On Drug Use

[Engler]

Re: On Drug Use

Drugs are bad. Don't do them. And now you know.

[Izzi]

Re: On Drug Use

it is the job of the user to research the drug and understand these properties before he or she takes it.

You'd think so, but if the person were to go that far i dont think they would be dumb enough to want to do it in the first place.

[Chrissi]

Re: On Drug Use

Drugs are bad. Don't do them. And now you know.

Please do think before you post in CT.

You'd think so, but if the person were to go that far i dont think they would be dumb enough to want to do it in the first place.

You act like we don't know what we're talking about first-hand. But we do.

Personally, ever since my first drug experience gave me a shock, I have researched every chemical I have ever ingested carefully before doing it. One of those chemicals was salvia. I still do salvia on a regular basis. So apparently I was still "dumb" enough to do it. But actually there was negligible risk in my taking salvia. How is that dumb, exactly? And I know someone is going to get me on the negligible risk part, but I'm going to counter that before it even comes up: almost everything we do every day comes with SOME sort of risk. Driving comes with a risk to your life. Even just walking outside. But we don't stop doing these things. I'm sure you can think of a million examples now that I've cleared the air.

You just insinuated that every drug user is "dumb", which is far from the truth. I don't even need to prove my point here, we've got living examples in this thread: aperson and jewpin, and probably some others. And depending on how intelligent you consider me, there is also myself.

PS I have not discussed any illegal activities in this thread. Salvia is legal.

[aperson]

Re: On Drug Use

You'd think so, but if the person were to go that far i dont think they would be dumb enough to want to do it in the first place.

I was anti-drug until I started researching them. Maybe you should learn to speak for yourself and stop being such a judgmental person, Izzi. I have a feeling you haven't researched drugs yourself, and your statement is just coming from some blind bias that you have arbitrarily developed from hearsay. Evidently, you haven't even put in the time to read through this thread before you dole out your quips.

[Izzi]

Re: On Drug Use

Wow i think you totally misunderstood where i was coming from there. You are way to quick to jump at stuff like that. Also that was only a 1 liner how do you get all of that out of it. How am i acting like i dont know what you are talking about? My statment wasnt even an arguement against anything you said. I was just throwing it out there. Please, calm down sir.

If you think about what i said the situation would be more like this.

"Hey i think im going to try cocain" "lets research it because it might be dangerous!" "Omg, its addictive and can ruin your life, omg" *does it anyways*

Please dont take this into a huge arguement. I read your post and this isnt an attack against you at all.

[flawofhumanity]

Re: On Drug Use

Wow i think you totally misunderstood where i was coming from there. You are way to quick to jump at stuff like that. Also that was only a 1 liner how do you get all of that out of it. How am i acting like i dont know what you are talking about? My statment wasnt even an arguement against anything you said. I was just throwing it out there. Please, calm down sir.

If you think about what i said the situation would be more like this.

"Hey i think im going to try cocain" "lets research it because it might be dangerous!" "Omg, its addictive and can ruin your life, omg" *does it anyways*

Please dont take this into a huge arguement. I read your post and this isnt an attack against you at all.

Ugh...The problem here is that you're generalizing all drugs to be as horrible as cocaine, thus the assumption that you haven't researched drugs well (I haven't either, though I did recently do a bit of research on marijuana, not the other drugs mentioned in this thread). The point these guys are trying to make, or the one that I'm getting at the very least, is that the media and the general population is very one-sided towards drug use, mainly because of the education (or lack thereof) provided to us.

Personally, I'm a firm believer of "My rights end where yours begin," therefore I haven't had any problems with psychadelic drug users for quite some time, though as others have mentioned, drugs like "opiates, amphetamines, cocaine, and certain depressants like GHB" can be physically addictive (I think, if I'm incorrect someone call me out on it) which can lead to the detriment of others not abusing said drugs.

[jewpinthethird]

Wow i think you totally misunderstood where i was coming from there. You are way to quick to jump at stuff like that. Also that was only a 1 liner how do you get all of that out of it. How am i acting like i dont know what you are talking about? My statment wasnt even an arguement against anything you said. I was just throwing it out there. Please, calm down sir.

If you think about what i said the situation would be more like this.

"Hey i think im going to try cocain" "lets research it because it might be dangerous!" "Omg, its addictive and can ruin your life, omg" *does it anyways*

Please dont take this into a huge arguement. I read your post and this isnt an attack against you at all.

Sorry bud, but this is Critical Thinking. If you say something inflammatory like that, you better back it up with something good. As Chrissi pointed out You didn't, and your e-ass was raped for it.

drugs like "opiates, amphetamines, cocaine, and certain depressants like GHB" can be physically addictive (I think, if I'm incorrect someone call me out on it) which can lead to the detriment of others not abusing said drugs.

