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

Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 135 posts

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#121

Post by anonymouskimmer »

kevviiinn wrote: post #112
anonymouskimmer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Desomorphine seems kind of bad, even without the other nasty effects when it is homemade by people who can't afford the real thing (i.e. Krokodil). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desomorphine > While desomorphine was found to be faster acting and more effective than morphine for the rapid relief of severe pain, its shorter duration of action and the relatively more severe respiratory depression produced at equianalges…

But definitely isn't worse than alcohol and fentanyl and 6MAM are both used medically. The damage from krokodil, as you mention, is from the impurities. Not to mention, krokodil wouldn't even be a thing if people had access to the usual schedule 1 substances

> krokodil wouldn't even be a thing if people had access to the usual schedule 1 substances

...at a price they can afford. Otherwise it still would be a thing, regardless of schedule 1 legality.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#122

Post by kevviiinn »

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #120
kevviiinn wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please explain the mechanism by which cannabis causes DNA damage when consumed in the same quantity as alcohol. When you match recreational dose, it doesn't. There is a slight possibility of free radicals in smoke causing DNA damage but that is incredibly minor compared to alcohol and can be avoided with different methods of consumption. You can't avoid the DNA damage of alcohol at any dose or method of consumption

The word I was responding to was "harmful", with no further specification. I stand by what I wrote, and don't feel the need to try to explain a point I wasn't making.

So then what is the mechanism of harm, if you can't state what the mechanism is then what is the reason to believe the statement?

Anyone can just claim something is "harmful" but if they can't really state how then why is there any reason to believe the statement

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#123

Post by kevviiinn »

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #121
kevviiinn wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But definitely isn't worse than alcohol and fentanyl and 6MAM are both used medically. The damage from krokodil, as you mention, is from the impurities. Not to mention, krokodil wouldn't even be a thing if people had access to the usual schedule 1 substances

> krokodil wouldn't even be a thing if people had access to the usual schedule 1 substances ...at a price they can afford. Otherwise it still would be a thing, regardless of schedule 1 legality.

One of the reasons those drugs are expensive is because of the illegality. In states with permissive cannabis laws the prices have fallen enormously. Not to mention people could easily grow poppies if it were legal to do so and extract the latex

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#124

Post by anonymouskimmer »

kevviiinn wrote: post #122
anonymouskimmer wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The word I was responding to was "harmful", with no further specification. I stand by what I wrote, and don't feel the need to try to explain a point I wasn't making.

So then what is the mechanism of harm, if you can't state what the mechanism is then what is the reason to believe the statement? Anyone can just claim something is "harmful" but if they can't really state how then why is there any reason to believe the statement

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2022/04/marijuana-hea...

> People who use marijuana have an increased risk of heart disease and heart attack, according to a large study led by researchers at Stanford Medicine.

> The study also showed that the psychoactive component of the drug, known as THC, causes inflammation in endothelial cells that line the interior of blood vessels, as well as atherosclerosis in laboratory mice.

> The inflammation and atherosclerosis can be blocked by a small molecule called genistein that occurs naturally in soy and fava beans, the researchers found. Because genistein has limited brain penetration, it doesn’t inhibit THC’s ability to stimulate appetite, dull pain and tamp down nausea — characteristics vital to medicinal marijuana users.

...> I expect we will begin to see a rise in heart attacks and strokes in the coming years.

If you go the Fava bean route, know that it can cause illness in some people. Soy is safer, and purified genistein (available as a supplement) probably safer still.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#125

Post by flangola7 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #116
flangola7 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If seriously does need to be done though. It's morbid having a single elderly person's health dictate which way a country goes.

I'd like to see one seat per circuit (13), and a term limit of 20 years.

I can get behind this.

Some countries even have several dozen supreme justices, with a new one every year or two. That would rid us of this obscene phenomenon that turns one elderly person's health issues into a disgraceful politically polarized evening news issue. It also increases the RoI of extortion and assassination.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#126

Post by ever1337 »

qumpis wrote: post #52
verilux68 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are already available on street corners, snapchat, and the darkweb. With no authority to ensure what dosage the illicitly manufactured pressed-pills have.

Sure, but the fraction of people who would go out of their way to access these is presumably small(er), especially those who havent yet tried them and who would nt jump through so many hoops to acquire them if they dont know their effect. I know I'm happy certain drugs aren't easily available.

