British woman gets death sentence

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

Shpongled:
But as for the likes of the LSD, MDMA, mushrooms, mescaline etc, those are among the safest drugs known, far safer than many medications sold in your local pharmacy.

MDMA is linked to a vast number of neurological disorders, including serotonergic neurotoxicity and Apoptosis. It literally kills the brain.

LSD can induce chronic psychosis and a new 'brand' has been distributed recently that causes homicidal rages in some people who take it. Remember the 'zombie' from Miami who ate part of a guy's face off? LSD. There have been a few other cases of it recently, but none so high profile.

Not going to bother going over the rest of them, but those drugs are banned for the safety and wellbeing of society as a whole. It's more important than any one person's perceived 'rights'.

Edit: Let me put it this way. If you think all of these drugs are perfectly safe, then why were they banned in the first place?

Kopikatsu:

Shpongled:
But as for the likes of the LSD, MDMA, mushrooms, mescaline etc, those are among the safest drugs known, far safer than many medications sold in your local pharmacy.

MDMA is linked to a vast number of neurological disorders, including serotonergic neurotoxicity and Apoptosis. It literally kills the brain.

LSD can induce chronic psychosis and a new 'brand' has been distributed recently that causes homicidal rages in some people who take it. Remember the 'zombie' from Miami who ate part of a guy's face off? LSD.

Not going to bother going over the rest of them, but those drugs are banned for the safety and wellbeing of society as a whole. It's more important than any one person's perceived 'rights'.

Im not a big fan of mdma, but to the point about the bad lsd being responsible for that florida case, the best way to avoid stuff like that is to legalise and regulate, in my view.

Trip drugs are my main interest, that a substance can alter your perceptions and open doors in your mind i think is great.

They were banned in the first place because of reactionary unjust and illogical policies.

adamsaccount:

Kopikatsu:

Shpongled:
But as for the likes of the LSD, MDMA, mushrooms, mescaline etc, those are among the safest drugs known, far safer than many medications sold in your local pharmacy.

MDMA is linked to a vast number of neurological disorders, including serotonergic neurotoxicity and Apoptosis. It literally kills the brain.

LSD can induce chronic psychosis and a new 'brand' has been distributed recently that causes homicidal rages in some people who take it. Remember the 'zombie' from Miami who ate part of a guy's face off? LSD.

Not going to bother going over the rest of them, but those drugs are banned for the safety and wellbeing of society as a whole. It's more important than any one person's perceived 'rights'.

Im not a big fan of mdma, but to the point about the bad lsd being responsible for that florida case, the best way to avoid stuff like that is to legalise and regulate, in my view.

Trip drugs are my main interest, that a substance can alter your perceptions and open doors in your mind i think is great.

They were banned in the first place because of reactionary unjust and illogical policies.

Actually, no. They were banned because they're classified as dangerous and addictive substances. The FDA even has a list of said substances, ranked by threat level.

Anyway, there. Drug-free hallucination induction.

Realize that the brain is designed to work in a specific way and that any substance that forcibly alters how it functions is going to cause damage. You're trying a ram a square peg in a round hole, and it just don't work.

Kopikatsu:

adamsaccount:

Kopikatsu:

MDMA is linked to a vast number of neurological disorders, including serotonergic neurotoxicity and Apoptosis. It literally kills the brain.

LSD can induce chronic psychosis and a new 'brand' has been distributed recently that causes homicidal rages in some people who take it. Remember the 'zombie' from Miami who ate part of a guy's face off? LSD.

Not going to bother going over the rest of them, but those drugs are banned for the safety and wellbeing of society as a whole. It's more important than any one person's perceived 'rights'.

Im not a big fan of mdma, but to the point about the bad lsd being responsible for that florida case, the best way to avoid stuff like that is to legalise and regulate, in my view.

Trip drugs are my main interest, that a substance can alter your perceptions and open doors in your mind i think is great.

They were banned in the first place because of reactionary unjust and illogical policies.

Actually, no. They were banned because they're classified as dangerous and addictive substances.

Anyway, there. Drug-free hallucination induction.

Realize that the brain is designed to work in a specific way and that any substance that forcibly alters how it functions is going to cause damage. You're trying a ram a square peg in a round hole, and it just don't work.

Allright cheers for the link thats pretty cool.

I do recognise that a lot of drugs cause damage to the brain, but at the same time that it is your right to do what you like with your brain as it is YOURS and yours alone, it should come down to personal responsibility and not legislation.

Kopikatsu:

Shpongled:
But as for the likes of the LSD, MDMA, mushrooms, mescaline etc, those are among the safest drugs known, far safer than many medications sold in your local pharmacy.

MDMA is linked to a vast number of neurological disorders, including serotonergic neurotoxicity and Apoptosis. It literally kills the brain.

LSD can induce chronic psychosis and a new 'brand' has been distributed recently that causes homicidal rages in some people who take it. Remember the 'zombie' from Miami who ate part of a guy's face off? LSD. There have been a few other cases of it recently, but none so high profile.

Not going to bother going over the rest of them, but those drugs are banned for the safety and wellbeing of society as a whole. It's more important than any one person's perceived 'rights'.

