Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study • Hacker News Board

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#231

Post by ulisesrmzroche » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 4:27 PM UTC

malux85 wrote: post #167

coffeemug wrote: post #130

Counter-anecdote: I've experimented with this stuff extensively in various settings and have known many other people who did, and in my experience it's unequivocally bullshit. Here's what happens. First, any given trip alleviates depression for about a month or two. That makes sense to me in a sense that the word "trip" isn't a coincidence-- a really fun intense vacation in a foreign country also alleviates depressio…

No, your conclusion is bullshit. > First, any given trip alleviates depression for about a month or two. That makes sense to me in a sense that the word "trip" isn't a coincidence-- a really fun intense vacation in a foreign country also alleviates depression for a month or two. You swear that when you come back things will be different, but then you have to answer slack messages at 9pm, and your project is slipping…

You sound live you’ve never done this, let alone any other shit.

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#232

Post by bordercases » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:18 PM UTC

o-__-o wrote: post #228

bordercases wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point I'm trying to make is that for all the risks I was taking none of the outcomes were psychologically unrecoverable or fatal. Using the word "bad" was just pointing to the class of experiences that people on the psych might consider, "not pleasant", but "not pleasant" doesn't mean "not valuable". Quite the opposite, I learned from basically every experience both through its intrinsic and extrinsic qualities.…

You can say the exact same thing for Zoloft. If you took a single 100mg dose you will notice the effects. But the line that crosses therapeutic to recreational (yes SSRIs are abused recreationally but are very short lived) is somewhere between 0 and 100mg and differs based on your biological makeup. Clinical trials and reports from prescribing psychiatrists helps find that hard distinction..

They can track and establish the base rate of such effects conditioned on a random population to blur the role of one's "biological makeup", and then apply value judgements as to what doses are useful for their purposes, yes.

In that sense if you're allowing whether or not a drug is recreational to depend on a person's makeup, how could you have known I was taking a recreational dose? Could bad trips not also occur at lower doses considered sub-recreational if a person is particularly sensitive? Likewise what happens if the drug only ends up benefiting a person past the point where they also have hallucinations as a "knock-on"?

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#233

Post by munchhausen » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 10:54 AM UTC

coffeemug wrote: post #130

Counter-anecdote: I've experimented with this stuff extensively in various settings and have known many other people who did, and in my experience it's unequivocally bullshit. Here's what happens. First, any given trip alleviates depression for about a month or two. That makes sense to me in a sense that the word "trip" isn't a coincidence-- a really fun intense vacation in a foreign country also alleviates depressio…

The drugs are not supposed to get you there. They are supposed to show you the territory, lift you, temporarily, out of the slime and muck of the dark age of materialism.

The rest is up to you, whether it's the third path, fourth path, or the umpteenth path.

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#234

Post by o-__-o » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 4:44 PM UTC

bordercases wrote: post #232

o-__-o wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say the exact same thing for Zoloft. If you took a single 100mg dose you will notice the effects. But the line that crosses therapeutic to recreational (yes SSRIs are abused recreationally but are very short lived) is somewhere between 0 and 100mg and differs based on your biological makeup. Clinical trials and reports from prescribing psychiatrists helps find that hard distinction..

They can track and establish the base rate of such effects conditioned on a random population to blur the role of one's "biological makeup", and then apply value judgements as to what doses are useful for their purposes, yes. In that sense if you're allowing whether or not a drug is recreational to depend on a person's makeup, how could you have known I was taking a recreational dose? Could bad trips not also occur a…

>In that sense if you're allowing whether or not a drug is recreational to depend on a person's makeup, how could you have known I was taking a recreational dose?

that is literally the point of a psychiatrist. there is only the law preventing psychiatrists from administering psychedelics like LSD in the same fashion. there are natural practitioners who do this for e.g. marijuana today.

if someone has an adverse reaction (bad trip) then the doctor usually alters the administration of the medicine in some manner (Lower dosage, increase dosage, change medication all together etc). but to say that there are only recreational doses for illicit drugs and there is no method to validate potency in human consumption is disingenuous.

a drug is a chemical. our body is nothing but a chain of chemical reactions. modern medicine and science has come up with a pretty good method of determining dosage

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#235

Post by malux85 » Tue, Jan 07, 2020, 7:55 PM UTC

mda wrote: post #176

lowdose wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brutal honesty at its best. If everyone had the guts to talk this tone to their boss the world would look a lot better.

Well there is a saying "It is easy for a single man to divorce a wife". I am not sure his suggestion is practical also tone is terrible. I hope they can cope with other people who are being "brutally honest" with them being a jerk in real life.

Yep I can.

> I am not sure his suggestion is practical

So what's your solution? Just live in misery all the time because doing the easy thing is easier than doing the correct thing? Avoid immediate discomfort in exchange for long term happiness - what terrible advice. No wonder these people are depressed.

You only get to live once, and I cant imagine anything worse than rotting away because you dont have the balls to stick up for yourself - sitting there at 9PM answering slack messages rather than just saying "I'm off the clock, go hire more people if you want 24/7 support".

Make love to her and save your marriage or break up and move on, just don't sit in resentment filled limbo, watching her clearly unhappy and flirting with other men --- then act surprised and betrayed when the thing THAT YOU CAN SEE MILES AWAY happens. He can see the unhappy future approaching and he's still not acting? Why? Because he is in love with misery like my post says.

Except when he does the mushrooms and they cheer him up a bit and give him the clarity and happiness to fix it. He still has to do it himself though

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#236

Post by shlant » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 2:45 AM UTC

chronofar wrote: post #204

shlant wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I believe your cynicism has sliced off only a portion of the truth here and tilted focus in the wrong directions." I think his cynicism is completely warranted considering how many people are starting to view psychedelics as a panacea. Do psychedelics offer an experience that could be part of, or even a spark a greater shift? Sure. Could psychedelics provide temporary relief from things like depression and anxiety…

All of what you said here is true, but that does not equate to "bullshit." Some level of skepticism is of course warranted. Complete dismissal is not.

who is saying "bullshit"? I think I am making a pretty reasonable argument that seems to fit into "Some level of skepticism is of course warranted".