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

Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

blogs.scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 199 posts

Re: Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

#61

Post by AstralStorm »

justaaron wrote: post #44
xg15 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The main issue with these "laws" is that they are speculative Sorry to pull that quote out of context, but this is just peak HN. It's beautiful. > Psychedelics have been available and used throughout history with few problems in ritual settings So we should only allow them in ritual settings then? > The real reason psychedelics were banned in the US is to have a reason to jail politically inconvenient people in Vie…

coffee is regulated? the drug war is a politically and economically driven disaster that has created the single largest wave in history of disrespect for law, laws, and our legal systems. Law, as a system, draws 100% of it's authority from the notion of being an externalized codified form of social morality. The minute Law ceases being moral and becomes merely an obvious instrument of power it's basis flounders. If y…

Coffee used to be regulated, until about 19th century in its countries, among them France, UK and Persia come to mind. First two were to crack down on cafés which were sources of political opposition.

Likewise in Persia, the it was related to sultan not profiting and religious reasons.

Re: Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

#62

Post by AstralStorm »

J-dawg wrote: post #34
xg15 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The main issue with these "laws" is that they are speculative Sorry to pull that quote out of context, but this is just peak HN. It's beautiful. > Psychedelics have been available and used throughout history with few problems in ritual settings So we should only allow them in ritual settings then? > The real reason psychedelics were banned in the US is to have a reason to jail politically inconvenient people in Vie…

In what way are they anything other than speculative? Drug laws are certainly not evidence based (in most places). They are based on ideologically driven speculation about the imagined consequences of legalisation.

Some actually were evidence based, such as opium laws. There was a big public health problem with opium a few centuries back - complicated with politics and economics of opium trade.

Likewise how barbiturates, amphetamines, cocaine and benzodiazepines are scheduled in various schedules. Many and high profile cases with deaths or major harm were linked to misuse of these drugs.

Re: Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

#63

Post by tzahola »

sonnyblarney wrote: post #20
white-flame wrote: post #15

The headline's question should really be reframed to question the validity of these restrictions in the first place. I'm not a user of any of these sorts of substances, nor condone them, but there's zero reason for a free country to police personal use of such things. Sure, driving under the influence should be policed as a safety hazard, showing up to work out of your gourd should still get you fired, etc. But there…

"but there's zero reason for a free country to police personal use of such things." There are a lot of reasons. The people on HN and their social circles are waaay on the high end of conscientiousness. They have nary any risk from something like LSD for the most part. But - wide open and fairly unregulated use? Available at the corner store? So many types will try it, more than a few times. Younger kids will definite…

>Maybe we might want to do an experiment in a city somewhere to see

We did: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/741...

Re: Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

#64

Post by tzahola »

bedane wrote: post #42

After being prescribed benzos, SSRIs, etc. for years for coping with issues a single dose of psilocybin managed to wipe out in 3 hours, I say yes.

What about the people being prescribed benzos, SSRIs, etc. for life to cope with the issues brought on by a single does of psilocybin/LSD/salvia/DMT/etc?

Re: Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

#65

Post by AstralStorm »

xg15 wrote: post #32
AstralStorm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said regulations. Regulations are set after there is a problem. In case of psychedelics, it is a law . If there is a problem, the regulation may be changed, and additional measures taken to get rid of it. The main issue with these laws is that they are speculative. It is actually very likely that nothing would change much if at all, except number of arrests and related costs. Oh and reduced cut for the black mark…

> The main issue with these "laws" is that they are speculative Sorry to pull that quote out of context, but this is just peak HN. It's beautiful. > Psychedelics have been available and used throughout history with few problems in ritual settings So we should only allow them in ritual settings then? > The real reason psychedelics were banned in the US is to have a reason to jail politically inconvenient people in Vie…

Of ritual settings, some are allowed already. Perhaps also should be allowed in a medical and research setting which would mean schedule 2 or 3.

However, abuse potential or evidence of harm should be first demonstrated before scheduling a substance this high.

Re: Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

#66

Post by sun41 »

sonnyblarney wrote: post #20
white-flame wrote: post #15

The headline's question should really be reframed to question the validity of these restrictions in the first place. I'm not a user of any of these sorts of substances, nor condone them, but there's zero reason for a free country to police personal use of such things. Sure, driving under the influence should be policed as a safety hazard, showing up to work out of your gourd should still get you fired, etc. But there…

"but there's zero reason for a free country to police personal use of such things." There are a lot of reasons. The people on HN and their social circles are waaay on the high end of conscientiousness. They have nary any risk from something like LSD for the most part. But - wide open and fairly unregulated use? Available at the corner store? So many types will try it, more than a few times. Younger kids will definite…

> More to the point: the regulations are not for you, they're for the 33%-ish of folks who have all sorts of problems.

What do you mean with "all sorts of problems"? Most people with "mental" problems do alcohol which is a really bad hard drugs. But if you mean with problems: treating depressions, treating all kinds of headaches, palliative treatment, not knowing what to do with your life, etc.. then what would you want to regulate for this group?

Psychedelics are a very harmless drugs; not addictive, there is no poisoning(like with alcohol), when the effect is gone you feel totally normal and healthy. The only thing you need to be careful with if you really want the best result from it is the dosage, never too much like with many other things in life.