Edit: Let me put it this way. If you think all of these drugs are perfectly safe, then why were they banned in the first place?

MDMA does not kill the brain, if it were that simple it wouldn't currently be the process of being an FDA approved treatment for various mental disorders - MAPS.

A) There is no other "brand" of LSD. LSD is LSD. Anything that isn't LSD is not LSD. There are various LSD analogues, but what you're thinking of isn't an LSD analogue, you're thinking of the 25x-nBOME's, which are phenethylamines, they aren't related to LSD in anyway whatsoever other than both being psychedelics and being commonly mistaken for each other because they're potent enough to fit on tabs, which are the most common form of distribution for LSD.

B) The man in that news story wasn't reported to be high on an nBOME, he was supposed to be high on "bath salts", which was originally MDPV, a stimulant drug that became broadly popular because of its legal status. "bath salts" since MDPV became illegal could now be anything, just another dangerous concoction of legal highs that emergency services don't have a clue how to deal with because no one can ever know wtf the actual drugs in them are.

C) It was found in the toxicology report that, despite the hysteria spread by the early news reports, the man wasn't actually high on anything. Aside from traces of marijuana there were no drugs found in the mans body. Drugs were not to blame for that incident. Yet another case of hysteria and propaganda aimed at drugs.

Most drugs are illegal because of incidents exactly like the one you've just posted. Man does something crazy, media blames it on drugs with no proof whatsoever, everyone believes the drugs are to blame, by the time the toxicology report comes out everyone's forgotten about the incident, legislation has been passed and no one cares about the actual facts anymore.

adamsaccount:

Kopikatsu:

adamsaccount:

Im not a big fan of mdma, but to the point about the bad lsd being responsible for that florida case, the best way to avoid stuff like that is to legalise and regulate, in my view.

Trip drugs are my main interest, that a substance can alter your perceptions and open doors in your mind i think is great.

They were banned in the first place because of reactionary unjust and illogical policies.

Actually, no. They were banned because they're classified as dangerous and addictive substances.

Anyway, there. Drug-free hallucination induction.

Realize that the brain is designed to work in a specific way and that any substance that forcibly alters how it functions is going to cause damage. You're trying a ram a square peg in a round hole, and it just don't work.

Allright cheers for the link thats pretty cool.

I do recognise that a lot of drugs cause damage to the brain, but at the same time that it is your right to do what you like with your brain as it is YOURS and yours alone, it should come down to personal responsibility and not legislation.

So why do you demand that medical needs be taken care of by the state/government? Also, you already don't have a right to your body. The government is free to tell you what you can do with yourself, what kind of protection you're required to use during any activity, what kind of foods you can eat, what level of medical care children must have, etc.

Here's a list of the tier-1 drugs in the US, by the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Schedule_I_drugs_%28US%29

Kopikatsu:

adamsaccount:

Kopikatsu:

Actually, no. They were banned because they're classified as dangerous and addictive substances.

Anyway, there. Drug-free hallucination induction.

Realize that the brain is designed to work in a specific way and that any substance that forcibly alters how it functions is going to cause damage. You're trying a ram a square peg in a round hole, and it just don't work.

Allright cheers for the link thats pretty cool.

I do recognise that a lot of drugs cause damage to the brain, but at the same time that it is your right to do what you like with your brain as it is YOURS and yours alone, it should come down to personal responsibility and not legislation.

So why do you demand that medical needs be taken care of by the state/government? Also, you already don't have a right to your body. The government is free to tell you what you can do with yourself, what kind of protection you're required to use during any activity, what kind of foods you can eat, what level of medical care children must have, etc.

Here's a list of the tier-1 drugs in the US, by the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Schedule_I_drugs_%28US%29

I disagree fundamentally that the government has the right to tell you what you can do withyouself, and what rights do you have if not the right to your body?

The health service in my country is free and will treat me for any condition i have however its caused. If i jumped off a building and broke a leg or was playing in traffic then theyd still treat me, so i dont see why the double standard exists.

And i look at all the people reliant on anti depressants and think, how the hell is this not the most hypocritcal kind of shit ever? You can be addicted to something if the government says its ok. What i mean by this is i currently take a mood stabiliser called quetiapine. If i stop taking it i vomit endlessly. The reason its ok is because quetiapine is not an enjoyable drug. It does help me, but so does weed.

I know people with such depressing lives that the only way they can keep going is by chemically altering their brains with prozac. Its all a huge hipocracy.

Kopikatsu:

adamsaccount:

Kopikatsu:

MDMA is linked to a vast number of neurological disorders, including serotonergic neurotoxicity and Apoptosis. It literally kills the brain.

LSD can induce chronic psychosis and a new 'brand' has been distributed recently that causes homicidal rages in some people who take it. Remember the 'zombie' from Miami who ate part of a guy's face off? LSD.

Not going to bother going over the rest of them, but those drugs are banned for the safety and wellbeing of society as a whole. It's more important than any one person's perceived 'rights'.

Im not a big fan of mdma, but to the point about the bad lsd being responsible for that florida case, the best way to avoid stuff like that is to legalise and regulate, in my view.

