hell scape, it wouldn't be available OTC either. Just some thoughts, the discussion is a difficult one.

heavenlyblue 8y ago
>> If 1% of all paracetamols would drag the person through... Right... But we still sell nuts to people allergic to nuts, and we still sell alcohol to people who end up beating their wives and then think it never happened. I don’t believe your point is reasonable at all.