Drug education with pharmacology and toxicology.

Author: Mps1213

Posts

Total: 80
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@AustinL0926
No, I think they should be taxed at a flat rate. There’s no evidence to assume that any drug will do more harm than tobacco or alcohol. I don’t think there is compelling evidence to 1: even show that the drugs you mention are more harmful to society than just about any other drug you can name. And 2: any reason people should have to pay more tax simply because they enjoy a drug other people consider too harmful. 
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@AustinL0926
Also what exactly would the metrics be for “more harmful?” 

If you think that society is harmed more by certain drugs, what would your evidence be to support that claim? 
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@AustinL0926
Do you have any evidence to support that some drugs are more harmful than others to society? Or were you making the arguments just to ask hypothetically? 
AustinL0926
AustinL0926's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 2,185
3
5
9
AustinL0926's avatar
AustinL0926
3
5
9
-->
@Mps1213
Sorry, I was busy all day yesterday. Yea, I do have some evidence - I'll share it once I get a chance (i.e. when my teacher isn't paying attention).
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@AustinL0926
Let’s start by defining the definition of ‘more harmful’ 

And what drugs you think are more harmful, then cite your evidence for it. 
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
I’m extremely curious as to what your evidence will be. I enjoy debating with you, so I’m looking forward to it. 

Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
What other drugs are you curious about man? Any drugs you want to try that you’d like to know more about? 
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
I didn't anticipate the abundance of answers I would find in one place, and I am pleasantly surprised by the wealth of information provided. I hadn't kept a list of questions, so I wasn't fully prepared for the extensive responses I received. While I'm still eager to explore new topics, I'm unsure of what specific questions to ask next.

Initially, I was interested in understanding the cognitive functions of drugs, their subjective effects on individuals, the mechanisms behind addiction, potential medicinal applications, and the broader topic of drug legalization. However, I believe you have already addressed these inquiries thoroughly. Therefore, I'm curious if there's any additional information or areas of knowledge you think I should be aware of based on the subjects we have discussed so far. Furthermore, I would be intrigued to learn about some of the most compelling and substantiated studies you have come across on these topics.
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
Thanks for the kind words. 

One of the more interesting studies I’ve come across recently is about the self administration of heroin, cocaine, and a mixture of heroin and cocaine in rats. There is a common misconception that dopamine release is powers addiction, this study inadvertently disproved that hypothesis. This was a very well done study that impressed me with its thoroughness. They took readings of rat brains after administering each of these drugs and saw that the release and inhibited re-uptake of dopamine was the highest among the mixture of heroin and cocaine.

This should be obvious considering their pharmacological properties. Heroin causes a pretty significant amount of dopamine to be released from the dopaminergic host cells. It goes onto the receptor and can stay there for a while due to the agonization of the mu-opioid receptor. Cocaine doesn’t release quite as much dopamine, instead it blocks the transport of dopamine. This will cause the dopamine to stay on the receptor longer, but cocaine is very short lived. In my experience it lasts no more than 30 minutes, sometimes less. 

In this study it showed that rats self administered cocaine far more often than both the mixture and heroin alone. If dopamine was what powered compulsive self administration it should’ve been the heroin and cocaine mixture that was redosed more often. While it is fairly obvious the reason this occurs is because cocaine doesn’t last as long as heroin, it was still very interesting to see that cocaine was self administered far more often. 

Then there is another study I’d like to mention, we can discuss both in further detail if that’s what you’d like to do. This one is more interesting to people who aren’t deeply interested in pharmacology. There is a drug called Ibogaine. It’s a naturally occurring substance and one of the most complex molecules on earth. It’s so complex that we still have a difficult time synthesizing it on a commercial level. Ibogaine has an incredibly complex Pharmacology. It is an NMDA receptor antagonist like Ketamine, which as been used to treat depression. It is an SSRI which has also been used to treat depression. It is an alpha-3 beta-4 nicotinic choline receptor agonist, which has been shows to help people quit smoking and is one of the effects of the anti-depressant Wellbutrin. It is also a 5-ht2a receptor agonist which has been shown to help with addiction and depression as well that’s what LSD and psilocybin do. It is a dopamine re-uptake inhibitor which is also a mechanism for treating depression. 

