3 ms·

No, the overall usage is low because they are tabooed socially. Alcohol and nicotine are more dangerous and yet if you replace the taboo with widespread societa

by DirkH 3y ago

No, the overall usage is low because they are tabooed socially. Alcohol and nicotine are more dangerous and yet if you replace the taboo with widespread societal normalization or even nudge far enough that not doing alcohol is taboo then you see widespread rampant usage - and in some countries medical systems become strained. I call bullshit on anyone saying societies are rational enough to identify which substances are dangerous to a stable mindset or not and that is why some substances are not used much. We aren't nearly that thoughtful with what we ingest. It is always "what will so and so think of me if I do or do not do this" as an overriding directive. Mind you, what others think of you and how that affects your social status has very strong causal mental health effects, so it is worth taking seriously. But obviously then this means the bad health effects are sometimes divorced from what the substance actually does to you independently of how worried you are others will see you. In Vancouver Canada psychedelics have been decriminalized. You can buy shrooms for instance in stores that sell them publicaly and openly and legally with neon-capitalism ads telling you what strain will give you what kind of trip (are you looking for a hint of more socialization or more introspective?). Accordingly bumping into random people at parties or public parks where people are high and happy to share they are high is orders of magnitude more common now. Said people are no longer as afraid that their behaviour will associate them with someone who is unlawful or a high risk taker or a leftist hippy or insert-negative-association-here. Less stigma = more usage.

soligern 3y ago
You have to really abuse alcohol for it to mess with your psyche. Nicotine is damaging physically but does nothing significant to the mind. Contrast that with one terrible trip that could very well happen on your first time trying psychedelics.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- DirkH 3y ago
  Different people can have pretty different experiences with different drugs. Just because you have an alcohol tolerance (assuming you do) doesn't mean others do. Just thinking of myself, I'm always surprised how little it takes for alcohol to alter my psche to the point that I can't find my wallet and am speaking in tongues because I'm a huge lightweight. For some it even represents an existential risk due to overwhelming dependence. Also, if forming an difficult-to-break addiction to alcohol (super common) isn't something messing with your psyche long-term you and I have drastically different views of what constitutes "messing with your psyche." Also I call MASSIVE BS on nicotine not doing anything significantly to the mind. Good lord, have you ever Googles "What Nicotine does to your mind" and tried reading some papers? Cognitive decline, dependence (classified as highly addictive which is a direct long-term change to your brain. How can anyone argue this isn't a significant change to your mind?), dementia, brain volume decrease, memory+attention impairment... I could go on. What Nicotone doesn't do is cause a significant change in people's behaviour that is immediately apparent that makes them want to act in ways that are socially stigmatized - like get all cuddly... Or hug a tree... or act like a slug and laugh hysterically.... all which psychedelics tend to induce. Again, social stigma attached to certain behaviour is the primary culprit. These are usually harmless behaviours, even if annoying. None of which matters because as the scientific literature will attest and what I as someone who used to be strongly anti-drug will also say is: "Despite the contrary perception of much of the public, psychedelic drugs are not addictive and are physiologically safe.[20][21][10] As of 2016, there have been no known deaths due to overdose of LSD, psilocybin, or mescaline." If the things called Nicotine and alcohol that might fucking kill me and destroy my brain to the point I need state funds to get me rehabilitated if I'm not careful are fully legal for recreation, why in the name of all that is evidence-based do we make the thing with ZERO documented deaths illegal? Because it is socially, culturally and politically stigmatized completely independently of its relatively low negative health impacts. Ergo, it either stays illegal or we don't use it. I'll even end with a fresh example: in a recent lecture my friend's neuroscience prof went through the negative proven health outcomes of various drugs and concluded there really is no health-related reason for psychedelics to be illegal. At all. You know what happened next? Some undergrads argued with the professor. Not with peer-reviewed counter-evidence or asking clarifying questions no. They responded with vehement confidence that the professor "must be wrong" and even got angry with him with complaints apparently filed. I couldn't believe it. I still struggle to. All he did was dare to publicly break the taboo of even implicitly suggesting psychedelics should be legal recreationally because it isn't a big deal.
  - soligern 3y ago
    You’re not getting it, either genuinely or in a more dissembling way to justify your point. Sure alcohol will make you “lose your wallet” but it’s not fundamentally changing your perspectives/outlook on life significantly unless you abuse it for very long. Nicotine by itself is pretty much entirely harmless beside second tier effects from having a very strong addictive component. A person is rarely “broken” by moderate alcohol use. That’s explicitly not true of psychedelics.

by DirkH 3y ago

soligern 3y ago

You have to really abuse alcohol for it to mess with your psyche. Nicotine is damaging physically but does nothing significant to the mind. Contrast that with one terrible trip that could very well happen on your first time trying psychedelics.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
DirkH 3y ago
Different people can have pretty different experiences with different drugs. Just because you have an alcohol tolerance (assuming you do) doesn't mean others do. Just thinking of myself, I'm always surprised how little it takes for alcohol to alter my psche to the point that I can't find my wallet and am speaking in tongues because I'm a huge lightweight. For some it even represents an existential risk due to overwhelming dependence. Also, if forming an difficult-to-break addiction to alcohol (super common) isn't something messing with your psyche long-term you and I have drastically different views of what constitutes "messing with your psyche." Also I call MASSIVE BS on nicotine not doing anything significantly to the mind. Good lord, have you ever Googles "What Nicotine does to your mind" and tried reading some papers? Cognitive decline, dependence (classified as highly addictive which is a direct long-term change to your brain. How can anyone argue this isn't a significant change to your mind?), dementia, brain volume decrease, memory+attention impairment... I could go on. What Nicotone doesn't do is cause a significant change in people's behaviour that is immediately apparent that makes them want to act in ways that are socially stigmatized - like get all cuddly... Or hug a tree... or act like a slug and laugh hysterically.... all which psychedelics tend to induce. Again, social stigma attached to certain behaviour is the primary culprit. These are usually harmless behaviours, even if annoying. None of which matters because as the scientific literature will attest and what I as someone who used to be strongly anti-drug will also say is: "Despite the contrary perception of much of the public, psychedelic drugs are not addictive and are physiologically safe.[20][21][10] As of 2016, there have been no known deaths due to overdose of LSD, psilocybin, or mescaline." If the things called Nicotine and alcohol that might fucking kill me and destroy my brain to the point I need state funds to get me rehabilitated if I'm not careful are fully legal for recreation, why in the name of all that is evidence-based do we make the thing with ZERO documented deaths illegal? Because it is socially, culturally and politically stigmatized completely independently of its relatively low negative health impacts. Ergo, it either stays illegal or we don't use it. I'll even end with a fresh example: in a recent lecture my friend's neuroscience prof went through the negative proven health outcomes of various drugs and concluded there really is no health-related reason for psychedelics to be illegal. At all. You know what happened next? Some undergrads argued with the professor. Not with peer-reviewed counter-evidence or asking clarifying questions no. They responded with vehement confidence that the professor "must be wrong" and even got angry with him with complaints apparently filed. I couldn't believe it. I still struggle to. All he did was dare to publicly break the taboo of even implicitly suggesting psychedelics should be legal recreationally because it isn't a big deal.
- soligern 3y ago
  You’re not getting it, either genuinely or in a more dissembling way to justify your point. Sure alcohol will make you “lose your wallet” but it’s not fundamentally changing your perspectives/outlook on life significantly unless you abuse it for very long. Nicotine by itself is pretty much entirely harmless beside second tier effects from having a very strong addictive component. A person is rarely “broken” by moderate alcohol use. That’s explicitly not true of psychedelics.