Prohibition of psychedelics only causes criminality and harm, it doesn't solve a problem at all. It is an illusion to think that your children are not able to get their hands on it when it is prohibited. The truth is they'll get questionable quality LSD in the criminal circuit, or they'll pick magic mushrooms theirselves which can be quite tricky!

Re: Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

#67

Post by toomanybeersies »

sonnyblarney wrote: post #20
white-flame wrote: post #15

The headline's question should really be reframed to question the validity of these restrictions in the first place. I'm not a user of any of these sorts of substances, nor condone them, but there's zero reason for a free country to police personal use of such things. Sure, driving under the influence should be policed as a safety hazard, showing up to work out of your gourd should still get you fired, etc. But there…

"but there's zero reason for a free country to police personal use of such things." There are a lot of reasons. The people on HN and their social circles are waaay on the high end of conscientiousness. They have nary any risk from something like LSD for the most part. But - wide open and fairly unregulated use? Available at the corner store? So many types will try it, more than a few times. Younger kids will definite…

> The people on HN and their social circles are waaay on the high end of conscientiousness

You overestimate some of us. I'd say that I'm in that third of the population that's susceptible to my vices. It's just that I can afford less harmful drugs and I call myself a hedonist to legitimise my proclivities with a philosophy.

These communities that are ravaged by crack and alcohol (a legal drug) would continue to be ravaged by crack and alcohol, even if LSD was made legal. It's just not that kind of drug. If anything, it might benefit the community because they might gain some introspection. These communities already have access to these drugs anyway; drugs are everywhere, they just choose heroin and crack over MDMA and LSD, for whatever reason.

Despite the best efforts of the War on Drugs, they are easier to find now than ever before, in many places people can get cocaine delivered faster than pizza [1]. Anybody that wants to do drugs is doing them. There aren't many people who avoid drugs purely because they are illegal, especially in at-risk communities.

I live in a 'vulnerable' neighbourhood, ridden with heroin addiction; so much so that there's a safe injection centre for heroin and methamphetamine around the corner from me. Nobody here is missing out on heroin because it's illegal. All the addicts can have as much heroin as they can afford here, it's so easy to find. If I walk to the shops in the afternoon, I can usually eyeball at least 2 or 3 dealers, without even trying.

Legalising drugs won't have effects that are anywhere near as severe as you might think.

[1] https://www.globaldrugsurvey.com/gds-2018/cokeinoes-cocaine-...

Re: Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

#68

Post by vinceguidry »

xg15 wrote: post #32
AstralStorm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said regulations. Regulations are set after there is a problem. In case of psychedelics, it is a law . If there is a problem, the regulation may be changed, and additional measures taken to get rid of it. The main issue with these laws is that they are speculative. It is actually very likely that nothing would change much if at all, except number of arrests and related costs. Oh and reduced cut for the black mark…

> The main issue with these "laws" is that they are speculative Sorry to pull that quote out of context, but this is just peak HN. It's beautiful. > Psychedelics have been available and used throughout history with few problems in ritual settings So we should only allow them in ritual settings then? > The real reason psychedelics were banned in the US is to have a reason to jail politically inconvenient people in Vie…

You guys are in 100% agreement. Parent is pointing out the difference between regulation and law and is just fine with regulated legality.

Re: Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

#69

Post by vinceguidry »

tzahola wrote: post #64
bedane wrote: post #42

After being prescribed benzos, SSRIs, etc. for years for coping with issues a single dose of psilocybin managed to wipe out in 3 hours, I say yes.

What about the people being prescribed benzos, SSRIs, etc. for life to cope with the issues brought on by a single does of psilocybin/LSD/salvia/DMT/etc?

Is this a thing?

I know a guy who seriously overdosed on LSD and had to spend a weekend in a hospital. Other than a severe aversion to psychedelics he wasn't seriously harmed, at least not to the point where he needs daily medication to deal. He has the worst Adderall tolerance his docs have ever seen but that's unrelated. I suppose I could ask him whether his OD made his ADD worse.

For sure chronic abuse of psychedelics will cause permanent effects but I'm not aware that anything other than a life-threatening overdose of psychedelics will cause someone to need lifelong medication to manage the consequences.

Re: Should We Loosen the Restrictions on Psychedelics?

#70

Post by toomanybeersies »

King-Aaron wrote: post #16
scarecrowbob wrote: post #8

" Their safety and efficacy exist only within highly structured specialized treatment settings. In addition, desired outcomes depend upon the production of a temporary but profoundly regressed, disorganized and incapacitated state. Outside of that structure, psychedelics are no less abusable, acutely debilitating and liable to result in psychological damage—sometimes severe and unremitting—than they ever were." This…

Anecdotally, I was at a doof (bush rave) a few years ago, where one of the punters decided to go for a stroll in the middle of the night - head full of acid - and got promptly lost. Police search and rescue were called out, big dollar costs to the state, and while the kid turned up fine in that instance, it's statistically more likely you won't turn up fine in the Australian bush. I certainly feel that there's no abs…

I don't want to sound like one of those anti-alcohol, pro-drug people, but to continue with the anecdotes: I've seen people get into far more dangerous situations and states from drinking than I have from use of any recreational drugs.

Anytime you hear about somebody being king hit in town, I can guarantee you the perpetrator has had a skin full of piss.

Post reply on HN