PDA

View Full Version : What Would Happen If I Ingested 1 Pound of LSD?


plnnr
08-18-2004, 01:34 PM
I was re-reading Albert Hoffman's account of his early LSD experiments in his book, My Problem Child . He got the first dose by unknowinigly getting a little bit on his finger and then touching his lip. Result:

HELLO THERE

It apparently made the bicycle ride home that day a little more interesting than usual.

The amount of the substance that it takes to trigger a reaction is very, very small - the amounts are measured in micrograms.

What would happen if, by some freak of...well, freaks...I was to ingest a pound of the stuff? Let's say I'm walking backstage at the first concert that The All-New Grateful Dead Touring Band and Showing, Featuring the Resurrected Jerry Garcia is playing on the moon, and I'm thirsty. There's some orange juice - and I love orange juice. I proceed to drink a gallon of the stuff, not knowing that the ghosts of Albert Hoffman, Timothy Leary, Ken Kesey, and Aldous Huxley, and the very much still alive Owsley Stanely have all tweaked the juice so that there's now the equivalent of 1 pound of LSD in it. I also have to assume that I'll just ignore the fact that the bottle of orange juice is positively glowing.

Would my body absorb as much as it could tolerate and excrete the rest? Would I care? How much could my body tolerate?

Q.E.D.
08-18-2004, 01:47 PM
You'd probably die. In fact, you'd almost certainly die. According to this MSDS (http://erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_data_sheet.shtml), the intravenous rat LD50 is 50 mg/kg. Even allowing that oral ingestion likely has a higher tolerated dose, ingesting a pound of the stuff exceeds that by several orders of magnitude.

Jurph
08-18-2004, 01:50 PM
I suspect that unless you are a very large person, you'll die. LD50 stands for "Lethal Dose, 50% of the population." You determine it by administering a controlled dosage (proportional to each animal's mass) of the chemical in question to a population of animals and recording at what dosage half of them are dead from overdose.

The LD50 for LSD-25 is reported as, variously:
- 46, 16.5, .3 (http://maps.org/forum/2000/msg00181.html) milligrams per kilogram of mass (mice, rabbits, rats, respectively)
- The same values (http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/lsd/child2.htm), cited by Abbie Hoffman himself with anecdotes
- 12,000 ug/kg (http://erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_dose.shtml) for humans :eek: which I doubt was ever verified experimentally.

Nonetheless, I suspect that a shot-glass of pure LSD would be more than enough to kill you. If the Erowid estimate is even remotely close, and you weigh 100kg, then you would have a fifty-fifty chance of dying after ingesting 1.2 grams of the pure liquid.

clold
08-18-2004, 01:56 PM
Only LSD fatality I can find: http://erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_history4.shtml

And that wasn't even 300mg.

chorpler
08-18-2004, 02:20 PM
Only LSD fatality I can find: http://erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_history4.shtml

And that wasn't even 300mg.

Of course, that page points out that it may not have been the LSD that killed the elephant; it might have been the 2800mg of Thorazine or the "unspecified quantity of pentobarbital sodium [injected] directly into a vein." Alas, poor Tusko...

BobLibDem
08-18-2004, 02:25 PM
I can't vouch for the lethal dose but suppose the previous posters are right. I just am curious to know what the street value of a whole pound of LSD would be. If this is a hijack, my apologies but I am rather curious.

Rufus Xavier
08-18-2004, 02:42 PM
cited by Abbie Hoffman himself with anecdotes


You mean Albert, of course. I'm sure Abbie came close but never quite discovered the lethal dose (For humans) of LSD.

If a 'hit' of LSD is about 200 micrograms, then a pound is what? 2.27 million hits? I think it took Jerry Garcia almost 5 years to consume that much! ;)

Slithy Tove
08-18-2004, 02:43 PM
So what would the pharmacokinetics of a lethal dose be? Aside from the impaired sensory centers in the brain, does LSD have side effects that would cause renal railure, heart attack, etc.? Or would your brain be so freaked out it would be unable to maintain your body's systems?

