Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why We Should Say Yes to Drugs

nymag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 144 posts

Re: Why We Should Say Yes to Drugs

#31

Post by jakelazaroff »

abhiminator wrote: post #5

I'm totally on-board with opposition to the pointless 'War on Drugs,' but what I'm not cool with is when pundits and other public figures on the other side of the spectrum PUSH for its wide-adoption and integration into everyday lifestyle akin to alcohol -- like the article's author is doing here -- which I feel is equally detrimental because there have been many well documented cases of people succumbing to the spel…

Neither article supports your assertion.

[0] is entirely about how safe psychedelics are. It opens with an anecdote about eight people who took several thousand times a normal dose with no adverse effects (then later mentions that alcohol's ratio of lethal dose to effective dose is ten).

[1] is about experiencing bad side-effects (while you're high, not lasting) from marijuana. It makes an unlinked reference to conflicting studies about association with schizophrenia, but that's it.

I'm not saying that all drugs are great and people should just have at it; our policies on drug use should be focused on harm reduction. In order to do that it's critically important that we have real empirical data about how drugs are used and can be abused, not more baseless scaremongering about people "succumbing to the spell" of drugs.

Re: Why We Should Say Yes to Drugs

#32

Post by grosjona »

Drugs desensitise people to life's "regular highs" which makes them seek out stronger, more stimulating experiences in their lives, which makes them want more money (since these experiences tend to be expensive), which makes people more competitive in the workplace/marketplace (and more likely to be dishonest and prioritise short term gains)... This makes it harder for non-drug-users to compete in the workplace/marketplace.

Legalising drugs would essentially force everyone to use drugs. That's the same reason why drugs are banned in professional sport.

From my experience, drugs make people less altruistic. Although it does also make them more social (but social != altruism).

Re: Why We Should Say Yes to Drugs

#33

Post by ben_w »

merinowool wrote: post #27
tranchms wrote: post #13

“LSD comes from bacteria.” This is wrong. LSD is synthesized from ergot, a fungus that grows on rye. An oversight like this throws the authors entire credibility into question. Know your subject matter.

I wonder if all media participate in such disinformation on purpose...

No need to assume malice. If someone got 90% in an essay they’d be top of the class, from what I remember at school. What would journalists score if tested the same way?

Re: Why We Should Say Yes to Drugs

#34

Post by meiraleal »

headsoup wrote: post #21
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely agree - in fact I am starting to look at fats and sugar as drugs at least as harmful long term as some "real" drugs. When you look at coca cola adverts and big supermarkets as pushers, things start to become much clearer and the scale of the struggle on obesity really is startling. So yes, I am in favour of democratic nanny states.

You don't need a nanny state as a solution. In fact that's bad as it leaves people to believe they don't need to critically think about things because 'nanny' has them covered. They need better regulation, education (not the systemic industrial kind currently provided) and discussion. Marketplace of ideas and all that.

7 billion people are not going to think in a critical way. It didn't happen when we had 1 billion, nor 2, 3... And the difficult is growing. To deal with it is the only reason politics was created.

PS: we are asking the same: better regulation and education (and more boards of discussion) is the foundation of a great state.

Re: Why We Should Say Yes to Drugs

#35

Post by zkomp »

grosjona wrote: post #32

Drugs desensitise people to life's "regular highs" which makes them seek out stronger, more stimulating experiences in their lives, which makes them want more money (since these experiences tend to be expensive), which makes people more competitive in the workplace/marketplace (and more likely to be dishonest and prioritise short term gains)... This makes it harder for non-drug-users to compete in the workplace/marke…

I do not believe you at all.

This kind of puritanism and any abstaining (from coffee, tobacco, alcohol, sex, drugs, entertainment, etc) should be a personal life choice. Not mandated by law.

Drugs have been since since forever, and prohibition never really worked. It even has not so hidden racist logic baked into it, targeting minorities, civil asset forfeiture, covert wars by letter soup agencies. It must end.

Re: Why We Should Say Yes to Drugs

#36

Post by isoprophlex »

Fnoord wrote: post #16

Disclaimer: I'm a former recreative drug user who particularly experimented with various psychedelics throughout my early '20s. Most of these were legal or decriminalised at that time, in my country. I've found out at the age of 35 that I have autism, and wish I knew this earlier in my life. I recommend every human being to, instead of self experiment, follow the conventional scientific method instead, and solely (al…

A nipick:

The ergot fungi are that, not bacteria!

Also LSA is lysergic acid; ergot infected rye contains more complex biomolecules fused to LSA or ergoline. So little pure LSA in these plants!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergot

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergoline#Peptide_alkaloids

Re: Why We Should Say Yes to Drugs

#37

Post by sannee »

tranchms wrote: post #13

“LSD comes from bacteria.” This is wrong. LSD is synthesized from ergot, a fungus that grows on rye. An oversight like this throws the authors entire credibility into question. Know your subject matter.

I now wonder if there are any psychoactives produced by bacteria. Or how hard would it be to transfer some metabolic pathway to get drug-producing bacteria (DMT biosynthesis seems pretty simple, just two proteins...).

Re: Why We Should Say Yes to Drugs

#38

Post by malmsteen »

tranchms wrote: post #13

“LSD comes from bacteria.” This is wrong. LSD is synthesized from ergot, a fungus that grows on rye. An oversight like this throws the authors entire credibility into question. Know your subject matter.

whatever though? we have thousand of bacterias in the body ad at the end of the process LSD is just a molecule.

Re: Why We Should Say Yes to Drugs

#39

Post by ppseafield »

grosjona wrote: post #32

Drugs desensitise people to life's "regular highs" which makes them seek out stronger, more stimulating experiences in their lives, which makes them want more money (since these experiences tend to be expensive), which makes people more competitive in the workplace/marketplace (and more likely to be dishonest and prioritise short term gains)... This makes it harder for non-drug-users to compete in the workplace/marke…

> Drugs desensitise people to life's "regular highs" which makes them seek out stronger, more stimulating experiences in their lives, which makes them want more money (since these experiences tend to be expensive), which makes people more competitive in the workplace/marketplace (and more likely to be dishonest and prioritise short term gains)... This makes it harder for non-drug-users to compete in the workplace/marketplace.

Perhaps not everyone's goal is to compete in the workplace/marketplace?

> Legalising drugs would essentially force everyone to use drugs.

Just like legalizing alcohol means everyone is forced to drink alcohol? In the US prohibition brought us a surge of organized crime. Our current demand for illegal drugs creates a very, very successful business model for drug cartels in Mezo- and South America. I don't see how that's better.

> That's the same reason why drugs are banned in professional sport.

How's that going? The rules are regularly broken anyways, and all the doping happens in secret. Tons of professional and amateur athletes are doping in spite of the bans.

Post reply on HN