Trip drugs are my main interest, that a substance can alter your perceptions and open doors in your mind i think is great.

They were banned in the first place because of reactionary unjust and illogical policies.

Actually, no. They were banned because they're classified as dangerous and addictive substances. The FDA even has a list of said substances, ranked by threat level.

Anyway, there. Drug-free hallucination induction.

Realize that the brain is designed to work in a specific way and that any substance that forcibly alters how it functions is going to cause damage. You're trying a ram a square peg in a round hole, and it just don't work.

LSD has one of the highest therapeutic indexes of any drugs known to man. It is not known to be neurotoxic in any way whatsoever. it causes no physical damage to the brain, it has only ever killed one person. Said person having injected more 300,000 times the standard dose. Other than that one incident, there are no other reports of permanent physical damage caused by LSD.

Mental issues have been associated with it, but as with marijuana the data is all up in the air, there are no conclusive results from any studies. It's most commonly accepted that LSD can exacerbate pre-existed conditions, but not cause new ones.

Shpongled:

Kopikatsu:

adamsaccount:

Im not a big fan of mdma, but to the point about the bad lsd being responsible for that florida case, the best way to avoid stuff like that is to legalise and regulate, in my view.

Trip drugs are my main interest, that a substance can alter your perceptions and open doors in your mind i think is great.

They were banned in the first place because of reactionary unjust and illogical policies.

Actually, no. They were banned because they're classified as dangerous and addictive substances. The FDA even has a list of said substances, ranked by threat level.

Anyway, there. Drug-free hallucination induction.

Realize that the brain is designed to work in a specific way and that any substance that forcibly alters how it functions is going to cause damage. You're trying a ram a square peg in a round hole, and it just don't work.

LSD has one of the highest therapeutic indexes of any drugs known to man. It is not known to be neurotoxic in any way whatsoever. it causes no physical damage to the brain, it has only ever killed one person. Said person having injected more 300,000 times the standard dose. Other than that one incident, there are no other reports of permanent physical damage caused by LSD.

Mental issues have been associated with it, but as with marijuana the data is all up in the air, there are no conclusive results from any studies. It's most commonly accepted that LSD can exacerbate pre-existed conditions, but not cause new ones.

Gotta agree, i feel at least part of the reason for prohibition of weed and lsd is that they can make you more aware of the faults of capitalism and stop you acting like a good little consumer.

As bill hicks said, i can wake up at 7 everyday and go to a little cubicle job pushing numbers around earning money for my boss like a good little automoton or i can get up at midday, smoke a joint and learn to play the sitar.

Smeatza:
Tenfold? Where's your source for that?
Did you even read the MDMA article yourself? I can't honestly believe you did considering it shows that the short term side affects of MDMA are the same as alcohol and the long term side effects pretty much non-existant.
None of this disproves the much more highly destructive side affects of prohibition.

If you'd actually read it before responding with even more empty claims and ignoring my posts, you'd have seen it's a few paragraphs down:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDMA#Chronic_use

Also it quite clearly states that XTC/mdma destroys serotonine transport capacity, permanently crippling someone's mood. The conclusions even went so far as to class XTC as a neurotoxin, because that's basically what it did: destroy neurons.

Come on man, you've been losing this "But drugs are totally harmless and non-addictive!" bullshit consistently for entire pages now. Give it up. Nobody's going to fall for arbitrarily crying that pot is good, I prove it's not, you ignore it and cry again that pot is good, etc. It's not something people will fall for.

Smeatza:
This one actually made me laugh, it's as if you think alcohol isn't a drug or something.
In any case that part in bold is again, so incredibly obviously wrong that it discredits everything you say. It is sensationalist.

You're dodging your burden of evidence: Where is the proof of harm done by various drug, per-user and per-use compensated?

Argueing with you is rather unpleasant as you have no arguments other than 'but I want to get high' I assume, and compensate being wrong with personal attacks. Why not just admit you're wrong and drugs are harmfull? It's far more constructive an approach that's for sure.

Shpongled:
LSD has one of the highest therapeutic indexes of any drugs known to man. It is not known to be neurotoxic in any way whatsoever. it causes no physical damage to the brain, it has only ever killed one person. Said person having injected more 300,000 times the standard dose. Other than that one incident, there are no other reports of permanent physical damage caused by LSD.

Mental issues have been associated with it, but as with marijuana the data is all up in the air, there are no conclusive results from any studies. It's most commonly accepted that LSD can exacerbate pre-existed conditions, but not cause new ones.

You're talking about a drug that's not removed by the body by the liver, like other toxins are, and can cause people sudden halucinations at random times up to 6 months later, meaning for instance that every single LSD user should have their drivers license revoked for six months after each shot because their mental stability can't be guaranteed.

LSD has been known to trigger mental problems such as psychosis, cause panic attacks, and severely worsen existing mental conditions. Not to mention what people do due to the halucinations; Seeing bugs under your skin? Why don't you take a knife and cut them out? That sort of thing.