Rufus Xavier
08-18-2004, 02:46 PM
I can't vouch for the lethal dose but suppose the previous posters are right. I just am curious to know what the street value of a whole pound of LSD would be. If this is a hijack, my apologies but I am rather curious.

If my previous math is correct, and the street value of LSD is about $8 a hit, a pound would have a street value of 18.181 million $US. I doubt anyone would waste that much on plnnr's OJ. :)

Q.E.D.
08-18-2004, 02:50 PM
So what would the pharmacokinetics of a lethal dose be? Aside from the impaired sensory centers in the brain, does LSD have side effects that would cause renal railure, heart attack, etc.? Or would your brain be so freaked out it would be unable to maintain your body's systems?
From the MSDS I linked to:
STUDIES INDICATE THAT DEATH IN ANIMALS IS DUE TO RESPIRATORY FAILURE OR HYPERTHERMIA.

vetbridge
08-18-2004, 02:57 PM
I suspect that unless you are a very large person, you'll die.

I would agree as long as we define "very large" as being smaller than the moon but larger than a blue whale. ;)

plnnr
08-18-2004, 04:02 PM
So what would the pharmacokinetics of a lethal dose be? Aside from the impaired sensory centers in the brain, does LSD have side effects that would cause renal railure, heart attack, etc.? Or would your brain be so freaked out it would be unable to maintain your body's systems?

That was the real gist of my quesiton - I knew that I'd probably die (or at least wish that I had), but I was more curious about the physical repercussions.

Respiratory failure and hyperthermia are also the results of ingesting too much Ecstasy (IIRC - I've never tried it, but seem to remember reading as much). I supppose they must act in a somewhat similar fashion.

Derleth
08-18-2004, 04:47 PM
I would agree as long as we define "very large" as being smaller than the moon but larger than a blue whale. ;)Very large: adj.: That's no moon!

:D

Yllaria
08-18-2004, 05:06 PM
As a comparison, I'm guessing that ingesting a pound of pure salt would kill you, too.

BrainGlutton
08-18-2004, 06:17 PM
I have no cite on this, but a highly educated and sophisticated acidhead once told me that LSD works by dissolving one of the neurotransmitter chemicals in the brain (forget which one -- there are more than a hundred neurotransmitters, I think). The "trip" is the process by which your brain adjusts itself, over several hours, to work without that neurotransmitter. Then, over the course of about a week, your brain produces enough of the missing neurotransmitter to bring it back up to a normal level. Therefore:

1. It's really impossible to trip more than once a week. If you drop acid the day after a trip, it will have no effect on you. The crucial neurotransmitter is already gone.

2. A large amount of LSD won't get you any higher than a small amount. All you need is just enough to completely dissolve the neurotransmitter; more is a waste, just a way of enriching your urine.

I have never heard this from any other source and have no idea if it's true.

Mr. Blue Sky
08-18-2004, 06:51 PM
What Would Happen If I Ingested 1 Pound of LSD?

You'd greenlight every Kevin Costner movie.

dougie_monty
08-18-2004, 07:00 PM
I never touched the stuff, but there's a girl I went to high school with in the Sixities, whose younger brother took it. (He died in 1998 at the age of 44.) He suffered from bad trips. :(
Remember the "Blueboy" episode of Dragnet in 1967?
Early in the episode Friday says "LSD is so potent that a single kilo of the stuff--2.2 pounds--could turn every person into L. A. County into a total psychotic. The [1966] population of the county: seven million people."
What's seven million--or rather, 14 million plus--times worse than being a total psychotic?
Police Chemist Ray Murray (Olan Soule) tells Friday and Gannon--who don't have any LSD laws to enforce yet--"From the number of cases [of LSD users] coming in here they'd better give you people something to work with damn soon."

Marley23
08-18-2004, 07:06 PM
Isn't LSD normally a liquid? What would a pound of it be, a frozen block?

Johanna
08-18-2004, 07:10 PM
American Abbie Hoffman (of Chicago 7 fame) spelled his last name Hoffman.

Swiss Albert Hofmann (of LSD fame) spells his last name Hofmann.