The reality is that many people use drugs, likely yourself included, and they are dying from this unregulated market. Prohibition is taking lives and making addiction worse. Whether some x percentage of people may be dissuaded from using drugs is not at issue. in my mind the harm from unclean supply is much greater.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#127

Post by yadingus »

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #118
yadingus wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a modern, western distinction tho. In many cultures plants, mushrooms, and other substances are considered straight up medicine, sometimes mixed with other things, usually surrounded by ritual.

The point I was trying to make is that a "drug" is typically highly purified and a standardized single component, or at most a mix of highly purified components. Herbs, as medicine, are complex and variable. Even with highly debased street drugs they're missing the additional herbal components.

Is it tho? It's not uncommon to mix weed with herbs, it's called a spliff. Ayahuasca is a combination of substances, would you not consider modern ayahuasca consumption as a drug? Mushrooms are often mixed with lemon juice.

Plus what's the point of making the distinction? And you mentioned that people in the past wouldn't snort drugs, and that's false, there's native tribes that would make powder out of seeds and snort them.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#128

Post by anonymouskimmer »

yadingus wrote: post #127
anonymouskimmer wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point I was trying to make is that a "drug" is typically highly purified and a standardized single component, or at most a mix of highly purified components. Herbs, as medicine, are complex and variable. Even with highly debased street drugs they're missing the additional herbal components.

Is it tho? It's not uncommon to mix weed with herbs, it's called a spliff. Ayahuasca is a combination of substances, would you not consider modern ayahuasca consumption as a drug? Mushrooms are often mixed with lemon juice. Plus what's the point of making the distinction? And you mentioned that people in the past wouldn't snort drugs, and that's false, there's native tribes that would make powder out of seeds and sno…

"Weed" is an "herb". The "drugs" in weed are THC and the cannabinols/oids.

> would you not consider modern ayahuasca consumption as a drug

From the context of what I wrote, obviously not. In colloquial usage, I would call it a drug, but I was obviously making a distinction here.

> Plus what's the point of making the distinction?

The context and particularities of what I was saying is the point!!!!!!!!!!

Herbs do not naturally standardize their active compounds. These compounds are subject to variable expression based on the genetics, environmental conditions in which they are grown, and time of harvest. Purified drugs, and even some herb-based supplements, are standardized. Even when they're being debased on the street, they're being debased in the batch in a standard manner (assuming they were well mixed, of course).

> and that's false, there's native tribes that would make powder out of seeds and snort them.

Thanks for letting me know. I don't see that this fact detracts from the larger point I'm making. Please stop nitpicking and try to see the larger point I was trying to make. I'm not trying to have an argument here, I'm trying to have a discussion.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#129

Post by the_only_law »

kortex wrote: post #48

> Thus, opium alkaloids were detected in Late Bronze Age containers > different hallucinogenic compounds, mainly nicotine, tryptamines and tropane alkaloids have been chemically documented in Prehispanic artefacts from the Americas, and psychoactive compounds of Cannabis in archaeological wooden braziers from China. > The alkaloids ephedrine, atropine and scopolamine were detected, and their concentrations estimated…

> different hallucinogenic compounds, mainly nicotine…

Wait what? Nicotine is hallucinogenic? What sort of ungodly dose do you need for that.

Re: Direct evidence of the use of multiple drugs in Bronze Age from human hair test

#130

Post by kortex »

the_only_law wrote: post #129
kortex wrote: post #48

> Thus, opium alkaloids were detected in Late Bronze Age containers > different hallucinogenic compounds, mainly nicotine, tryptamines and tropane alkaloids have been chemically documented in Prehispanic artefacts from the Americas, and psychoactive compounds of Cannabis in archaeological wooden braziers from China. > The alkaloids ephedrine, atropine and scopolamine were detected, and their concentrations estimated…

> different hallucinogenic compounds, mainly nicotine… Wait what? Nicotine is hallucinogenic? What sort of ungodly dose do you need for that.

Ha! I didn't catch that the first time. That's a direct quote from the paper though. I think maybe they meant psychotropic, not hallucinogenic, as tropane alkaloids aren't traditionally hallucinogenic. Or they started with "different hallucinogenic compounds, mainly tryptamines" and then edited in nicotine and tropane alkaloids, and missed it on editing.
Post reply on HN