Blablahb:

Shpongled:
LSD has one of the highest therapeutic indexes of any drugs known to man. It is not known to be neurotoxic in any way whatsoever. it causes no physical damage to the brain, it has only ever killed one person. Said person having injected more 300,000 times the standard dose. Other than that one incident, there are no other reports of permanent physical damage caused by LSD.

Mental issues have been associated with it, but as with marijuana the data is all up in the air, there are no conclusive results from any studies. It's most commonly accepted that LSD can exacerbate pre-existed conditions, but not cause new ones.

You're talking about a drug that's not removed by the body by the liver, like other toxins are, and can cause people sudden halucinations at random times up to 6 months later, meaning for instance that every single LSD user should have their drivers license revoked for six months after each shot because their mental stability can't be guaranteed.

LSD has been known to trigger mental problems such as psychosis, cause panic attacks, and severely worsen existing mental conditions. Not to mention what people do due to the halucinations; Seeing bugs under your skin? Why don't you take a knife and cut them out? That sort of thing.

I promised myself i wouldn't reply to you but i'll make an exception here just to point something out.

LSD is in fact metabolised by the liver, has a half-life of roughly 4-6 hours, reaches peak blood plasma levels in around 10-15 minutes after ingestion and rapidly falls thereafter. Only trace amounts of LSD have been found more than 12 hours after ingestion and the drug is entirely gone within 24 hours.

http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_myth1.shtml
Has a bunch of references at the bottom. I'd post a better citation but this is not contested scientifically at all. This is well-accepted as fact. A simple google will reveal extensive information about LSD metabolization.

"flashbacks", if they exist at all, are not caused by residual leftover LSD. This is a myth. Yet another instance of the anti-drug people in this thread basing their opinions on on myths, mistruths and misinformation. Keep going Blablah, you only discredit yourself further. If you're wrong about this what else are you wrong about? Why should any trust you when you clearly don't fact check anything you say?

Well my personal opinion is not that all drugs are harmless, I cant talk for anyone else. Some are worse than others but despite this you should still be allowed to choose even if you elect to choose to harm yourself. Theres no freedom at all if theres no freedom to make bad decisions.

There are however quite a few drugs that are less harmful than things currently legal, for example a commision by the british government (this is david knut, who quit his job when the government ignored his advice) found that the worse thing people do when smoking weed is mixing it with tobacco.

I think the fundamental difference between me and the people im arguing against is that they see it as their right to force their views on what you should and shouldnt do on everyone else whereas im for letting people do as they please so long as no one else is being harmed.

Bashfluff:

Helmholtz Watson:

Bashfluff:

There doesn't need to be an argument other than individual liberty. But of course, the, "We are allowed to put everything else--pretty much--into our own bodies, so why not this?" is a pretty compelling one.

You want to do whatever you want to your body? Sure, but if things take a turn for the worst then you shouldn't be allowed to go to a hospital if you don't have insurance and you should be prevented from receiving any medical benefits that are payed for with my tax dollars.

*shivers*

I would hate to live in a society like that, along with anyone else who is sane.

And I would hate to live in a society where I was expected to pay for you destroying your own body, despite the fact that you were informed multiple times that cocaine is a very harmful and addictive drug.

You want the freedom to do whatever you want to your own body? Fine, but I'm not your parent, I shouldn't have to pay for your reckless choices.

Helmholtz Watson:

Bashfluff:

Helmholtz Watson:
You want to do whatever you want to your body? Sure, but if things take a turn for the worst then you shouldn't be allowed to go to a hospital if you don't have insurance and you should be prevented from receiving any medical benefits that are payed for with my tax dollars.

*shivers*

I would hate to live in a society like that, along with anyone else who is sane.

And I would hate to live in a society where I was expected to pay for you destroying your own body, despite the fact that you were informed multiple times that cocaine is a very harmful and addictive drug.

You want the freedom to do whatever you want to your own body? Fine, but I'm not your parent, I shouldn't have to pay for your reckless choices.

Look, if your from britain then youre allready paying for all the alcoholics with liver problems, all the smokers with lung cancer and all the people with heart disease from obesity.

This argument would only make sense if the current situation was one in which no one harmed themselves and was treated by the nhs. Do you want to remove nhs cover from all these people as well? Also, previously mentioned mountain climbers, motorcyclists, horse riders. All these people choose to do something dangerous and can harm themselves in the process.

Id be perfectly fine with paying an extra tax to pay for any medical bills from my drug use. Its just not something that will even be considered and this is sad.

adamsaccount:

Look, if your from britain then....

I'm not from Britain, I'm American. My point still stands.

Shpongled:
"flashbacks", if they exist at all, are not caused by residual leftover LSD. This is a myth. Yet another instance of the anti-drug people in this thread basing their opinions on on myths, mistruths and misinformation. Keep going Blablah, you only discredit yourself further. If you're wrong about this what else are you wrong about? Why should any trust you when you clearly don't fact check anything you say?

