Drug education with pharmacology and toxicology.

Author: Mps1213
Drugs
Cannabis
heroin
PCP

Posts

Total: 80
Topic's author
#31
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
One thing that is genuinely incredible about them besides the power of the experience is how safe they are toxicologically. High doses lose almost no risk what so ever to the body. The only risks high doses of tryptamine psychedelics pose are mental issues. 

For example I gave myself full blown PTSD from LSD. A guy sold me some and didn’t tell me he was told they have 4.5x the amount of acid that a normal tab of acid does. And I took three. So I thought I was taking a normal dose for a fun night 300-330 micro grams, but actually took 1300 micro grams. It was the most traumatic experience of my life. I still can’t tell people about the details of it without having anxiety attacks. I had nightmares for months about taking LSD and had to talk with my therapist about it for a while before I recovered. 

That isn’t to scare people from taking LSD, that had nothing to do with the drug   and everything to do with my abuse of the drug. After this experience I dedicated my life to understanding pharmacology and the psychology of drug abuse and addiction. I have never used LSD since and I never will again because it’s like getting food poisoning from a restaurant. I have used Psilocybin since and had a perfectly normal time. Prohibition also had a role to play in my traumatic experience, if would’ve been able to purchase LSD with clear dosages i would’ve either taken half of one of those tabs or not bought it at all. But I had to purchase it off the street at an unknown dosage. And LSD is impossible to weigh unless you have a multi hundred dollar scale, which I don’t. 

So again this isn’t meant to be a scare story, just a realistic risk of LSD use. I have fully recovered from that experience and work a high paying job at an environmental health firm and am a responsible tax paying citizen, so it’s not like it destroyed my life. But it fucked with me for a few months fornsure and that is a real possibility with high doses of those drugs. 
#32
Platypi
Platypi's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 57
0
0
3
Platypi's avatar
Platypi
0
0
3
-->
@Mps1213
A number of people smoke where I live and work.


Has anyone studied which ways to smoke tobacco have a lower health risk?  

  • A certain sort of pipe
  • Cigars of some sort
  • Cigarettes
How often should one smoke if they prefer tobacco?

Topic's author
#33
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Platypi
Hey man good question. The only form of tobacco that can be regularly used with very little health side effects is snus, actual snus. 

However oral tobacco has a lower cancer rate than smoked tobacco but you’re talking about smoking.

The cancer rate from smoking tobacco isn’t the only health concern. It also raises blood pressure, scars lung tissue, deposits tar in the lungs etc. to minimize the risks of that 1-3 cigarettes a day will pose minimal health risks to the user, relative to people who smoke more.

Pipe tobacco is “less dangerous” than cigarettes for sure. It’s usually higher quality tobacco and in most situations burns and smokes at a slightly lower temperature which will decrease lung scarring and the amount of tar deposited. A lot of pipe tobacco also has more nicotine which is what we are all ultimately after. 

I would recommend using a vape, sadly there aren’t many other plants that contain nicotine, and the ones that do contain very very little quantities of it. If your set on smoking tobacco and inhaling the tobacco pipe tobacco would be your least deadly way of ingesting the drug. If you’re not set on inhaling it, smoke a cigar here and there, even the small ones contain a ton of nicotine that will soak in through the tissue in your mouth. You can also use snus if you don’t want to smoke. You can even swallow your spit so you don’t have to constantly be spitting. Vaping is the safest way to consume nicotine through inhalation, make sure it’s a regulated product so you’re not inhaling anything dangerous like Vitamin E acetate which was the main culprit behind all of the vaping scare stories. Make sure the vape product is a mixture of propylene Glycol and vegetable glycerin. These two substances are the “vehicles” used in asthma inhalers and pose no significant health risk to the user. 

