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

201–209 of 209 posts

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

#201

Post by krispyfi »

seabird wrote: post #184
krispyfi wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody that can actually execute on properly dosing it will expose themselves to the liability of doing so. Nobody? Um, I'm right here? I bought a 0.1ml pipette back in the day for the precise purpose of safely dosing 25X-NBOMes volumetrically, rather than by mass. And I'm not the only one. Hamilton Morris[0], Nervewing[1], and many others on forums such as Bluelight[2] write about their positive 25X-NBOMe experience…

My point on liability isn't about your personal tolerance for risk and confidence in your own work on a n=1 scale, it's about whether or not you would be comfortable doing that work for thousands of other people with the understanding that a very minor fuck up results in somebody being dead. To be clear, I'm with you on the idea that all drugs should be legal. I don't believe in scheduling drugs to determine sentenci…

Ah, then I misinterpreted you. My apologies.

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

#202

Post by bozhark »

colecut wrote: post #61
bozhark wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anxious or depressed people benefit from the experience more so than someone of speculatively sound mind.

I think by the nature of their position, they have more to potentially benefit. But it's totally possible for an anxious person to end up worse.

Yeah both are valid

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

#203

Post by bozhark »

cthalupa wrote: post #137
bozhark wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, they don’t cause undesirable mental conditions that persist for the rest of your life. Your “trip” is about 6-8 hours on a typical 3.5g dose.

As someone who is very much in favor of legalizing psychadelics and has enjoyed his experiences with them: No, there is a lot of strong evidence that psychadelic trips can trigger underlying issues such as schizophrenia, etc. However, some portion of these people would have it triggered these latent illnesses regardless of the use of these substances. The hard to answer question is how many people would develop these…

Triggers schizophrenia?

Think that through.

Schizophrenia was already there, the trip made it apparent.

Associating “psychedelics” with CAUSATION is absolutely irresponsible

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

#204

Post by leoedin »

birdyrooster wrote: post #114
bozhark wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, they don’t cause undesirable mental conditions that persist for the rest of your life. Your “trip” is about 6-8 hours on a typical 3.5g dose.

Dude I know people who have had their lifelong schizophrenia start at the same time they started using hallucinogens like LSD and mushrooms. It's not a conspiracy or bullshit. People I have loved have changed in ways they couldn't control and was destructive/scary for them.

Schizophrenia commonly starts showing symptoms in the mid to late twenties - so while the two may be linked it's also likely that schizophrenia onset happens to be the age that many people start seriously taking drugs.

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

#205

Post by carlmr »

kodah wrote: post #190
NtochkaNzvanova wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California and other states already showed with marijuana that if you have enough local popular support, you can legalize drugs and the feds will do nothing. This is especially true right now with Democrats in control of the DoJ. In fact, if you look at cities like San Francisco, all drugs are already de facto decriminalized. CA could legalize LSD, psilocybin, MDMA, ketamine, etc. tomorrow.

I live in Oregon, all drugs already are decriminalized. That doesn't solve a littany of problems and is progress, but albeit with short term thinking. Passing through states that consider what you can buy for $20 at a mom and pop shop a felony is bit more than just problematic. States passing laws relieves their citizens of pressure, but we still need to move drugs entirely to a states right or we need to correct the…

>dropped from VA plans.

This should be illegal, "thank you for your service, where you got PTSD from seeing your friends die, we will reward you with dropping you from your healthcare plan if you self-medicate".

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

#206

Post by jl2718 »

Imagine being told that your 50-year-old brain surgeon is returning from to a year-long psychedelic sabbatical just prior to your surgery. LSD, ayahuasca, psilocybin, frogs, everything. They tell you that this has completely changed everything about what they think and know.

There is an inconsistency between the ability to “change your mind”, and the right to hold a lifetime credential, or more broadly, an identity or reputation. In the other direction, a person with a new brain may find themselves trapped by an old identity, reputation, or criminal record. Either way, there’s no good way to assess whether someone’s capabilities or behavior has changed to become inconsistent with past labels. This is also true for the sober passage of time and experience, but massively more so with the use of drugs (including alcohol). The main difference with psychedelics is that they affect a broader range of higher-order brain systems, whereas most other abused substances mainly affect the dopamine system, which is also disastrous, but probably takes longer to affect skill and knowledge.

Imagine all of this research results in wonderful outcomes for happiness and positive affect and sociality etc. Everybody wants the treatment. Then we discover that all we’re doing is making people dumber, and dumb people are happier. And they’re also more confident, extroverted, and relatable, even creative, as they are no longer bound to their former knowledge, reasoning, or expertise, so the perception is that they are even smarter. It’s perfect for the individual, but a potential disaster for society.

And of course, a proper screed today wouldn’t be complete without prognosticating about AI. It’s possible that some form of machine learning could and maybe should replace most forms of crystallized intelligence and skill, such that the only thing left for humans is exactly this type of “dumb genius” that we seem to find so beguiling in the majority of famous people.

https://youtu.be/GtBhclCigH0

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

#207

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #198
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You obviously don't need a license or authorization to engage in otherwise legal religious practice by this logic, the government could make illegal any other religious practice (in addition to psychedelic usage), because then the practice isn't "otherwise legal"

Welcome to the grey areas of the real world.

welcome to circular logic and confusing prescriptivism with descriptivism

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

#208

Post by hext »

bozhark wrote: post #203
cthalupa wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who is very much in favor of legalizing psychadelics and has enjoyed his experiences with them: No, there is a lot of strong evidence that psychadelic trips can trigger underlying issues such as schizophrenia, etc. However, some portion of these people would have it triggered these latent illnesses regardless of the use of these substances. The hard to answer question is how many people would develop these…

Triggers schizophrenia? Think that through. Schizophrenia was already there, the trip made it apparent. Associating “psychedelics” with CAUSATION is absolutely irresponsible

> Schizophrenia was already there, the trip made it apparent.

That is exactly what they are saying.

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

#209

Post by chiefalchemist »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #165
chiefalchemist wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

re: opiate of the masses https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/the+opiate+of+the+masse... In short, it's not to be read literally.

I'm aware, and in context with religion is an apt metaphor. But in context with psychedelics it's not. They're not a numbing agents, they're catalysts for change, that's why they're applicable to therapy in ways that opiates are not.

Yes and no. At some low-level the brain doesn't differential between physical pain and mental / emotional pain. It's pain, and it needs to be reckoned with. Maybe psychedelics aren't painkillers in the opioid sense. However, they do provide pain relief, and yes perhaps an opportunity for healing.

The difference really isn't all that much.

Post reply on HN