I don't believe that for one second. My first and only trip occured when I was a junior in high school. My drink was spiked with it during lunch when I got up to use the bathroom as a 'joke'. I tripped for 9 hours, scared out of my mind, and completely incapable of comprehending what was happening to me, despite people trying to explain to me what happened. I'm glad that shit is illegal, I damn near severed my own fingers with a cleaver when I got home because I thought my fingers had turned into snakes. Thankfully a friend that decided to stay with me to make sure I stayed safe stopped me. I had flashbacks in the form of explosions of light in my peripheral vision fairly frequently, on the average of a few times a week, for months afterwards.

Helmholtz Watson:

adamsaccount:

Look, if your from britain then....

I'm not from Britain, I'm American. My point still stands.

Okidoke, i dont know much about the american health system but if you need to pay to be treated then people are allready paying for their choices.

Jux:

Shpongled:
"flashbacks", if they exist at all, are not caused by residual leftover LSD. This is a myth. Yet another instance of the anti-drug people in this thread basing their opinions on on myths, mistruths and misinformation. Keep going Blablah, you only discredit yourself further. If you're wrong about this what else are you wrong about? Why should any trust you when you clearly don't fact check anything you say?

I don't believe that for one second. My first and only trip occured when I was a junior in high school. My drink was spiked with it during lunch when I got up to use the bathroom. I tripped for 9 hours, scared out of my mind, and completely incapable of comprehending what was happening to me, despite people trying to explain to me what happened. I'm glad that shit is illegal, I damn near severed my own fingers with a cleaver when I got home because I thought my fingers had turned into snakes. Thankfully a friend that decided to stay with me to make sure I stayed safe stopped me. I had flashbacks in the form of explosions of light in my peripheral vision fairly frequently, on the average of a few times a week, for months afterwards.

What were talking about though is the choice to take it, spiking your drink with it was a fucked up move, forcing anyone to take anything they dont want to is fucked up and dangerous as hell, i dont think youd find anyone who would dispute that point.

Like with a lot of trip drugs you have to put in a bit of research and effort and be prepared.

I can only imagine how terrifying it must be to accidentally ingest lsd.

Jux:

Shpongled:
"flashbacks", if they exist at all, are not caused by residual leftover LSD. This is a myth. Yet another instance of the anti-drug people in this thread basing their opinions on on myths, mistruths and misinformation. Keep going Blablah, you only discredit yourself further. If you're wrong about this what else are you wrong about? Why should any trust you when you clearly don't fact check anything you say?

I don't believe that for one second. My first and only trip occured when I was a junior in high school. My drink was spiked with it during lunch when I got up to use the bathroom. I tripped for 9 hours, scared out of my mind, and completely incapable of comprehending what was happening to me, despite people trying to explain to me what happened. I'm glad that shit is illegal, I damn near severed my own fingers with a cleaver when I got home because I thought my fingers had turned into snakes. Thankfully a friend that decided to stay with me to make sure I stayed safe stopped me. I had flashbacks in the form of explosions of light in my peripheral vision fairly frequently, on the average of a few times a week, for months afterwards.

Believe whatever the fuck you want mate, flashbacks aren't caused by residual LSD left in the body. Scientific fact. If anything it's some form of PTSD. And yes, obviously bad things are going to happen when you unknowingly get dosed with a potent psychedelic, that's more of an argument against douchebags spiking your drink than the drug itself. The effects of psychedelics vary greatly depending on the mind set and setting of the individual in question. Being dosed unknowingly already puts you in a bad mindset, not surprising things went south from there.

Either way, wasn't caused by residual LSD left in the body.

adamsaccount:

Jux:

Shpongled:
"flashbacks", if they exist at all, are not caused by residual leftover LSD. This is a myth. Yet another instance of the anti-drug people in this thread basing their opinions on on myths, mistruths and misinformation. Keep going Blablah, you only discredit yourself further. If you're wrong about this what else are you wrong about? Why should any trust you when you clearly don't fact check anything you say?

I don't believe that for one second. My first and only trip occured when I was a junior in high school. My drink was spiked with it during lunch when I got up to use the bathroom. I tripped for 9 hours, scared out of my mind, and completely incapable of comprehending what was happening to me, despite people trying to explain to me what happened. I'm glad that shit is illegal, I damn near severed my own fingers with a cleaver when I got home because I thought my fingers had turned into snakes. Thankfully a friend that decided to stay with me to make sure I stayed safe stopped me. I had flashbacks in the form of explosions of light in my peripheral vision fairly frequently, on the average of a few times a week, for months afterwards.

What were talking about though is the choice to take it, spiking your drink with it was a fucked up move, forcing anyone to take anything they dont want to is fucked up and dangerous as hell, i dont think youd find anyone who would dispute that point.

Indeed, it was fucked up. I was simply disputing his claim that flashbacks don't happen. As for why I feel LSD in particular should be illegal, it has high potential not only for abuse of others, like was done to me, but the behavior it induces can be extremely dangerous, not only to yourself, but to those around you. What if I had turned that knife on my friend? Sure, I was drugged without my knowledge, but even if it had been different, if I had willingly taken it, my cognitive capacities were so far removed that I could have injured or killed someone without full understanding of what I was doing.

It does happen and is a danger, there was that actor who set himself on fire after lsd use, but the way I see it forcing anyone to take it is completely wrong, but should someone properly understand the dangers, along with the potentially positive therapeutic effects I don't think legislation should be getting in the way.