I actually had to look this up just now, but GHB is addictive (I, for some reason, didn't think it was). It's fairly mild when taken as a low dose sleeping aid, but it's deadly when taken at recreational doses. It's more commonly known as the date-rape drug and it can put you in a coma and even kill you. More dangerously, it can made from common household cleaning agents. But some people like take it because it gets you hella krunk, ya know wut i m sayin?

[uselessaccount]

Re: On Drug Use

I don't know a great amount about each drug, but I think laws are obviously there for a reason. The same way that a rail protects you from falling off a bridge or something, the laws kind of help to stop people from eventually overdosing or messing up their life. Most people won't fall off a bridge, but the fact that it's there stops the few that would've fallen off as opposed to if it wasn't there. Also truth is, whether you yourself are affected drastically by illegal drugs or not, it does drag down communities and countries. The line shouldn't be drawn where one person or a group of individuals feel that they have self control, because there are always people that can't control themselves. I guess what I said isn't too relevant to drugs themselves but I think it's a fair explanation of why anti-drug laws are the way that they are.

[aperson]

Re: On Drug Use

I don't know a great amount about each drug, but I think laws are obviously there for a reason. The same way that a rail protects you from falling off a bridge or something, the laws kind of help to stop people from eventually overdosing or messing up their life. Most people won't fall off a bridge, but the fact that it's there stops the few that would've fallen off as opposed to if it wasn't there. Also truth is, whether you yourself are affected drastically by illegal drugs or not, it does drag down communities and countries. The line shouldn't be drawn where one person or a group of individuals feel that they have self control, because there are always people that can't control themselves. I guess what I said isn't too relevant to drugs themselves but I think it's a fair explanation of why anti-drug laws are the way that they are.

I think you'd be a bit surprised at the history of some of our drug legislation then. There are quite a few ties to racist legislation against Mexican immigration in the early 1900s that account for marijuana being illegal, and Harry Anslinger was the man who led the crusade for it's illegalization. I suggest you read this link and come to your own conclusions about what kind of rails our government is building.

That's not the only one though. Ecstasy in unadulterated form is a drug known as MDMA (3,4 methylenedioxymethamphetamine) (note, this doesn't mean it's methamphetamine just because it has that inside the name. It's a totally different drug that simply has the amphetamine group inside of its chemical structure). There were studies done in the mid 90s that demonstrated that MDMA could cause holes in the human brain. This study was led by a man named George Ricaurte who was receiving funding from the government. Funnily enough, he retracted his paper in 2002 when it came to light that his test subjects were given methamphetamine instead of MDMA. Let me say it again, he administered the wrong drug on which the entire study was based. The government still cites this study as one of the backbones for the illegalization of MDMA. No studies since have been able to demonstrate any kind of serious serotonin loss from controlled use of MDMA.

When MDMA was originally synthesized by Alexander Shulgin, he saw it as a tool that could help therapists with patients who were suffering from Post Tramautic Stress Disorder and sent the drug out to psychologists that he knew. Additionally, the man responsible for the initial large-scale distribution of ecstacy was a standing member in the Christian church who saw it as a way to help people come to a purer, more insightful understanding of their problems. (search for the video documentary Ecstasy Rising if you want to learn more about this).

Both the non-medical and therapeutic use of MDMA were made illegal in 1985 despite the Drug Enforcement Administration Administrative Law Judge Francis Young's recommendation that physicians be permitted to continue to administer it to their patients. (from http://www.a1b2c3.com/drugs/x_01.htm)

These are just examples of the government enacting completely asinine legislation for two drugs. I won't even get into how absurd I believe its legislation of psychedelic drugs is, that's a diatribe for another day. But hopefully you should understand that the government is not always out for "what's best for you." Organizations like the Drug Enforcement Agency thrive off of continually being able to capture and arrest "drug abusers" and those that distribute drugs. Without a large scale drug problem, these people don't bring home any money to their families. This creates quite a bit of an agenda for them to keep pressuring legislation against all kinds of drugs, whether it is proper or not.

I hope that you actually do choose to look into and research issues of law like this, because a society that blindly accepts whatever rule structure the government feeds down to them is quickly going to become oppressed.



Edit: Oh, that's why I get Albert Hoffman mixed up as Alexander Hoffman. It's Albert Hoffman and Alexander Shulgin. My brain is dyslexic in the most subtle of ways...

[aperson]

Re: On Drug Use

Wow i think you totally misunderstood where i was coming from there. You are way to quick to jump at stuff like that. Also that was only a 1 liner how do you get all of that out of it. How am i acting like i dont know what you are talking about? My statment wasnt even an arguement against anything you said. I was just throwing it out there. Please, calm down sir.

If you think about what i said the situation would be more like this.

"Hey i think im going to try cocain" "lets research it because it might be dangerous!" "Omg, its addictive and can ruin your life, omg" *does it anyways*

Please dont take this into a huge arguement. I read your post and this isnt an attack against you at all.