Just wanted to clear that up. The other Hoffman in the Chicago 7 trial was the judge, Julius Hoffman, who according to Abbie Hoffman looked and sounded like Mr. Magoo. Abbie taunted him in Yiddish.

Morbo
08-18-2004, 07:15 PM
1. It's really impossible to trip more than once a week. If you drop acid the day after a trip, it will have no effect on you. The crucial neurotransmitter is already gone.

I can tell you from personal experience* that it's more like 48 hours. So while it's true the next day it won't work, the day after that it will. Certainly not a week.

2. A large amount of LSD won't get you any higher than a small amount. All you need is just enough to completely dissolve the neurotransmitter; more is a waste, just a way of enriching your urine.

Again I can attest that if you're coming down and you take another drop, you're back up again. IOW, if you space out (heh) a larger amount it will certainly get you higher.

Remember the "Blueboy" episode of Dragnet in 1967?

Beyond question the most hilarious dipiction of drugs ever put to film. And I've seen Reefer Madness.


*I wouldn't say I'm proud of my younger days, but I don't regret them either, if that makes sense.

mangeorge
08-18-2004, 07:18 PM
Isn't LSD normally a liquid? What would a pound of it be, a frozen block?
"A pint's a pound, the world around".
:)
Peace,
mangeorge

rfgdxm
08-18-2004, 07:49 PM
Given that I have 2 websites devoted to a specific psychedelic drug, Cecil ought to be paying me to post here with questions like this being asked. ;) The simple answer is that if you took a pound of LSD, if it didn't kill you, you are just too stupid to live. Why would any human who deserved to live munch down a pound of a drug where the usual dose was in the microgram range?

mangeorge
08-18-2004, 08:16 PM
Given that I have 2 websites devoted to a specific psychedelic drug, Cecil ought to be paying me to post here with questions like this being asked. ;) The simple answer is that if you took a pound of LSD, if it didn't kill you, you are just too stupid to live. Why would any human who deserved to live munch down a pound of a drug where the usual dose was in the microgram range?
We didn't read about the OJ, did we. ;)

SnakeSpirit
08-18-2004, 08:29 PM
I can't vouch for the lethal dose but suppose the previous posters are right. I just am curious to know what the street value of a whole pound of LSD would be. If this is a hijack, my apologies but I am rather curious.
You got a particular reason for asking that, friend... :D ????
You wouldn't be hiding anything from us now, would you??

SnakeSpirit
08-18-2004, 08:39 PM
Isn't LSD normally a liquid? What would a pound of it be, a frozen block?
No. Pure LSD is solid at room temperature. It is dissolved in a liquid to assist in applying the proper dosage (a drop) to the paper used to dispense the drug by ingestion.
It can also be mixed with gelatin, which is then solidified in sheets marked for separation into individual doses.

SnakeSpirit
08-18-2004, 08:45 PM
Again I can attest that if you're coming down and you take another drop, you're back up again. IOW, if you space out (heh) a larger amount it will certainly get you higher.

I think that depends on the dosage of the original dose. Perhaps with a dose small enough to not dissolve all of the neurotransmitter this would be true, but with a dose sufficiently large, if you drop again just as you're coming down, you will not go on another trip, you'll just remain in that "coming-down plateau."


..^

ccwaterback
08-18-2004, 09:48 PM
You would experience flashing lights, like photographer's flash bulbs popping.

Then you would see images of Curly from the Three Stooges doing is craziest antics.

http://members.aol.com/mike6099/sounds/curly.wav

Newspaper taxis would appear on the shore, waiting to take you awaYYY YYY .

You would climb in the back with your head in the clouds and be gone ... to my place.

When the men on the chessboard get up and tell you where to go, tell 'em a hookah smoking caterpillar has given you the call.

Then all the sights and sounds around you would begin too swirl around your head as if going down a drain in your mind.

You would hear Howard Cosell shouting, "Down goes Frazier! Down goes Frazier!".

Then nothingness, nothing to see but pure white light, nothing to hear but the eternal dial-tone.

Tommy can you see me? Tommy can you hear me?