Theres plenty of dangerous things you can do legally, few of which have the mind opening capabilities of lsd or mescaline.

Jux:

adamsaccount:

Jux:

I don't believe that for one second. My first and only trip occured when I was a junior in high school. My drink was spiked with it during lunch when I got up to use the bathroom. I tripped for 9 hours, scared out of my mind, and completely incapable of comprehending what was happening to me, despite people trying to explain to me what happened. I'm glad that shit is illegal, I damn near severed my own fingers with a cleaver when I got home because I thought my fingers had turned into snakes. Thankfully a friend that decided to stay with me to make sure I stayed safe stopped me. I had flashbacks in the form of explosions of light in my peripheral vision fairly frequently, on the average of a few times a week, for months afterwards.

What were talking about though is the choice to take it, spiking your drink with it was a fucked up move, forcing anyone to take anything they dont want to is fucked up and dangerous as hell, i dont think youd find anyone who would dispute that point.

Indeed, it was fucked up. I was simply disputing his claim that flashbacks don't happen. As for why I feel LSD in particular should be illegal, it has high potential not only for abuse of others, like was done to me, but the behavior it induces can be extremely dangerous, not only to yourself, but to those around you. What if I had turned that knife on my friend? Sure, I was drugged without my knowledge, but even if it had been different, if I had willingly taken it, my cognitive capacities were so far removed that I could have injured or killed someone without full understanding of what I was doing.

I didn't claim they didn't happen, i questioned whether they happen, there is a difference. Goddamn it could you please read my posts before you reply to them, you're almost as bad as blablah.

Just for fun though, i could have pointed out that the visual effects you experienced are more than likely to be HPPD. Sometimes "flashbacks" are attributed as HPPD, but flashbacks generally refer more to the re-emergence of the mental effects of psychedelics than the visual, which is why "flashbacks" are doubted more heavily than HPPD, because they're far less common and far harder to prove or find a reason for. But that would be quibbling, so i didn't bother, but the point was there to be made.

adamsaccount:
It does happen and is a danger, there was that actor who set himself on fire after lsd use, but the way I see it forcing anyone to take it is completely wrong, but should someone properly understand the dangers, along with the potentially positive therapeutic effects I don't think legislation should be getting in the way.

Theres plenty of dangerous things you can do legally, few of which have the mind opening capabilities of lsd or mescaline.

I don't see how the potentially positive effects outwiegh the very well known negative effects. Experiments were done with lsd back in the 50's and 60's in Canada, look up Humphry Osmand sometime. Dude put a bunch of schizos and sociopaths on lsd as part of their therapy. Turned out very badly.

Jux:

adamsaccount:
It does happen and is a danger, there was that actor who set himself on fire after lsd use, but the way I see it forcing anyone to take it is completely wrong, but should someone properly understand the dangers, along with the potentially positive therapeutic effects I don't think legislation should be getting in the way.

Theres plenty of dangerous things you can do legally, few of which have the mind opening capabilities of lsd or mescaline.

I don't see how the potentially positive effects outwiegh the very well known negative effects. Experiments were done with lsd back in the 50's and 60's in Canada, look up Humphry Osmand sometime. Dude put a bunch of schizos and sociopaths on lsd as part of their therapy. Turned out very badly.

What a fucking surprise. I'm glad we cleared that up. Schizo's and sociopaths don't mix well with potent psychedelics. What else don't they mix well with? Sharp knives and Machine guns?

For the overwhelming majority of users the positives of psychedelics have outweigh'd the negatives. There aren't really that many people around who've had bad experiences with them. Bad trips are far from the norm.

MAPS are actually testing psilocybin at the moment on patients with terminal illnesses to help them come to terms with their impending death. It's proving to be an overwhelming success so far. Take a look at http://www.maps.org/ to find out what benefits researchers finding for psychedelics when used in suitably controlled environments.

Shpongled:
I didn't claim they didn't happen, i questioned whether they happen, there is a difference. Goddamn it could you please read my posts before you reply to them, you're almost as bad as blablah.

Just for fun though, i could have pointed out that the visual effects you experienced are more than likely to be HPPD. Sometimes "flashbacks" are attributed as HPPD, but flashbacks generally refer more to the re-emergence of the mental effects of psychedelics than the visual, which is why "flashbacks" are doubted more heavily than HPPD, because they're far less common and far harder to prove or find a reason for. But that would be quibbling, so i didn't bother, but the point was there to be made.

Difference noted. And your question is answered, they happen. You can dispute whether they are the result of LSD altering my brain or not, but I didn't see a single thing in your LSD myth site about flashbacks not being real, or attributed to LSD. In fact, after browsing the site a little, I found just the opposite.

http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_info7.shtml

Granted, this isn't even close to scientific, but until you present me with scientific information, the only thing I have to go by is my own experiences.

Jux:

adamsaccount:
It does happen and is a danger, there was that actor who set himself on fire after lsd use, but the way I see it forcing anyone to take it is completely wrong, but should someone properly understand the dangers, along with the potentially positive therapeutic effects I don't think legislation should be getting in the way.