Even though you've already been ripped apart for this I feel you still need it cemented in your brain. Your first post was an absolutely idiotic blanket generalization about all drugs. My entire first post was about how not all drugs appear as they seem, and that we should come to a deeper understanding about all the drugs around us before we choose to both demonize or use them.

You, on the other hand, completely ignored it and chose to make an uninsightful comment about how no one with adequate research could possibly want to do any drug. Also, way to back it up with another idiotic generalization in this post. I researched cocaine heavily before I tried it and decided it was worth it if for nothing else than to catalogue the experience. it was a pretty uneventful experience; I haven't done coke since.
Additionally, a personal counterexample to your pile of tripe would read like this:

"I researched mushrooms for several months before I decided to do them. I came to the conclusion that they were a powerful drug which could be very insightful if given proper respect. Therefore, I tried shrooms and had an absolutely fantastic experience."

I have little patience for people who are both judgmental and ignorant like you. Ignorance is fine and understandable, but as soon as you start making value judgments about something you don't understand you only cement the misinformation that has been plaguing the world of drug legislation for so long already.

[lord_carbo]

Re: On Drug Use

I don't know a great amount about each drug, but I think laws are obviously there for a reason. The same way that a rail protects you from falling off a bridge or something, the laws kind of help to stop people from eventually overdosing or messing up their life. Most people won't fall off a bridge, but the fact that it's there stops the few that would've fallen off as opposed to if it wasn't there.

Most people would fall off a bridge accidentally, not because they went into something ignorantly that has obvious risks. And the laws unjustly persecute those who know what they're doing with drugs.

Also truth is, whether you yourself are affected drastically by illegal drugs or not, it does drag down communities and countries. The line shouldn't be drawn where one person or a group of individuals feel that they have self control, because there are always people that can't control themselves. I guess what I said isn't too relevant to drugs themselves but I think it's a fair explanation of why anti-drug laws are the way that they are.

I'd argue this, but I need to know exactly what you mean by "drag down communities." How so? There are many ways you could specifically mean this.

[jewpinthethird]

Re: On Drug Use

Really, I can't say anything that hasn't been said or than there is only one 'f' in Hofmann.

It's a common mistake. I only noticed it after I was typing up the citation for my essay.

ps. My professor (a chemist) admitted to have done his own experiments with LSD...which can be interpreted however you like, I guess.

[SonicFlasher]

Re: On Drug Use

I've been into Coricidin and Robotussin the past year almost, taking as high as 40 tablets of Coricidin and getting the trip of my life. Sometimes I'll take 16 coricidin and 2 bottles of robotussin. Wat could be the effects of this?

[aperson]

Re: On Drug Use

I've been into Coricidin and Robotussin the past year almost, taking as high as 40 tablets of Coricidin and getting the trip of my life. Sometimes I'll take 16 coricidin and 2 bottles of robotussin. Wat could be the effects of this?

Liver failure and death.

Coricidin Cough & Cold contains acetaminophen, the same stuff that's in Tylenol. That's the reason they warn you not to take too much Tylenol; acetaminophen is metabolized in the liver and causes toxic metabolites to be released which damage the liver. In sufficiently high concentrations (read: around the doses you're taking), acetaminophen can cause liver failure, which leads to death. If you're taking Robitussin to trip you should be taking something that has ONLY Dextromethorphan HBr as the active ingredient. Check the back of the label, if anything appears besides that (such as acetaminophen or guafenesin), get something else.

Also, it's been hypothesized (but not proven) that taking high doses of DXM often can lead to either brain lesions or serotonin syndrome. You don't want either of these, so I'd recommend tripping on it no more often that once every 3 weeks.

[uselessaccount]

Re: On Drug Use

And the laws unjustly persecute those who know what they're doing with drugs.

Laws basically account for everyone, even when there people who know what they're doing. I don't think there will ever be a way around that. To say that "those who know what they're doing deserve more rights and freedom" leads to "it's just too bad for those who don't know what they're doing". However, I do feel that the government has their laws not to protect us really, but rather just based on the principle that drugs are wrong. Honestly though, I wouldn't prefer another system even though ours is faulty.

I'd argue this, but I need to know exactly what you mean by "drag down communities." How so? There are many ways you could specifically mean this.

Even though it may not be the core of the drugs themselves, I can't say that they haven't negatively impacted people. I've seen people and friends turn into criminals and dropouts over the years, but I'm pretty sure everyone has seen that in some way.

And Aperson, I know you're educated and really informed on the topic but my main standing point is that even though drug use doesn't seem to be a problem for you, it is and will be for others and also (this may not be important depending on your view of social life) people will judge you solely on the fact that you take drugs. Even with all you know and study, your going to be classified and discriminated against because just like there will always be people that go too far with drugs, there will always be people who just see "the pothead" and never look any further. With my knowledge, I don't have the authority to say that drugs are wrong, but I think we can both agree that a lot people have been seriously messed up by drugs and still will be.