I have studied pharmacology for 5 years. I’d like to help people use drugs more safely, I’m currently working on a book in this topic. I’m making this forum for one person specifically on this site, but if anyone has any questions about drugs, how to use them safely, how they work, how to prevent addiction, how to lower the risks, etc. please ask.
Drug education with pharmacology and toxicology.
Posts
Total:
80
-->
@Critical-Tim
Here you go man, you said you wanted to learn more about the topic. What do you want to know?
If there is anyone on this site who uses drugs. I want them to be able to do it safely. If they want to know how the drug works, if they want to know how to minimize the potential risks of drug use, etc. I can help with all of that. This isn’t a recommendation to do drugs, this isn’t a recommendation to buy drugs off the street. I want to help keep people safe as much as I possibly can. Nothing I say in this forum or to anyone who asks questions should be received as me trying to convince them to use drugs. I just want to answer questions and help give proper drug education.
-->
@Mps1213
Given the wide scope of the topic, it is unclear where to begin. However, starting with the topic of cannabis may be a good idea, as it has been a subject of much discussion. My question is: what are the benefits of cannabis that should make it suitable for over-the-counter access, and what are the potential negative consequences that people should be mindful of?
-->
@Critical-Tim
Cannabis has some good benefits for the users. I’m not going to speak on things like tax revenues or anything like that. Cannabis causes please through dopamine release, it causes euphoria, it causes changes in pain perception to make some types of pain better, it causes an increased appetite, and it can be a helpful way to decompress after stressful days.
The negative side effects of cannabis particularly in users with a low tolerance to the drug can be unenjoyable. If new users invest too much of the substance they can face significant anxiety and paranoia, drying out of the mouth, increased heart rate, negative impacts on cognition while under the influence of the substance, increased prevalence of psychosis symptoms not the development of the mental disorder itself, and an overlooked issue is the feeling of guilt from ingesting the drug.
All of this is mediated by the agonism of the CB1 and CB2 receptors. Agonism means activation. The CB1 receptor and cannabinoid receptors in general are located in many places throughout the body and are much higher in number than most other receptors. These receptors act as a sort of Moderator for the release of most neurotransmitters. When these receptors are activated, even by endogenous substances like anandamide, they suppress the speed of signals through out the central nervous system, which is why most users report a feeling of relaxation. It also causes the release of dopamine and serotonin in the brain. THC also has affinity for the serotonin 2a receptor, which is the “psychedelic receptor” that LSD, psilocybin, DMT, etc all activate. THC actually blocks this receptor from activating. This also causes sedation effects. One thing I often bring up is that drugs aren’t necessarily what’s causing the effects. Our brain can already do all of this stuff. Which is why these receptors exist. There are already substances in our brain that can cause these effects under certain pretenses, drugs are just a short cut to these effects.
There are also more serious risks than just subjective effects while under the influence. Such as inflammation of the arteries surrounding the heart, which increases the risk for heart failure. It also causes misfiring of the CB1 receptor when abused for long periods of time and this is something that has been linked to obesity even in people who have never smoked cannabis. Then the more controversial one is addiction. All drugs are addictive. Even cannabis. It does cause physical withdrawal symptoms when the substance is used heavily for long periods of time and the use is abruptly stopped.
Those side effects tend to come from long periods of heavy use, the majority of cannabis users minimize the potential for these risks because most of them do not smoke cannabis in that way.
Overall cannabis is just another drug, it has some medical applicability that I didn’t speak about because that wasn’t the scope of the question. There’s nothing very special about cannabis, it does have risks when abused, and has benefits when used responsibly. It doesn’t have a realistic lethal dose with users, but that doesn’t mean people can’t die in relation to the effects of cannabis. With alcohol we consider drunk driving accidents alcohol deaths, we are starting to do the same with cannabis. There will be a certain number of associated cannabis deaths.
If the argument is about legalization the safety profile of a drug ultimately doesn’t matter, which is why alcohol and tobacco are legal. But the risks and benefits of drugs need to be clearly discussed with people hoping to ingest the drug. For new users it is important to stick to very low doses because THC is a pretty potent substance and can cause an unenjoyable experience if taken in over dose. So stick with low doses, enjoy the drug sporadically as possible to minimize any risks from long term use, and most of the people who use it will enjoy the cannabis experience and face little to no side effects
If you would like to dive deeper into the pharmacology we can do that. Let me know what else you’d like to know or talk about.
-->
@Critical-Tim
We can also talk about addiction, the misconceptions surrounding drugs like heroin, crack, meth, etc. and can hopefully give you a reason to start questioning a lot of bs that’s spread about drugs. At some point, the questioning will turn to the laws surrounding drugs and it becomes clear prohibition harms society as a whole far more than drugs do.
I will admit that cannabinoids are the drugs I am least interested in. The pharmacology is pretty simple and it’s just not very interesting to me. Most of my time studying has been dedicated to amphetamines, opioids, psychedelics, NMDA antagonists like PCP and ketamine. I can still give some good information on cannabinoids but they’re just slightly outside of my interest.
-->
@Mps1213
My next question was about addiction and what specifically causes it in certain substances over others. In my understanding, there are two aspects of the human psyche: the conscious self and the physiological self. The conscious self is focused on preparing for the future and urges you to work now to relax later. The physiological self, on the other hand, is only concerned with the present and tells you to relax and enjoy yourself. When it comes to addiction, I imagine a strong connection between the physiological self and the drug, as it stimulates our pleasure receptors to an extreme level, losing the balance between yourselves. This overwhelms our physiological self to the point where it takes over our psyche and our conscious self loses control. However, once a person withdraws from the drug, they regain their balance between the conscious and physiological selves, allowing them to make rational decisions about both present enjoyment and future conscious choices. With this balance reestablished, they can maintain a healthy relationship with their present actions and future self.
Of course, this is my psychological approach to understanding drug addiction. Could you explain how it happens scientifically, and whether or not my psychological evaluation correlates with the science behind it?
-->
@Critical-Tim
This is a good question. You’re close. First we need to define what addiction is.
Substance use disorder is the actual diagnosis term for addiction and three main things need to be happening in unison. 1: the person has tried to quit, and can’t. 2: the person faces withdrawal when they attempt to quit. 3: the drug use must be negatively impacting their life. Meaning they’re missing work to use the drug, not taking care of their kids, or other relationships due to the drug use.
The reason all three of these things need to be happening together is simple. For example I take OCD medication called Buspirone, if I were to quit this medication, I would face withdrawal and have trouble quitting, but I wouldn’t be called an addict simply because of this. It improved my quality of life dramatically and helps me get through the day. This can also be the case with other illicit substances, many people take amphetamines or opioids to just get their jobs done. To get through their long days and painful work. Even people who use oxycodone, heroin, or Methamphetamine wouldn’t be considered addicts if they drug use isn’t negatively impacting their life in a substantial way.
So you start this by saying what causes it in some substances but not others. This is a misconception. We can all find some people who fit that description above for substance use disorder for any psychoactive substance. From cannabis to meth. People can become addicted to anything. The main determining factors for addiction are: emotional crises, Job loss, poverty, trauma, and unrealistic expectations placed on people. When these determining factors are removed, addiction rates are extremely low in those populations, but drug use remains about the same. There is more complexity than that. For example if someone struggle with insomnia, severe pain, or anxiety. They are more likely to develop dependance and possibly addiction on drugs like opioids. If someone has problems staying awake, struggle with chronic fatigue, etc. they’re more likely to experience that with amphetamines.
So basically put addiction has very little to do with the drug itself. However the actual mechanism for developing addiction is a mixture of psychological mediation and physiological changes. Addiction itself, the diagnosis, is only focused on the effects of drugs on the persons psychological state and the state of their life in relation to the drug use. When drugs are used often, there is always a reason. So let’s take anxiety for example. If someone is using drugs to combat their anxiety, that alone isn’t a problem. The problem that eventually can lead to addiction is that they do not develop Healthy coping mechanisms for their anxiety while they are self medicating or even being medicated by a professional with drugs. So when they become anxious, instead of having ways to calm themselves down, whether it be focusing on breathing, exercising, reading, etc. their brain turns to the only coping mechanism they have which is ingesting the drug. if they are using a substance like alcohol or Xanax for treatment, these drugs slow the electrical currents in the brain and cause a sedating feeling. This is the physiological aspect of addiction. When they are not ingesting the substance the brain’s electrical currents are compensating for the time slowed and can be over reactive which causes more anxiety. This only tends to happen after a long period of use. These drugs, called benzodiazepines that agonize the GABAs receptors, are the only drugs that can kill you from quitting cold turkey after long periods of use. That is another physiological aspect.
Now to go into the assumption you made, that is very common, about how some drugs cause addiction more than others I’m gonna talk about some studies. I’m going to post this now and complete the rest in another post.
-->
@Critical-Tim
Before I go into the studies I’m going to make a point. It is true that there are more heroin addicts than oxycodone addicts. However that is not an indication that heroin is more addictive than oxycodone. They have the same mechanism in the brain, the brain can not tell the difference between these two drugs. The reason we see higher rates of addiction with heroin users is because heroin is more available, cheaper, and more potent. Potency does not determine addiction potential at all, it only determines the weight at which pharmacological activity begins. There are other metrics for it, like at comparable weights which one causes more pharmacological activity, but neither of those have an effect on addiction. Rates of addiction can differ between drugs but there is no evidence any drug is more addictive than any other drug. There’s also no evidence that some drugs “help people escape” more than others. Now to the breakdown of some studies about addiction.
The idea that everyone who uses cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine, must become addicts who throw their lives away comes from very flawed studies done on rats in the 1970’s. These studies took stressed out test rats, put them into small cages, and gave them two options. The first option was to drink water out of a bowl. The second option was to drink water that was infused with cocaine or heroin. The rats chose the drug infused bowl every time. They developed an addiction to the drug infused water, and drank it until they died. Every single one of them in the study did this. This study was then extrapolated to human behavior, and that is fair enough in my opinion. We use rats to test all drugs before they are able to enter human trials. This particular study, in a sense, is still being used to power anti-drug rhetoric in the US. This study is why the average American believes anyone who uses heroin is an addict and will be led to a premature death due to their drug use. Even if the people spouting these opinions are unaware of the specific study. Popular culture also has a huge role to play in this phenomenon as well, but it can be argued that media and political figures used the results of this study to power that side of pop culture back in the 70’s.
However, many studies have been conducted since then. These included putting the rats in large rooms, not cages, with many other rats, sexually active mates, sugary treats, and then the clean and drug infused water. The results were astounding. Every rat tried the drug infused water, likely because they had no way of knowing the water had drugs in it, or were just curious as to why there were two bowls. Throughout the study, after they tried the special water, they all began to choose the sugary treat and socialization with other rats over the drug infused water. In fact when these attractive alternatives were offered, they began only drinking the clean water as opposed to the drug infused water. Essentially this study mimicked what the average human experiences, and it showed mammals chose socialization and sex over drugs.
Many more studies of this nature were published after these initial results reached science journals. All of the studies showed the same results. They were all done by different people that were all independent of each other. This pattern caught the attention of Dr. Carl Hart, a chairman of the National Institute of Health and professor of pharmacology and psychology at the Ivy league school Cambridge. He began conducting similar experiments, but with human test subjects. He gathered crack cocaine and methamphetamine addicts from New York City and gave them two options. The two options they were offered were a sum of money or a hit of their drug of choice worth more than that sun of money. When the sun of money was $5 most addicts chose the drug. When he raised the money up to $20 Everyone except one person in the study took the money instead of the drug they were addicted to. These studies show, very clearly, that if offered attractive alternatives, even addicts won’t choose the drug.
Admittedly this does not tell the whole story. There are many aspects to drug addiction that need to be considered. With methamphetamine users in particular paranoia is a major aspect of taking high doses of that drug. It is possible that some of those people were afraid this was a trap of some sort. However this would not explain the addicts choosing the drug over the $5 in the first iteration of the study. All studies will have some sort of implicit bias, no study can cover all aspects of human behavior. However, that alone is not reason to discount the findings of the studies. We can also look at how many people have used drugs in the last reported year and how many people were diagnosed with substance abuse disorder. Well over 200,000,000 people reported using drugs of some sort in 2019. That accounts for drugs from alcohol to PCP. only 20,000,000 people had a diagnosis for SUD at that time. These studies and statistics have shown that 80-90% of drug users do not become addicted to the substance they chose to use.
The talk of addiction always leads to a particular conversation. People who use drugs like cannabis refuse to believe that cannabis is addictive. They take a lazy high road of claiming their drug use should be acceptable due to one reason or another. While simultaneously talking down on other drugs and other drug users. We could find many people who have their lives disrupted by their cannabis use. Whether that is failing drug tests, gaining weight, losing discipline, lowered motivation, etc. Anything that changes a human’s state of mind is addictive and can lead to addiction. That does not mean cannabis should be illegal. All it means is that we as a population need to be honest and clear about what the risks are to using any drug.
-->
@Critical-Tim
The reason I made the clear distinction between the mechanism for developing addiction and the diagnosis of addiction itself is because there isn’t a concrete physiological change that will have someone be diagnosed with addiction. Which is why I also brought up the fact we don’t call people who rely on anti-depressants or any anxiety medications addicts, because addiction is a psychological diagnosis. The development of addiction is both psychological and physiological, I hope I made that clear enough.
-->
@Critical-Tim
And you’re basic assumption of what causes addiction to form was pretty damn close. At least in very general terms. About wanting to relax and feel good right now. The thing I was mainly trying to point out is that there are reasons only 10-20% of drug users feel that need and develop addiction, and that is the determining factors I laid out. Addiction ultimately has nothing to do with drugs, it’s a misattributed problem. The reason drugs like heroin are only associated with addicts is be Ayse many people who use the drug but are successful, which is a very high number are very hesitant to admit to that. So the only people admitting to it, are the addicts and it gives a very skewed profile of drugs of that nature.
-->
@Tarik
That is an interesting difference between addiction and drug dependence that I had not recognized before. If someone is taking a drug and experiences withdrawal symptoms upon sudden cessation, then they may have developed physical dependence on the drug. However, addiction is characterized by a compulsive desire to continue using the drug despite negative consequences on one's life, relationships, and health. So, if someone is taking a drug but it is not negatively affecting their life and they do not have the compulsive desire to continue using it, they may not be considered addicted even if they have physical dependence and withdrawal symptoms.
The main determining factors for addiction are emotional crises, Job loss, poverty, trauma, and unrealistic expectations placed on people. When these determining factors are removed, addiction rates are extremely low in those populations, but drug use remains about the same.
That is understandable, as a drug that is intended to provide a pleasurable experience would be even more appealing if one's current life is particularly difficult at the moment.
-->
@Critical-Tim
So, if someone is taking a drug but it is not negatively affecting their life and they do not have the compulsive desire to continue using it, they may not be considered addicted even if they have physical dependence and withdrawal symptoms.”
You absolutely nailed it right on the head on there. I don’t know if you have ever heard of a plant drug called Kratom or not. It contains an opioid drug that has a pretty complex pharmacology I can break down if you’re interested. However, I use this drug daily, I’m on it right now. I have two herniated discs in my lower back sustained from kick boxing, I live a certain amount of pain, so to get through these 13 hour days I do for my environmental health job I need something to combat that. It also helps with a good mood boost, I get mildly euphoric and it makes me a better worker, parent, son, partner, etc. it has never impacted my life negatively, but it is fair to assume I am likely dependent on this drug. That shouldn’t be a bad thing in my opinion. People are dependent on all types of things to get through the day and drug use shouldn’t be considered any different.
-->
@Mps1213
So, if I understand correctly, it's not necessarily the physiological attachment to the drug that causes addiction, but rather the conscious decision to give in to the physiological attachment and allow it to take control.
Here is an article:The physiological effects of nicotine on the brain create a strong urge for the person to continue smoking, even if they are consciously aware of the negative health consequences. Despite knowing the harm that smoking causes, the addiction can override the conscious decision to quit, and the person may find themselves continuing to smoke despite their best efforts to stop. In this way, the physiological dependence on nicotine can take control over the conscious decision-making process.
So, if I understand correctly, you're saying that the article is unfair to blame the drug because those who claim to be giving their best effort to quit are actually voluntarily giving in to the drug, thus making a conscious surrender to their physiological self. In this way, although it may seem like they are unable to control themselves, they are doing so willingly. Is that correct?
-->
@Mps1213
However, I use this drug daily, I’m on it right now. I have two herniated discs in my lower back sustained from kick boxing, I live a certain amount of pain, so to get through these 13 hour days I do for my environmental health job I need something to combat that. It also helps with a good mood boost, I get mildly euphoric and it makes me a better worker, parent, son, partner, etc. it has never impacted my life negatively, but it is fair to assume I am likely dependent on this drug. That shouldn’t be a bad thing in my opinion.
Nearly everyone in America is dependent on caffeine, and I don't believe dependency is necessarily negative, as long as it has more positive than negative consequences.
-->
@Critical-Tim
So, if I understand correctly, you're saying that the article is unfair to blame the drug because those who claim to be giving their best effort to quit are actually voluntarily giving in to the drug, thus making a conscious surrender to their physiological self. In this way, although it may seem like they are unable to control themselves, they are doing so willingly. Is that correct?”
No necessarily so remember how I said that the development of addiction can be physiological? It’s a mixture of both. Mainly it does tend to be the choice to use the drug repeatedly to the point where they develop addiction. I’d also be very hesitant to say nicotine use or dependance is bad unless the form they are ingesting is tobacco. Nicotine has a lot of benefits people don’t speak about. In the vast majority of cases it is the users making a conscious Decision to ingest the drug in unhealthy and unreasonable amounts. That is what leads to addiction. It also has something to do with very poor education on drugs as well. Physiological aspects of drug use play a part in addiction but are not the determining factor or everyone who uses drugs would be addicts due to those effects. Since 80-90% of drug users are not addicts, the evidence to support what that article is claiming is weak at best
Anyway, the reason nicotine isn’t a drug that can cause dependance pretty quickly is because it has a very short duration and blocks dopamine transport. So dopamine is on the dopamine receptors longer giving peopl a sense of pleasure, no euphoria because it isn’t active enough at releasing dopamine. So there is a physiological aspect sometimes in the development of addiction, but not addiction itself. Addiction is a mental diagnosis not a physical one. Physiological aspects can certainly drive the person to use drugs more often, but those physiological aspects are more ‘addictive’ for the lack of a better term, to people who have those pre existing conditions of life I mentioned earlier.
I would say it’s very unfair of that article to claim nicotine is inherently harmful because that simply isn’t true. Tobacco is pretty harmful in some forms. But not all, snus for example is a form of processed tobacco the Swedish formed and the cancer rates with that form of tobacco are extremely low.
-->
@Critical-Tim
“Nearly everyone in America is dependent on caffeine, and I don't believe dependency is necessarily negative, as long as it has more positive than negative consequences.”
There you go man, that statement right there makes you more educated and aware of what addiction is than 75% of people in our country, if you’re American.
-->
@Critical-Tim
And let me be very clear about something. Before I began studying pharmacology, psychology of addiction, psychopharmacology etc. I had two bouts with addiction. One with alcohol and one with LSD. These addictions formed at very hard times of my life, go figure. I didn’t know anything about either drug and I abused them to help me cope with the severe falling out I went through with my closest friends, that has since been mended, severe depression, undiagnosed OCD, etc. so that again is proof in the pudding it has nothing to do with either of those drugs, because I still use alcohol to this day in a very responsible and reasonable way. It is also proof that actually educating people, who are willing to learn, is extremely effective.
-->
@Critical-Tim
Something else I would like to point out, especially if you aren’t scientifically minded (not saying you aren’t just in general you seem intelligent enough) not all peer reviewed studies are created equally. The methods and results section of the studies need to be analyzed very closely. Don’t turn to journalism for anything related to drugs, or anything else scientific for that matter because they’re not capable of understanding the data being presented to them 9/10 times. I can show so many examples of poorly conducted studies, like the rat addiction model from the 70’s that journalists latch onto because they don’t have the ability to weed out the bullshit studies.
-->
@Mps1213
I understand your point about not relying on journalism for answers about drugs. However, most people struggle to differentiate between facts and opinions. This is because they think that words are synonymous with understanding, which is a misconception. Words are low-resolution interpretations of concepts from the metaphysical realm. When someone gathers words from others, they must be aware that these words come with personal biases and subjective judgments. By doing so, they can extract the raw life experience of the source. We must acknowledge that no matter how illogical a person's words may be, they are still alive because evolution has deemed them viable. However, just because someone is viable doesn't mean their words are useful or reasonable. It only means that their understanding is valid. If someone can express their ideas concisely, all logical conclusions would never be disagreed upon. For example, if someone asks about the weather and you replied that it was 70 degrees, but it's not, you lied. However, if you said, "My friend told me it was 70 degrees," or "It feels like 70 degrees to me," that would be true and there would be no miscommunication. The biggest problem with logical deduction in the modern-day is that people don't express their ideas properly. Only once a person understands how to express their ideas concisely can they decode the real intentions of others' words. This is where I am critical. I critically examine others' words in a productive way. Even if someone speaks illogically, you can ask them how they came to that conclusion, understand their idea, and how it became their idea. Then, you can extract the raw, untainted life experience of others and add it to your own. This isn't to say that it becomes the new answer, but rather to add it to your database and recompile for a more all-encompassing conclusion and better understanding of the world.
While journalism can be misleading for those who cannot differentiate between fact and opinion, it can be valuable for those who possess critical thinking skills. It provides a wealth of information about the authors' perspectives and experiences related to drugs, which then can decode their biases into your own understanding of the research and results conducted. What I'm trying to convey is that individuals with critical thinking skills should not dismiss the ideas of others, even if they are presented in an illogical manner. Overall, I agree that I wouldn't recommend others to rely on journalism for answers unless I knew that they were capable of analyzing and understanding the conclusions properly.
-->
@Critical-Tim
Did you tag me in this by accident?
-->
@Critical-Tim
I don’t disagree with some of what of you said.
There are way too many examples of journalists spreading complete nonsense about drugs that I’ve heard people repeat so I usually just tell people to stay away from journalists on this topic. Read peer reviewed studies, look at the data, look up words you don’t know until you can read an article and understand all of it.
-->
@Tarik
Yes, my mistake.
-->
@Critical-Tim
What other drugs are you interested in learning about?
-->
@Mps1213
I am interested in learning more about psychedelics and hallucinogens such as psilocybin and LSD. I have heard many fascinating stories about these drugs, but they often seem to be explained in a spiritual or mystical way. There have been numerous experiments conducted with these substances, some of which I find hard to believe, while others seem to require further scientific investigation and understanding.
-->
@Critical-Tim
ok cool.
We can start with LSD and Psilocybin. It is highly annoying the spiritual mystical stuff you’re talking about. There is also this incredibly annoying elitism those people are employing as well. They always talk about their drugs as medicine or that they’re good drugs while shitting on other drugs. I hate it.
Anyway what specifically are you wanting to know? Mechanisms for the experience? What the studies are showing? Dosages to take? Effects and side effects? Toxicity?
Let me know what exactly you’re hoping to learn and I’ll break it down. If I tried to cover all of that it would take 3 10,000 character posts lol.
-->
@Critical-Tim
And I’m not against going over all of that if you’d like.
-->
@Mps1213
I am interested in understanding the science behind hallucinogens, such as what causes the hallucinations and spiritual experiences. I am also curious about why they are often associated with unexplainable events and strange stories. For example, I have heard of groups of people taking the same drug and all experiencing the same dream. While I am not a conspiracy theorist, as I only acknowledge the facts; I have listened to podcasts by Joe Rogan, and I can't help but wonder what is so unique or mysterious about these drugs that make them such a focus of research.
-->
@Critical-Tim
So the science behind the hallucinations is still a little vague. I’ll break it down best I can.
The receptors these drugs agonize, or activate, are called the serotonin2a receptors. Ima call them 5-ht2a from here on out, (serotonin is 5-hydroxytryptamine) hence 5-ht. These receptors are most densely located all throughout the CNS. However they are most densely located in serotonergic terminal rich areas. This means that where the serotonergic cortex’s are, where these terminals connect to other terminals are where the highest density of these receptors are. There are also 5-ht receptors in the stomach which is why some of these drugs cause nausea. The serotonin system plays an incredibly important role in our consciousness it controls mood memory function, it controls nerves, it controls a lot in our body.
So when these receptors are activated by very powerful drugs like LSD and psilocin (active metabolite of psilocybin, psilocybin is a prodrug and isn’t what gets you high) it is essentially putting these highly complex consciousness powering cortexes into over drive. The cortexes it puts into overdrive are mainly prefrontal, parietal, and somatosensory cortex. These cortexes have been shown to have incredibly important roles in our consciousness. Just to show how important let’s look at what happens when the pre frontal cortex isn’t working properly.
“A person with damage to the prefrontal cortex might have blunted emotional responses, for instance. They might even become more aggressive and irritable, and struggle to initiate activities. Finally, they might perform poorly on tasks that require long-term planning and impulse inhibition”
So we can see right here that when that cortex is over drive there will be a more emotional response. That explains why there is so much “spirituality” or religious type experiences when taking psychedelics. The experience and hallucinations feel very real, and since that part of the brain is highly active it also feels incredible emotional and important to the person. I have a lot of experience with these drugs and the experience feels incredibly real and important and as if you’re connected to something higher than yourself. That doesn’t mean you are and I don’t believe you are. I just think this is what happens when we stimulate these highly complex and important parts of the brain.
The hallucinations are not yet mechanistically explained perfectly. These are mysterious drugs in that sense. But we can see that people with schizophrenia have over active 5-ht2a receptors, among other things, like issues with the NMDA receptors and adrenergic receptors. So it doesn’t mean you’re experiencing schizophrenia when you take these drugs, it just means you’re potentially experiencing a part of it without a lot of the negative side effects.
One reason they are researched very often is how well they’ve done treating mental illnesses. From depression to OCD. One drug called ibogaine has effectively treated opioid addiction, and has the mechanisms to theoretically treat Parkinson’s syndrome, addiction, depression, and anxiety. They’re also potentially important tools for understanding consciousness, because most of these molecules are very similar structurally to serotonin and cause such intense and profound effects. They have helped us map the serotonin system which is also important for brain injuries and research into that.
the pharmacology is relatively simple but still a little vague as to why exactly activating these receptors cause such experiences. I personally believe it’s as simple as saying “this is what happens when you put these cortexes into over drive” but the spiritual hippy crowd refuses to use science and always has to bring in some untestable hypothesis about connecting with spirits and seeing other worlds. Then treat that as if it is a given and then use that to ride a high horse over other drug users by calling it holy medicine and all that bullshit.