Theres plenty of dangerous things you can do legally, few of which have the mind opening capabilities of lsd or mescaline.

I don't see how the potentially positive effects outwiegh the very well known negative effects. Experiments were done with lsd back in the 50's and 60's in Canada, look up Humphry Osmand sometime. Dude put a bunch of schizos and sociopaths on lsd as part of their therapy. Turned out very badly.

Well its just a matter of opinion really, I might have had (or may not have had, just got a warning for admiting drug use so beware people) some really positive mind opening experiences that have changed my attitude towards life for the better and thats why I think we should all be allowed to do it. Its hard to worry about most things when you realise that lifes just a ride, a very elaborate and sometimes enjoyable ride.

Shpongled:
For the overwhelming majority of users the positives of psychedelics have outweigh'd the negatives. There aren't really that many people around who've had bad experiences with them. Bad trips are far from the norm.

Can you prove this, or is that just anecdotal?

Jux:

Shpongled:
I didn't claim they didn't happen, i questioned whether they happen, there is a difference. Goddamn it could you please read my posts before you reply to them, you're almost as bad as blablah.

Just for fun though, i could have pointed out that the visual effects you experienced are more than likely to be HPPD. Sometimes "flashbacks" are attributed as HPPD, but flashbacks generally refer more to the re-emergence of the mental effects of psychedelics than the visual, which is why "flashbacks" are doubted more heavily than HPPD, because they're far less common and far harder to prove or find a reason for. But that would be quibbling, so i didn't bother, but the point was there to be made.

Difference noted. And your question is answered, they happen. You can dispute whether they are the result of LSD altering my brain or not, but I didn't see a single thing in your LSD myth site about flashbacks not being real, or attributed to LSD. In fact, after browsing the site a little, I found just the opposite.

http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_info7.shtml

Granted, this isn't even close to scientific, but until you present me with scientific information, the only thing I have to go by is my own experiences.

Are you purposely misinterpreting my posts? The link was posted in response to the idea that flashbacks are caused by residual leftover LSD. That link was only to prove the metabolic process of LSD, nothing more.

Personally i'm happy to accept that they happen, always have been. But there are professionals out there that have expressed doubt, i was merely expressing their doubt. I didn't say they don't happen, i didn't even say i don't believe they happen.

As i said, and as that link supports, they're more likely a form of PTSD than anything else. Which is something that can happen after any particularly stressful event. Trips can be very extreme events, so it's no surprise a form of PTSD can develop around them. Note: PTSD does not involve any permanent alteration to the brain, it is not brain damage, it's a mental problem (though no less important or relevant because of it).

Jux:

Shpongled:
For the overwhelming majority of users the positives of psychedelics have outweigh'd the negatives. There aren't really that many people around who've had bad experiences with them. Bad trips are far from the norm.

Can you prove this, or is that just anecdotal?

I can't prove it no. I just tend to think that if bad trips were the norm LSD wouldn't be popular in the first place. There are psychedelics out there that have extremely high tendencies to produce unenjoyable, scarring, dysphoric trips. Funnily enough they aren't widely consumed, because they aren't fun. LSD is very popular, so it stands to reason most people on it have good trips.

Contrary to popular belief, drug-users do actually take drugs because they're fun.

I read anecdotally its 1/100 who have a bad trip, again no scientific proof there but it sounds about right

Your link showed metabolizing rates, it said nothing about PTSD, or about potential physiological changes, from what I saw.

If controlled substances like LSD are shown to have medical purposes, I have no problem with them being used for those medical purposes. If LSD helps people cope with end of life issues, then I have no problem with you taking it if you're terminal, under medical supervision.

And yea, drugs can start out as fun. Still not an argument for legalization.

Jux:
Your link showed metabolizing rates, it said nothing about PTSD, or about potential physiological changes, from what I saw.

If controlled substances like LSD are shown to have medical purposes, I have no problem with them being used for those medical purposes. If LSD helps people cope with end of life issues, then I have no problem with you taking it if you're terminal, under medical supervision.

And yea, drugs can start out as fun. Still not an argument for legalization.

No, my link mentioned nothing about PTSD or physiological changes, when i said "as that link supports", i was referring to the link you posted. And I never said drugs being fun was an argument for legalization. That was an answer to your question, you knew that, so why you tried to imply i was using it as an argument for legalization i don't know.

Shpongled:

Jux:
Your link showed metabolizing rates, it said nothing about PTSD, or about potential physiological changes, from what I saw.

If controlled substances like LSD are shown to have medical purposes, I have no problem with them being used for those medical purposes. If LSD helps people cope with end of life issues, then I have no problem with you taking it if you're terminal, under medical supervision.

And yea, drugs can start out as fun. Still not an argument for legalization.

No, my link mentioned nothing about PTSD or physiological changes, when i said "as that link supports", i was referring to the link you posted. And I never said drugs being fun was an argument for legalization. That was an answer to your question, you knew that, so why you tried to imply i was using it as an argument for legalization i don't know.