The two most impressive studies done with this drug have shown an incredible efficacy for treating opioid addiction. This is what most people know Ibogaine for. But that is just the tip of the iceberg with this drug. It also releases a substance called GDNF, Glial derived neurotrophic factor. This substance has been shown to be one of the only things discovered that rebuilds dopaminergic neurons. Why is that important? Well that is what Parkinson’s is, Parkinson’s destroys these neurons. So it is very possible that ibogaine could be a treatment for Parkinson’s. The best, or worst depending on who you’re asking, part about ibogaine is that it isn’t potent. It has actually been used medicinally in Europe before to treat some mental illnesses, in low doses. It is cardio toxic , so these large flood doses people take when they go overseas to help treat their addiction quickly, can be dangerous. It seems like if we would remove this substance from schedule 1 in the US and begin doing human trials on its medical abilities something very useful could enter our medicine cabinets to treat a lot of things. 
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
The studies on rats choosing cocaine over other options provide fascinating insights into addiction and its relation to dopamine. I'm eager to delve deeper into the mechanisms behind the rats' preference for cocaine and how it challenges our previous understanding of addiction primarily driven by dopamine. Furthermore, I'm curious about the implications of these findings and what they might suggest for future research on addiction.
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
The only reason rats self administer it more often is simple because cocaine doesn’t last as long. So the implications this has is that drugs with a longer duration will require for less compulsive re dosing, which could lead to less addiction or dependence potential. That’s why many drugs today like Adderall and methylphenidate are prescribed in extended release formulas. The drug lasts longer, doesn’t need to be taken as much, and therefore theoretically will lower addiction potential. Of course there are downsides to XR formulas as well. With things like amphetamines it can suppress appetite for longer which can be good if someone is trying to lose weight, or can be unhealthy. So there good and bad to XR. 
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
Why don't the rats choose the cocaine-heroin combination that lasts longer, releases more dopamine, and requires less frequent administration? Could this indicate that their addiction is not solely driven by the state of being high, but rather by the act of getting high, which is why they prefer the shorter-lasting option with ups and downs?
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
There’s no concrete evidence to support that it’s the act of getting high they’re after. It seems to all be relevant to the duration of the drug. They did self administer the mixture, they just compulsively re-administered the cocaine more. This is most likely because the duration of cocaine is significantly shorter. By significantly I mean that cocaine usually lasts about 30 minutes and heroin lasts 3-4 hours. So even when cocaine is combined heroin, the effects of feeling high would still be lingering. 

This isn’t necessarily meaning that cocaine is more addictive, studies I mentioned earlier about rats choosing attractive alternatives over cocaine are still valid even in this setting. This study just wasn’t trying to determine that, the only option these rats had was to use drugs, this study was specifically designed to see the amount of re-administration between these three options. The shortest lasting drug was the most self administered which isn’t surprising. 






















Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
I guess the question is, was the rate of administration inversely proportional to its length of effect?
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
Ah I see, my bad.

So I I wish I could put pictures here so you can see the graph. They used three different doses. Each of them proportional to the potency of the drug, so the cocaine doses are much much higher than the heroin doses. The heroin doses are 1.1ng, 2.3ng, and 4.5ng per infusion. The cocaine doses are 41.6nc, 83.2ng, and 166.4ng. The cocaine/heroin mixture are those same doses just combined for each level. 

The cocaine alone at the highest dose was self administered an average of 19 times over 6 sessions. The sessions were 60 minutes long for each dose. 

The average number of times heroin was self administered at the highest dose was around 9. The average for that same metric with the combination was about 5. 

This isn’t surprising as heroin lasts much longer. Depending on dose it can be anywhere from 2-6 hours of feeling the effects. I’m sure the rats tolerance began to grow as well. So in terms of proportionality cocaine was self administered on average  2x more than heroin and 4 tomes as much as the combination. Which shows dopamine isn’t the driving mechanism for compulsive redosing and it is more complicated of an issue than that. It has many variables, dopamine certainly being one of them. So a test I would like to see if doing this same thing but with fentanyl compared as well. Because fentanyl also has a pretty short duration. I also want to make clear this does not prove in anyway cocaine is more addictive than heroin or vice versa. It just shows that when given no other option besides self administering drugs, the shorter acting drug will be administered more often. 

52 days later

Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@FishChaser
What do you want to know about drugs? We can have the conversation here. I don’t really want to recommend any drugs, but I can paint a very clear picture of all of them and allow you to chose what you’d like to try 

32 days later

Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
I recently found some interesting new information since we last spoke, and I wanted to ask you about your thoughts. My question is how psilocybin relates to one's subconscious and conscious mind. It seemed to me that the conscious self is less abstract and more robotic than the subconscious. If I accept that it's true then I can say that the subconscious is more of what conscious is in relation to robotic. I can then say robotic is always correct and not able to interpret conscious is often correct and able to interpret, Then I presume the subconscious is much greater at interpreting but also less accurate than the conscious mind. this leads me to believe that the subconscious is the first step to understanding the world as it grabs the deeper abstract ideas and presents them to the conscious mind which can then more accurately validate or invalidate the presumptions that could not have been gathered by the conscious mind. I also noticed that psilocybin seems to make people see the world more broadly people can see shapes clearer yet in the research you presented me last time you demonstrated how psilocybin does not increase once accuracy but actually slightly decreases it. I then recalled this and considered the possibility that understanding abstract concepts is a trait of the subconscious mind. It finally led me to believe that possibly psilocybin is shifting the balance of the mind to become more subconsciously open as it would result in a greater error but greater ability to interpret and recognize patterns which seems to be a consistent characteristic of psilocybin users. After this revelation I started researching to consider whether this is indeed in alignment with research and here's what I found but I would love to hear your thoughts.

Some researchers have suggested that psilocybin may enhance access to subconscious or unconscious processes, such as memories, emotions, and creativity³⁵. Psilocybin may also reduce the activity of the default mode network (DMN), a brain system that is involved in self-referential thinking and mind wandering²⁵. The DMN is thought to act as a filter or gatekeeper for information that reaches conscious awareness, and by weakening its influence, psilocybin may allow more novel and diverse information to enter consciousness²⁵.

Therefore, one possible way to think about psilocybin's effect on the subconscious is that it may lower the threshold for subconscious information to become conscious, or increase the bandwidth of communication between the subconscious and conscious levels of the mind. This may explain why some people report having insights, revelations, or epiphanies while under the influence of psilocybin²⁴.

Cited by the following:
Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
You have entered one of the most debated and controversial fields of psychedelic science without knowing it lol. To start, I do agree psychedelics change your consciousness, just as every other drug does.. It just depends on what you define subconscious as, if you’re going to say it helps us access it. However, the reason this is controversial is generally because it isn’t consistently reproduced. I don’t like the way this article is framed, or the fact they don’t have the study linked, but this is just a quick example. This article talks about a study showing it doesn’t help improve cognition, memory, or creativity.
I think this is a classic case of people imposing their own intentions upon a drug experience., I may have pointed this out in the past, but we often under estimate the power of our own ideas on these experiences. If someone believes that psilocybin will cause them to be more creative, it will likely do that. Mainly because they feel like it will, and because theyre likely taking before engaging in creative activities. That’s going to have a huge effect on the experience. That’s what set and setting is, that’s also what the placebo effect is. 

Now to the super controversial aspect. The DMN. The reason this is so controversial is because many companies or people trying to tout the medical benefits of these drugs, bank a lot of their argument on this. However, far too little is known about the DMN in the first place. They say over active DMN is a cause of depression.(1) they say psilocybin lessens it’s activity. (2) However, neither of those things are completely true. We have also found under active DMNs in people with MDD (3) and then, of course, studies have also shown psilocybin increases DMN or has no effect on it at all. Just so you won’t have to read through a 48 page paper I’ll quote the part. 
“The strengthening of DMN-mediated counterfactual imaginings with psychedelics is consistent with recent work involving lysergic acid diethylamide, in which dynamic causal modelling established increased effective connectivity between posterior portions of the DMN and associated thalamus”. the paper is titled “ On the Varieties of Conscious Experiences: Altered Beliefs Under Psychedelics (ALBUS)”
Adam Safron

So basically what I’m saying is that the DMN is a big talking point for businesses and companies trying to pound the medical benefits. They bring it up likely knowing not many people know enough or research the topic enough to counter it. It may be true that psychedelics regularly decrease DMN activity, it may also be true most people with depression have an overactive DMN. However, right now we. Don’t know enough about either of those problems to make a concrete or certain claim about either. It’s a pretty controversial topic in psychedelic science rn because these people tend to become angry or shout people down when these counter arguments are brought up. 


Mps1213
Mps1213's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 169
0
3
7
Mps1213's avatar
Mps1213
0
3
7
-->
@Critical-Tim
That was a real basic breakdown of the problems with that hypothesis, I didn’t proofread so If something isn’t clear ask about it.
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mps1213
It seems the research suggests it may be probable, but we can't know for certain without further research. Thank you for your insight. I had this idea the other day as it dawned on me that there seemed to be a correlation between the mind's balance of the subconscious and conscious, which after fully considering made sense theoretically. As I understand the subconscious is able to consider more abstract processes and patterns in reality than the conscious, yet it is more erroneous as a result, whereas the conscious is more logical and concise but lacks the level of abstractness of the subconscious. This to me seems correct as the two parts of the mind work together to first generate thoughts in the mind abstractly through the subconscious and then with the limited number of generated scenarios the conscious can logically validate the few options.