BrainGlutton
08-18-2004, 09:56 PM
From the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSD):

Physical reactions to LSD may include: uterine contractions, body temperature increase, elevated blood sugar levels, dry-mouth, "goose-bumps", heart-rate increase, jaw clenching, cramps, muscle-tension, nausea, perspiration, pupil-dilation, salivation, mucus production, sleeplessness, tremors.

LSD functions as a serotonin antagonist, though this is probably not directly related to its hallucinogenic properties, as several chemical analogues to LSD which are psychically inert also antagonize serotonin.

<snip>

Physical dangers

Although LSD is generally considered nontoxic, other dangers may arise from bad judgments made during the experience. As with many drugs, while under the influence of LSD the ability to make sensible judgments and understand common dangers can be impaired, making the user susceptible to personal injury. If the user attempts to drive a car or operate machinery, their impaired state may lead to accidents and injury.

There is also mounting evidence that LSD can trigger a dissociative fugue state in individuals who are taking certain classes of antidepressants. In such a state, the user has an impulse to wander, and may not be aware of their actions, which can lead to physical injury. Lithium-based antidepressants and tricyclics are believed to have such severe interactions with LSD. MAOIs and SSRIs are believed to interact more benignly, tending to diminish LSD's subjective effects greatly.

<snip>

Urban Legends

A number of urban legends exist about LSD. The aura of mystique popularly associated with the drug, and a great deal of misinformation issued and propagated by well-meaning anti-drug groups, particularly in United States anti-drug education programs in schools, provide fertile ground for misconceptions to take hold. Such misinformation may be propagated due to simple ignorance, or through deliberate attempts to frighten students away from LSD usage through scare tactics.

Blue Star Tattoos

One popular meme is the blue star tattoo legend. This meme frequently surfaces in American elementary and middle schools in the form of a flyer that has been photocopied through many generations, which is distributed to parents by concerned school officials. It has also become popular on Internet mailing lists and websites. This legend states that a temporary lick-and-stick tattoo soaked in LSD and made in the form of a blue star, or of popular children's cartoon characters, is being distributed to children in the area in order to get them addicted to LSD [sic]. The flyer lists an inaccurate description of the effects of LSD, some attribution (typically to a well-regarded hospital or a vaguely specified "adviser to the president"), and instructs parents to contact police if they come across the blue star tattoos. No actual cases of LSD distribution to children in this manner have ever been documented.

Retention of LSD in Spinal Fluid

A meme with particular appeal to anti-drug educators who wish to instill a healthy fear of the potential long-term effects of LSD in their pupils, and also among casual high school age LSD users, is that the body stores crystallized LSD in spinal fluid or in fat cells, which at some point dislodges and causes horrific flashbacks, perhaps years later. The scientific evidence provides no support whatsoever for this theory, and rather indicates that LSD has a very short half-life in the body, and that most of the drug's already miniscule dose is eliminated from the system before the trip is even over. (see Flashbacks, above).

This legend may be derived from the fact that an inert, metabolized form of THC, the main active constituent of marijuana, is in fact stored by the body in fat cells for about a month after use.

Different Types of LSD

A popular meme with high school and college age users is that there are different "types" of LSD, which produce different types of trips. The types are usually associated with a particular blotter paper design or other dosage form (e.g. sugarcube or geltab), and the resultant trips associated with each dosage form are typically described in terms such as that "blue pyramids [a blotter paper design] give body trips" (a trip of mainly physical sensations with not much mental effect) or a "head trip" (the reverse, mainly mental effects with little physical sensations) or "great visuals" (hallucinations).

While there is no actual physical variation in the LSD molecules carried on different substrates, this meme is self-reinforcing insofar as a user taking LSD who strongly expects to have a particular type of experience due to ingesting a particular substrate is thus much more likely to actually have that particular kind of experience.

Banana Peel Synthesis

Another popular theme among naïve LSD users is that it is possible to synthesize LSD from banana peels or other common household foods and chemicals, or that the synthesis of LSD can be easily accomplished in a bathtub. Variants of this legend often circulate on the Internet, and were popular on 'underground' BBSes run by high schoolers before the advent of widespread home Internet access. This myth is sometimes related in a way so as to bolster social standing within a drug-using social group through association with the purported chemist, e.g. "My boyfriend/cousin/friend/roommate makes LSD in the bathtub from banana peels". The actual synthesis requires university training in organic chemistry and requires both expensive laboratory equipment and expensive, carefully controlled precursor chemicals.

Strychnine

Anti-drug educators frequently tell their students some variant on the theme of inevitable strychnine poisoning through LSD use, for example, that strychnine is commonly sold as a cheaper substitute for LSD by unscrupulous drug dealers; that strychnine is a byproduct of LSD synthesis; that the body produces strychnine as a result of LSD metabolism; or that strychnine is somehow necessary to bond LSD to blotter paper. None of these are true. These memes may even be believed and propagated by drug users themselves.

Strychnine has indeed rarely been discovered mixed with LSD and other drugs in a few samples recovered by law enforcement agencies, but these were all found in murder or attempted murder investigations where someone was being specifically targeted for poisoning, and not associated with recreational LSD use.

A related myth is that a new type of gang initiation requires the initiate to put a mixture of LSD and strychnine on the buttons of as many payphones as possible.

Fruit Juice Synergy

Several legends claim that drinking some specific type of fruit juice (varying from legend to legend) will intensify an LSD trip. While there is no specific physical evidence supporting this claim, if a person under the influence of LSD does something that they believe will intensify their trip, then it is likely to do so.

Various Atypical Psychotic Reactions

Anecdotal legends retell the stories of LSD users who believed (for example) they could fly and jumped out of a high window; believed themselves immortal and walked onto a highway, only to be hit by a car; thought that they were oranges and locked themselves in a closet for hours for fear of being peeled, etc. While it is not unlikely that isolated instances of such cases have occurred in the long and widespread history of LSD use, these are not typical reactions, though anti-drug educators usually present them as such, in an effort to warn students off of trying LSD. Individuals with preexisting mental problems are much more likely to suffer such effects under the influence of LSD.

SnakeSpirit
08-19-2004, 04:44 PM
With a tip 'o the hat to BrainGlutton which he derived "From the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSD): " emphasis mine:

Different Types of LSD

A popular meme with high school and college age users is that there are different "types" of LSD, which produce different types of trips. The types are usually associated with a particular blotter paper design or other dosage form (e.g. sugarcube or geltab), and the resultant trips associated with each dosage form are typically described in terms such as that "blue pyramids [a blotter paper design] give body trips" (a trip of mainly physical sensations with not much mental effect) or a "head trip" (the reverse, mainly mental effects with little physical sensations) or "great visuals" (hallucinations).

Someone needs to notify Wikipedia:
"Blue Pyramids" was a geltab design. The gelatin was stamped into a rough texture consisting of 100 tiny (approx. 1/8" square, 1/16" height) hollow, open base pyramid shapes. Easy to transport and divide, it also had a good reputation for being clean and strong.

On another point. Back in those days it was rumored that strychnine was added to LSD to increase the more spectacular effects that some desired (colors, sounds, etc.). The purer forms were better for self-exploration -- less distracting. One effect that seemed to be present in all forms of LSD, and was one of the first effects to onset, were "trails." If you moved your hand in front of your face, from one side to the other, your hand would seem to leave 'trails' in the air, almost as if you were somehow spread out over time so that you could watch your hand over the span of about a second instead of just in the instant.

'Trails' were particularly specacular at dusk and at night. The taillights of cars seemed to leave red flames behind them, like you'd expect from a rocket taking off. Especially dramatic with the pointed taillights in some of the older cars.

Or, at least that's what I heard, anyway.... :D


S~<

MysteryFellow63427
08-19-2004, 07:31 PM
Recent thread on the topic, probably redundant, but I'll post it anyways because I started it. :D
http://boards.academicpursuits.us/sdmb/showthread.php?t=255601

dougie_monty
08-20-2004, 02:22 AM
<<Beyond question the most hilarious dipiction of drugs ever put to film.>>
The spelling is "depiction," for your information.
Hilarious? I hardly think so. Part of the curriculum in high school when I was a sophomore, in 1965, in CA, involved Alcohol and Narcotics. And I remember a headline from the L. A. Times saying that evidence of brain damage from LSD "Mounts," to quote the paper.
The man who I mentioned as dying at the age of 44--well, that was the third death in that immediate family, to whom I had become quite close, in 12 years. If you would please give me your mailing address I'll tell this woman what you said about hilarious," since what I saw in the news media at the time pretty much matched what Joe Friday said on [Dragnet. She can tell you how hilarious it was to lose her brother. How dare you.
When my brother and sister and I were little kids our parents gave us some straight talk about drugs. It stuck, although both parents drank and smoked (tobacco). I was 17 when I saw that episode of Dragnet, but years before, on the local news, I saw a kid writhing on the floor in a restroom, under the influence of "goofballs." So I already had plenty of non-dramatized information about drugs before that episode aired. And that guy's death was the coup de grace.

SnakeSpirit
08-20-2004, 02:41 AM
Part of the curriculum in high school when I was a sophomore, in 1965, in CA, involved Alcohol and Narcotics. And I remember a headline from the L. A. Times saying that evidence of brain damage from LSD "Mounts," to quote the paper.
Your post pretty much speaks for itself, pardner.

gtbiehle
08-20-2004, 02:53 AM
LSD is an ergot derivative. I have taken ergot derviatives all my life for migraines, and they all have the same effects: nausea and constriction of the cardiovascular system. In fact, LSD was invented by a man looking for a migraine drug. Does anyone know if excess amounts would cause these primary symptoms? In this case, the answer to the OP would be that the person would vomit most of the drug and then suffer from ergot poisoning in which his vital organs would suffer from lack of blood.

dougie_monty
08-20-2004, 03:00 AM
Your post pretty much speaks for itself, pardner.
Forgive me if I don't pick up rhetoric very well--are you contradicting the school and the newspaper?
Your concise comment, as it stands, means nothing. Spell it out, bub.

Mr2001
08-20-2004, 06:21 AM
Forgive me if I don't pick up rhetoric very well--are you contradicting the school and the newspaper?
Your concise comment, as it stands, means nothing. Spell it out, bub.
School anti-drug classes are a notoriously bad source of information.

SnakeSpirit
08-20-2004, 11:53 AM
School anti-drug classes are a notoriously bad source of information.
Took the words right out of my mouth!
(and said 'em better than I could. Thanks!)

BrainGlutton
08-20-2004, 12:03 PM
I never touched the stuff, but there's a girl I went to high school with in the Sixities, whose younger brother took it. (He died in 1998 at the age of 44.) He suffered from bad trips. :(
Remember the "Blueboy" episode of Dragnet in 1967?

Beyond question the most hilarious dipiction of drugs ever put to film. And I've seen Reefer Madness.

Hilarious? I hardly think so. Part of the curriculum in high school when I was a sophomore, in 1965, in CA, involved Alcohol and Narcotics. And I remember a headline from the L. A. Times saying that evidence of brain damage from LSD "Mounts," to quote the paper.
The man who I mentioned as dying at the age of 44--well, that was the third death in that immediate family, to whom I had become quite close, in 12 years. If you would please give me your mailing address I'll tell this woman what you said about hilarious," since what I saw in the news media at the time pretty much matched what Joe Friday said on [Dragnet. She can tell you how hilarious it was to lose her brother. How dare you.

I would like to remind you, dougie, that in your first post all you said was that your friends brother (1) had bad trips and (2) died at the age of 44. You did not say he died of LSD poisoning -- and if you did say it I would call you a liar.

tdn
08-20-2004, 03:14 PM
Remember the "Blueboy" episode of Dragnet in 1967?


Didn't that one have a guy who was sucking paint off of a brush? Or was that an Adam-12?

Phlosphr
08-20-2004, 03:55 PM
Liquid LSD can be found, and unfortunately people have come close to what is going on in the OP]/b]. The school I teach at had a very terrible experience with what is called "[b]Being Puddled. Loosly translated someone gets their hands on some liquid acid, pours a small amount in their hands and licks it up. The dose is massive.