It wasn't my intention to misrepresent you. Hopefully we can clear this up. When you said "Contrary to popular belief, drug-users do actually take drugs because they're fun." which of my questions were you answering?

As for the PTSD bit, the link I posted, as I noted before, does not appear to have any acedemic citations, so the accuracy of the information is questionable. I simply linked it as anecdotal to show that, in addition to my own experiences, your own website seems to support that flashbacks are not some made up thing. Which I was responding to this:

"flashbacks", if they exist at all, are not caused by residual leftover LSD. This is a myth.

I called bullshit on your questioning as to whether they exist at all. And mince it however you want, that shit was directly tied to my trip. Whether it was due to residual lsd in the body, or physiological changes, or a stress response, it happened.

Helmholtz Watson:

Bashfluff:

Helmholtz Watson:
You want to do whatever you want to your body? Sure, but if things take a turn for the worst then you shouldn't be allowed to go to a hospital if you don't have insurance and you should be prevented from receiving any medical benefits that are payed for with my tax dollars.

*shivers*

I would hate to live in a society like that, along with anyone else who is sane.

And I would hate to live in a society where I was expected to pay for you destroying your own body, despite the fact that you were informed multiple times that cocaine is a very harmful and addictive drug.

You want the freedom to do whatever you want to your own body? Fine, but I'm not your parent, I shouldn't have to pay for your reckless choices.

Too bad. You already live there. We can drink until we need help. Or smoke. Or eat. Or play FOOTBALL. Or try to fix the roof when we really should just call professionals over. There are any number of reckless things people do every day, and I'm glad that we help those people out. I'm not going to condemn people to suffering and a slow death because they happened to do something risky or stupid, because we all do it. It's human nature. ALL of us do something risky every now and again, and we'd all like to be treated. Hell, 90% of Americans have some sort of soft addiction (or physical) so that's human nature too. I wouldn't withhold fire department protection to someone who lived in a place very prone to fire. Well, why not? You chose to live in a place where your house is likely to catch fire, so my tax dollars shouldn't pay for your risky choice?

EVERYONE who is sane would think that discrimination of that sort is horrifying at best, tyranny of a sort that can push us back as a society. I view healthcare as a basic human right. You don't withhold it because you don't like what someone is doing. That is mean, and cruel, and useless, and hypocritical. We've already decided as a society that we're going to help people.

Jux:

Shpongled:

Jux:
Your link showed metabolizing rates, it said nothing about PTSD, or about potential physiological changes, from what I saw.

If controlled substances like LSD are shown to have medical purposes, I have no problem with them being used for those medical purposes. If LSD helps people cope with end of life issues, then I have no problem with you taking it if you're terminal, under medical supervision.

And yea, drugs can start out as fun. Still not an argument for legalization.

No, my link mentioned nothing about PTSD or physiological changes, when i said "as that link supports", i was referring to the link you posted. And I never said drugs being fun was an argument for legalization. That was an answer to your question, you knew that, so why you tried to imply i was using it as an argument for legalization i don't know.

It wasn't my intention to misrepresent you. Hopefully we can clear this up. When you said "Contrary to popular belief, drug-users do actually take drugs because they're fun." which of my questions were you answering?

As for the PTSD bit, the link I posted, as I noted before, does not appear to have any acedemic citations, so the accuracy of the information is questionable. I simply linked it as anecdotal to show that, in addition to my own experiences, your own website seems to support that flashbacks are not some made up thing. Which I was responding to this:

"flashbacks", if they exist at all, are not caused by residual leftover LSD. This is a myth.

I called bullshit on your questioning as to whether they exist at all. And mince it however you want, that shit was directly tied to my trip. Whether it was due to residual lsd in the body, or physiological changes, or a stress response, it happened.

I was answering the question of whether i can prove bad trips were the minority of trips. I think it's fairly safe to assume that if bad trips were overly common on LSD then people wouldn't take it, because people don't take drugs that aren't fun, generally.

I know the link isn't an academic source, i was using it in the same way you were using it.

The reason i was pointing out the cause of flashbacks was to refute blablahs point that LSD stays in the body for a long time and causes flashbacks every now and then by suddenly popping back into the brain or something. I was pointing out someone else's misinformation. Which is where you quoted me and said you didn't believe it for one second. I assumed the point you didn't believe for one second was the point that i made, that residual LSD isn't the cause of flashbacks, if they are indeed a genuine phenomena.

The reason for the "if they exist at all" is because there is some doubt about them. Personally i'm happy to believe they can exist as a form of PTSD. Incidentally what happened to you weren't flashbacks. That was HPPD. I let it slide because "flashbacks" aren't really clearly defined in an academic sense, but they usually refer to mental effects, not visual. Lasting visual effects are well-documented, it's called HPPD.

Bashfluff:

EVERYONE who is sane would think that discrimination of that sort is horrifying at best, tyranny of a sort that can push us back as a society. I view healthcare as a basic human right.

No its holding a person responsible for their actions, and if they want to willingly put poison in their body, then they should be held accountable for it, not me. I shouldn't be held accountable for their actions, because if that was the case then I would have every right to support a law that says you can't consume cocaine.

Nice personal attack btw.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked