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

Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 209 posts

Re: Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

#41

Post by golergka »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #38
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #19

About two months ago I was at a festival with friends and a I had a psychedelic experience. What’s funny is earlier that day I had just told my friends “I know this sounds boring but I don’t like dancing that much.” Then while I was tripping I found that I was really enjoying the dancing. I felt like I was tapping in to a part of myself that had been dormant for a long time. I felt really confident and cool and sexy…

> We’ve got a crisis of unhappiness in this country and psychedelic therapies are absolutely a powerful tool we could use to help people find themselves. While I agree with everything else you said, this bit concerns me. I'm certainly in favor of using these tools to help anyone who needs help. But maybe we should start with a mirror, and collectively ask, "Why are so many so unhappy?" These psychedelics can help res…

> But maybe we should start with a mirror, and collectively ask, "Why are so many so unhappy?"

Because that's the default.. People haven't evolved to be happy; we have evolved to barely survive to have kids and care for them so that a few become adults. Being happy is the exception, you should ask how anyone manages that.

Re: Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

#42

Post by otherme123 »

ImAnAmateur wrote: post #26
operatingthetan wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, I'm confused what they are trying to accomplish gatekeeping others intent.

How is that gatekeeping? I'm trying to ask about what the risks are for people who take it at a party or a festival or at home for fun. >Psychedelics like psilocybin have a remarkably benign safety profile relative to other Schedule One drugs, not to mention very different social, cultural and historical roles. Lumping psychedelics together with powerful opioids like fentanyl misdirects resources, diminishes buy-in f…

There are some studies, and LSD is quite safe. Way safer than alcohol, for example.

But being on a very tight Schedule I (like MDMA, also quite safe), worse even than morphine, good luck researching the risks. It's a catch 22: we don't know the risks, so we ban studies about the substance. We don't have studies about the risks, so we cannot unban it.

When LSD was liberally consumed (1960's), there were almost no deaths related to it. And the very few reports are suspiciously "suicides" or "near suicides", which all of them seems to be accidents while tripping, like any drunk commit everyday (and not like LSD makes you suicidal by choice). More serious reports have found zero deaths directly linked with LSD toxicity: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29408722/

Re: Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

#43

Post by knightofmars »

slibhb wrote: post #39
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #19

About two months ago I was at a festival with friends and a I had a psychedelic experience. What’s funny is earlier that day I had just told my friends “I know this sounds boring but I don’t like dancing that much.” Then while I was tripping I found that I was really enjoying the dancing. I felt like I was tapping in to a part of myself that had been dormant for a long time. I felt really confident and cool and sexy…

For everyone who has an experience like you, there's someone like this guy: https://www.ecstaticintegration.org/p/dmt-derealization-and-... Anyway, since you were dancing, I assume you used MDMA which is much "less psychedelic" than acid or DMT (and much more of a stimulant). There's also more potential for misuse and addiction. Ketamine, too, turns out to be quite addictive by the way. It seems clear that psychedeli…

You are implying a 1:1 relationship with good experiences and bad experiences. That's not how drugs work. It is important to know the actual reality of this type of ratio so that individuals who are looking to use a drug of this nature can be well informed.

Re: Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

#44

Post by marcod »

slibhb wrote: post #39
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #19

About two months ago I was at a festival with friends and a I had a psychedelic experience. What’s funny is earlier that day I had just told my friends “I know this sounds boring but I don’t like dancing that much.” Then while I was tripping I found that I was really enjoying the dancing. I felt like I was tapping in to a part of myself that had been dormant for a long time. I felt really confident and cool and sexy…

For everyone who has an experience like you, there's someone like this guy: https://www.ecstaticintegration.org/p/dmt-derealization-and-... Anyway, since you were dancing, I assume you used MDMA which is much "less psychedelic" than acid or DMT (and much more of a stimulant). There's also more potential for misuse and addiction. Ketamine, too, turns out to be quite addictive by the way. It seems clear that psychedeli…

> Ketamine, too, turns out to be quite addictive by the way.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2022-07-ketamine-addiction.ht...

I have done the medically assisted Ketamine trips. No sign them being addicting to me whatsoever. It didn't do a whole lot for me, but some of the other peeps in my cohort had amazing results working through old grief.