Nicotine is actually good for you, in most cases. If you don’t have high blood pressure. It prevents type 2 diabetes, prevents dementia and Alzheimer’s and improves cognition both acutely and chronically. So don’t be afraid to use nicotine. If you smoke cigarettes keep the amount low, that can be difficult to do but not impossible. Vaping will destroy your nicotine tolerance. I have smoked 2 packs of cigarettes in a day while camping with my other friend who is an absolute animal with nicotine like I am. So if you want to keep it reasonable, keep the usage low. If it starts getting out of hand don’t smoke a pack a day, move to the vape, it’ll improve your health dramatically. 

Don’t use disposable vapes, they’ve been found to contain unsafe amounts of heavy metals by many studies. Use a refillable vape and buy a regulated vape juice product that I mentioned earlier. 

Hope this helped clarify I Know I tend to over explain so if you want a more clear answer let me know and I’ll try to keep it short and sweet. 



Topic's author
#34
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Platypi
One more thing. Studies have shown that even avid smokers can fully recover lung health in a matter of years if they stop smoking before 42. Granted this is if you don’t already develop lunch cancer which statistically isn’t very likely. So even if you do go off the rails with cigarettes don’t think it’s all over. Do deep breathing exercises, regularly cough as violently as possibly. I know that sounds stupid but coughing can really help clear some shit out of your lungs. Get off the cigs if you get too comfortable smoking them and you’ll recover that full length capacity pretty quickly especially if you are young. 
Topic's author
#35
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Platypi
Cigars and pipes are the safest way of smoking tobacco, especially if you’re not inhaling the smoke. Some of them taste amazing I love enjoying a cigar on the back porch or a pipe full of sweet Virginia tobacco. Inhaling the plant is really where the problems begin.
#36
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Mps1213
Cigars and pipes are the safest way of smoking tobacco.
Safer than what?

For sure the effects of smoking are variable relative to individual smoking behaviour.

Nonetheless some level of inhalation is unavoidable, and tobaccos addictive constituents are still an issue.

Your enjoyment is simply an illusive reaction to a chemical stimulant.... Which by it's very nature is unsafe to a degree.

But so is driving a car.

Enjoy.
#37
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
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.
Your personal experience with the drug and its effects on cognitive functions is very insightful. Our understanding of our own existence and reality is dependent on our consciousness or cognitive abilities. When a drug overly stimulates these functions, it can increase our awareness of reality, making the experience feel hyper-real even though the surroundings are the same. One example of this is an increase in spatial awareness where one can be aware of many things at once. When I took a small dose of psilocybin mushrooms, you experienced an increase in peripheral vision and noticed patterns and features of images more easily. The heightened connection with reality can feel emotional and spiritual, which may explain why some users, who are unfamiliar with the science or have a religious background, may associate the experience with a religious one. Overall, this provides clear insights into the functions that these drugs can induce and why they have been spiritually correlated by many people.
#38
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
I'm interested in learning more about microdosing cognition-enhancing drugs, which can potentially promote long-term or permanent improvements in cognitive abilities such as memory, focus, and awareness. Jordan Peterson has discussed how low-dose psilocybin mushrooms have been found to increase cognitive abilities by approximately 1 standard deviation. I would like to know more about the potential benefits and drawbacks of microdosing for long-term benefit and improved cognitive abilities.
Topic's author
#39
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@zedvictor4
“For sure the effects of smoking are variable relative to individual smoking behavior.” 

This is true in some sense but also not. Nicotine will raise your blood pressure no matter how it is ingested. Benzene will always be released when tobacco is lit on fire. There a certain health risks that are unavoidable no matter how nicotine is consumed. However not inhaling the drug deep into your lungs will prevent the really detrimental health effects. Making just puffing on the smoke and holding it in your mouth safer than deep inhalation. 
Topic's author
#40
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
There haven’t been any convincing studies about improving cognitive ability long terms with microdosing psychedelics. Self reported studies with thousands of people haven’t shown any significant medical benefit with using the drugs in this way. 

One of the problems is that there isn’t a standard dosage for microdosing. It ranges widely. However this is something I try to point out with all drugs. Even though there may not be a concrete medical application for something doesn’t mean it can’t improve someone’s quality of life. If someone is microdosing LSD 3-4 times a week and they’re in a better mood, feel more creative, etc. then it will be inherently beneficial for them to keep doing so. That doesn’t mean it would be a reliable treatment for depression or any illness, but if it makes someone feel better then that will help them. 

I also haven’t seen any serious side effects from microdosing, again no one has a real definition of what that is, but if you taking small sun psychedelic doses I haven’t seen anything to be worried about. I have micro doses a few times and it is a nice feeling but not something I enjoy more than an opioid for example. So to me microdosing isn’t something that will be a medical break through or anything, just something that helps people get through the week like caffeine or any other drug is. 
Topic's author
#41
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
Microdosing kind of lies on the fringes of neuroscience and psychopharmacology and I’m not a fan of that type of stuff most of the time. Usually because there’s always big claims made with little evidence, like it treats OCD, ADHD, improves cognitive ability etc. it may help someone with OCD function better and that’s ok but that does necessarily mean it’ll be effective as a large scale treatment. Also just because some feels like their cognitive function is increased doesn’t necessarily mean they are. 

If you don’t mind, could you attempt to find the study Jordan was talking about? I’d like to see a study with those conclusions, not saying it doesn’t exist, just curious if you can find it. I’d like to see how it was conducted. 
Topic's author
#42
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
Give this study a read. 

It’s pretty long. But it’s clear that there is not many clear benefits across the board for psilocin microdosing, compared to placebo. 

#43
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
I couldn't recall the name of the research, but after searching the results and studies these were the most probable to be what I was referring to.
  1. Dr. Roland Griffiths has conducted multiple studies on psilocybin, but the specific study where he found that psilocybin can improve cognitive functions by 1 standard deviation was conducted at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland. The study was published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology in 2006, and it was titled "Psilocybin can occasion mystical-type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance".
  2. Researchers at Imperial College London and published in the journal Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews in 2016 is called "Psychedelics and cognitive function: A systematic review." The study analyzed data from 29 studies that investigated the effects of psychedelic drugs on cognitive functions, including studies on psilocybin.
#44
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
After reviewing the experiment's particulars and its findings, I am convinced that it was a rigorous investigation that refutes any claims of cognitive function benefits. Though I would appreciate your thoughts on the two studies I shared with you.
Topic's author
#45
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
I’m not seeing where the Rolland study says anything about increased cognitive function. I am familiar with that study but haven’t read it in it’s entirety in a long time. I’ll give it another read soon.

If you ever want to access journal articles that are pay walled, use a website called sci-hub you can access them for free. Doesn’t work well on A phone in my experience.

The main reason I’m skeptical of a lot of psychedelic stuff, is because most studies have shown that There isn’t much certainty as to exactly how some of the claims these people make are achieved. That doesn’t necessarily mean they are wrong. For example one of them was that it decreases the default mode network activity and that caused the users to be able to become less depressed and have less rumination. However other studies have shown the default mode network doesn’t play as big of a role in depression and anxiety as once thought. There is variability in the DMN and people with both under active and over active DMNs can have depression and anxiety.

the studies for a few mental disorders are very promising. However the same thing is happening with psychedelics as is happening with cannabis. The users feel the medical benefits are needed to excuse their use of the drug so they begin making a lot of claims that aren’t backed up by the data. Most studies outside of MDD and PTSD, the benefits and results are barely different than placebo. So it is important to make people realize that just because you do go on some websites that claim things about these drugs doesn’t mean they’re at all true or backed by evidence. 

That also doesn’t necessarily mean the claims are completely false, because like I said if someone’s week is better and they’re enjoying their days more while under the influence of the drug, they will likely be seeing other benefits. that isn’t the same thing as a drug being useful for treating disorders at population wide scales. It just means that people enjoy using drugs that help them get through the day. 

Does that make sense? 

Topic's author
#46
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
I could not find the second study would you mind providing a link? 
Topic's author
#47
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
for actual input on the mystical experience study that isn't surprising at all. Given what we know about where these serotonin receptors are located in the brain. When those parts of the brain are hyper active it increases the feeling of importance and emotion attached to the experience. So it isn't surprising. However, it can be very important, especially if the experience helps people overcome their fear of death or over come depression. That perceived significance can be very important for people in certain situations. So just because it is expected doesn't mean it isn't very important and needed.  
#48
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
It's strange, I couldn't find the second one either. Here's a link to another study by the same group that focuses on improved cognitive functions. I haven't had a chance to review it yet, but I intend to do so.
Topic's author
#49
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
I’ll be honest man, those articles are the ones I’m talking about when I say there’s this weird “holier than thou” type attitude. I’ll give examples. 

“Researchers have uncovered the first scientific evidence of a 'higher' state of consciousness.” 
 A change in consciousness is not a ‘higher’ state of consciousness. They’d never say this about a drug like heroin or Methamphetamine even though their parameters for it are the same. The parameters of a high consciousness are supposedly just “In the study, neuroscientists observed a sustained increase in the diversity of brain signals of people under the influence of psychedelic drugs, compared with when they were in a normal ‘awake and aware’ state.” 

That is all drugs’ effect on the brain… which is why people take them.

“This finding shows that the brain-on-psychedelics behaves very differently from normal,” 

Well of course it is, that’s the point of taking the drugs. That isn’t new information, it’s no some surprise. A high dose of MDMA also makes the behave much differently than normal. They’re not claiming that drug causes the brain to exhibit a highe level of consciousness. 

My pet peeve with this type of stuff is why even add all of this flowery stuff to it? Why not just talk about what exactly the brain is doing and say why it can be beneficial? It is true that the brain has more connectivity under the influence of psychedelics, but that doesn’t mean it needs to be presented in a way that makes it seem like these drugs are somehow more special than other drugs. They have their place in medicine, but this type of coverage has no place in science. If they’re trying to get more readers by noting more sensational with their coverage that is fine, but it just annoying because most of what they’re saying is applicable to most drugs, but they would never speak about other drugs in that way.  

The reason I’m picking it apart is because this article presents nothing we don’t already know. they didn’t reveal any new information that helps us better understand the drugs mechanism. All it did was spread weird “psychedelics are the key to a higher level of consciousness” type stuff. That is useless to anyone who isn’t trying to make themselves feel better about using the drug in my opinion.

I could be wrong and I could be being too close minded on the topic, if you think so please let me know! I’ll never get upset or annoyed if you see it differently. 

#50
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Critical-Tim
What are your views on Yin and Yang.

For every effect the is a necessary opposite effect.

With regard to the positive/negative properties of nicotine and psilocybin, and how they relate or react to/with the positive/negative properties of the human condition.
#51
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
I find your argument to be logical and convincing. Your experience and research with the drugs, as well as personal usage, is essential to fully comprehend the topic. I believe that a combination of knowledge and experience is required to gain a comprehensive understanding of something. Additionally, I agree with your observation that many individuals viewing this research tend to view it through a supernatural lens, even though they are scientists. It appears to me that the researchers conducting these experiments may be influenced by religious beliefs in supernatural means, leading them to opt for the easiest and most straightforward explanation, rather than delving into the complex science behind it. However, I am interested in hearing your thoughts on why people are not approaching this topic with the necessary scientific mindset to fully understand the science behind it.
#52
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't think the concept of Yin and Yang can be applied to individual things within the universe. For example, we don't apply it to water, since it is well-known that water does much more good than harm, and so there is not an equal positive and negative. People tried to apply this to people's lives with the concept of Karma, which suggests that what goes around comes around, with an equal state of positive and negative. However, this explanation fails to account for why some people's lives are obviously much worse than others, leading to the development of the less scientific aspect of Karma. Such as in all your lives collectively there is an equal positive and negative.

As far as Yin and Yang is concerned, it does better than Karma since it applies to the universe as a whole, suggesting that all good in the universe is equal to all bad. However, I cannot comprehend the entire universe, so I cannot present any evidence or claim that there is an equal amount of good and bad in the universe as a whole. Moreover, what a person defines as good and bad is subjective.

Regarding the drugs, I do not believe that Yin and Yang applies to independent things in the universe such as drugs. I believe that some drugs are less beneficial than others, just as soda is less beneficial than water. Therefore, we need to do more scientific research or acknowledge the research that's already been done to determine how we can use the available resources better.
#53
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Critical-Tim
My understanding of the concept, is that everything has balanced effects and properties.

Rather than specific things having specific opposites.

Though one could say water or no water, which is effectively wet and dry or flood and drought.

Nonetheless, isn't the basis of the concept just an awareness that EVERYTING is balanced unless unbalanced.

So pure H2O is balanced, and therefore can be unbalanced.

And therefore the human mass is also balanced unless unbalanced....With specific regard to the use of drugs such as nicotine and psilocybin.

My understanding of karma is not the same....Karma implies universal consequences rather than universal harmony.

Which is not to say that there are not consequences to both harmony and disharmony. 
#54
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@zedvictor4
Certain things possess more positive properties than negative ones. For example, air has enabled the survival of countless individuals, far outnumbering the cases where it has caused harm through toxicity. The same can be said for water.

I previously had a flawed understanding of karma, but now I have gained a much clearer comprehension of this concept, though my point remains the same.
Topic's author
#55
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
I believe the main reason people aren’t viewing this scientifically is because they don’t understand how science works. It’s like when someone begins ranting and raving about astrology acting like it’s a scientific topic. People just want to be involved with something they feel is ground breaking or ahead of the curve and right now that trend is that psychedelics are spiritual medicine. 

They also tend to abuse the fact they’ve been used as thousands of years as a way of excusing their liking of the drug. I also think that’s a big role, their entire lives they’ve been told how bad drugs are. Now these people enjoy psychedelics and have to coke up some absurd excuse for their use of drugs. 
Topic's author
#56
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
The main issue seems to be that people don’t realize science must be taken one small step at a time. So when someone does psychedelics and they feel like they’re connecting to the spirits and shit, they don’t stop and say “what is the evidence for this?” Or “how do I know what I’m feeling really means anything” instead they immediately jump to assuming it is true then coming up with theories about what their assumption means. Even if that assumption has no evidence to support it.

I think the other reason is like I said they have to come up with some excuse to make their drug use seem reasonable to everyone and themselves. They’re not comfortable acknowledging they enjoy drugs, and would enjoy others. So they have separate the substances from being drugs into something else. 
#57
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
I find the given explanations to be reasonable, acknowledging that there may be other logical perspectives on the matter. Ultimately, the researchers involved in such cases struggle to separate their personal opinions from their scientific research, which undermines their competence in conducting objective and unbiased studies.
Topic's author
#58
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
That has been a huge problem with all drugs. Especially drugs like Methamphetamine and heroin. There is a lot of just false information about those two drugs in particular. Drugs like ‘krokadil’ which isn’t a real drug, have also cause reporting from journalists on the topic just horrible and it spreads ignorance that leads to people dying and being out in prison. 
Topic's author
#59
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@AustinL0926
Care to learn anything about any drug? 
#60
AustinL0926
AustinL0926's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 2,185
3
5
9
AustinL0926's avatar
AustinL0926
3
5
9
-->
@Mps1213
Sure. Do you believe that traditionally illegal drugs (e.g. cocaine), if legalized, should be taxed relative to their expected harm on society?