Re: Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

#45

Post by slibhb »

knightofmars wrote: post #43
slibhb wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For everyone who has an experience like you, there's someone like this guy: https://www.ecstaticintegration.org/p/dmt-derealization-and-... Anyway, since you were dancing, I assume you used MDMA which is much "less psychedelic" than acid or DMT (and much more of a stimulant). There's also more potential for misuse and addiction. Ketamine, too, turns out to be quite addictive by the way. It seems clear that psychedeli…

You are implying a 1:1 relationship with good experiences and bad experiences. That's not how drugs work. It is important to know the actual reality of this type of ratio so that individuals who are looking to use a drug of this nature can be well informed.

No, I'm positing a 1:1 relationship between "holy shit I am a new person" in a good way and "holy shit I am a new person" in a bad way.

That's not the same as good/bad experiences.

Re: Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

#46

Post by cies »

benbreen wrote: post #2

I'm the author of the OP. Happy to talk more about the history of psychedelics. I also wanted to flag that if anyone is interested in some of the historical sources I cite here (such as the Jesuit talking about ayahuasca in the 18th century) I go into more detail in this journal article, which is open access: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/historical-journal/a...

The categories law has for drugs suck, psychs dont need a new category, they simply need to be unscheduled. Like daffodils.

Re: Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

#47

Post by slibhb »

marcod wrote: post #44
slibhb wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For everyone who has an experience like you, there's someone like this guy: https://www.ecstaticintegration.org/p/dmt-derealization-and-... Anyway, since you were dancing, I assume you used MDMA which is much "less psychedelic" than acid or DMT (and much more of a stimulant). There's also more potential for misuse and addiction. Ketamine, too, turns out to be quite addictive by the way. It seems clear that psychedeli…

> Ketamine, too, turns out to be quite addictive by the way. https://medicalxpress.com/news/2022-07-ketamine-addiction.ht... I have done the medically assisted Ketamine trips. No sign them being addicting to me whatsoever. It didn't do a whole lot for me, but some of the other peeps in my cohort had amazing results working through old grief.

It's well known that ketamine is addictive. Just google "ketamine addiction". It's an effective antidepressant for many people but you can't take it long term because tolerance develops quickly.

Re: Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

#48

Post by s1artibartfast »

coderintherye wrote: post #36
ImAnAmateur wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got a question for you. Some people are very carefree with their use of psychoactive drugs. I'd say nearly everyone I've ever seen post online about trying mushrooms, LSD, etc. has done it for fun (or the experience) instead of spiritual, psychological, or medicinal reasons. What risks are they exposing themselves to? I'd hate to have a friend hurt themselves.

Erowid is a great resource for these sorts of questions: https://erowid.org In fact they have an answer specific to your question on mushrooms: https://www.erowid.org/ask/ask.php?ID=1606 In short, there is very little risk but whether or not someone should choose to take something should still be an informed choice. As far as risk to life, there's been few or no reported deaths purely due to ingesting psilocybin. How…

I think there's a lot more nuance than even that. Many psychedelics can trigger or exacerbate undesirable mental conditions that persist for the rest of your life.

Re: Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

#49

Post by bozhark »

crazygringo wrote: post #14
ttctciyf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > this new landscape demands more than just new laws. It also requires a new category for psychedelics. Are they recreational drugs? Are they medicines? Are they religious sacraments? I'm asking why we can't just answer this question with "They are psychedelics".

Because legally, that's as meaningful as saying "they are quooquaquams". The entire point of categorizing them is to answer questions around: - Should they be sold to take recreationally, like tobacco and alcohol? Should there be limits, like tobacco packaging and taxes, or rules similar to drunk driving? - Or should they only be prescribed by doctors for mental health reasons, and not allowed recreationally or in re…

There is not licensing or authorization for religion.

There is no application for approval required to be a “church”, ie: religion.

Thinking there could be some “authority” for a religious institution’s practices is beyond measure.

Re: Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them

#50

Post by bozhark »

ImAnAmateur wrote: post #4
benbreen wrote: post #2

I'm the author of the OP. Happy to talk more about the history of psychedelics. I also wanted to flag that if anyone is interested in some of the historical sources I cite here (such as the Jesuit talking about ayahuasca in the 18th century) I go into more detail in this journal article, which is open access: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/historical-journal/a...

I've got a question for you. Some people are very carefree with their use of psychoactive drugs. I'd say nearly everyone I've ever seen post online about trying mushrooms, LSD, etc. has done it for fun (or the experience) instead of spiritual, psychological, or medicinal reasons. What risks are they exposing themselves to? I'd hate to have a friend hurt themselves.

Caffeine is a psychoactive drug.
Post reply on HN