The girl who did this spent 3 days in her locked dorm room sitting in a stinking pile of urine and feces. People thought she was driven home so no one thought anything of it that her door was closed.

She is living out her days in an institution.

dougie_monty
08-20-2004, 06:41 PM
Didn't that one have a guy who was sucking paint off of a brush? Or was that an Adam-12?
It sure did--the "Dragnet" episode, that is. Friday and Gannon happened upon a drug party and a young man had a paint brush in his mouth. This weirdo was in fact the one who told the cops where "Blueboy" was.
(They found him and a an 18-year-old somewhere else. The kid said to them,
"What's the matter with Benjie? He's been like that for over an hour. Threw some kind of a fit. Kept saying he wanted to get further out...further out...kept saying he wanted to get further out..."
(Friday examined Benjie's wide-open eyes and said, "Well, he made it: he's dead." :( )
As for the guy who died, no, I didn't say he died from LSD poisoning--nearly 30 years after the fact. Remember Jenny in Forrest Gump? I didn't say she died from drug poisoning, either. Her situation was one wrong move after another.
As for the person who put down school anti-drug education, sorry, I don't accept your appraisal. The alternative in 1965 would have been for me to get drug information from pushers. I guess that is what you want: The blind leading the blind.

Mr2001
08-20-2004, 06:56 PM
As for the person who put down school anti-drug education, sorry, I don't accept your appraisal. The alternative in 1965 would have been for me to get drug information from pushers.
Hello, I am Mr2001. I can't comment on what things were like in 1965, but today, there are far better alternatives, many of which can be found linked from sites like Erowid.

Considering that schools are still pushing mistruths about drugs today, and more is known about them today than 40 years ago, I can't imagine why schools would've been more likely to give out correct information then than they are now.

I guess that is what you want: The blind leading the blind.
Well, you guessed wrong. I want everyone to have access to factual information, and to make their own decisions based on that evidence. I don't want the government pushing propaganda in place of facts, especially in schools, where they're the only source of information.

mangeorge
08-20-2004, 07:14 PM
I was there in the '60's (b 1945), and yes, we laughed at the "education" put out by the establishment. Not because it was especially funny (with the exception of "Reefer Madness), but because it was so often total bullshit. And we knew it was. When you lie to kids and young people, you lose credibility. And when you lack credibility, your propaganda's gonna attract ridicule. Be honest with kids, and consistant, and they'll sometimes listen.
Sorry, d_m, that's how it is.
man (my thing fell off) george

Derleth
08-20-2004, 07:36 PM
Well, as long as nobody becomes an orange. (http://snopes.com/horrors/drugs/orange.htm)

:rolleyes:

Gods, why don't the people who put these things together just use real stories, of the kind that actually happened? Don't they realize that by making shit up, they only alienate their target audience and make it impossible for any message they might have to get through?

dougie_monty, you cannot defend what the schools are selling on a factual basis. And if you dress them up as "pious lies" or "necessary untruths", I'm telling you right now that they aren't working. I interact with high school-age kids on a daily basis and none of them believe the DARE or other school-supported info. This is largely because they have drug experience and know what really happens, and they can smell the bullshit. Kids today are no different from kids in the 1960s-1970s, in other words.

mangeorge
08-20-2004, 07:48 PM
Thanks, Derleth, I'd forgotten about that one. :D
They were so serious about it, too. :dubious:

BrainGlutton
08-20-2004, 08:45 PM
Liquid LSD can be found, and unfortunately people have come close to what is going on in the OP]/b]. The school I teach at had a very terrible experience with what is called "[b]Being Puddled. Loosly translated someone gets their hands on some liquid acid, pours a small amount in their hands and licks it up. The dose is massive.

The girl who did this spent 3 days in her locked dorm room sitting in a stinking pile of urine and feces. People thought she was driven home so no one thought anything of it that her door was closed.

She is living out her days in an institution.

Now that is a scary story! So scary that I refuse to believe it without a cite. Something like that must have made the newspapers -- what year did it happen?

Master Wang-Ka
08-20-2004, 08:46 PM
I read Hofman's book. In it, he mentions that experimenters other than himself theorized that LSD-25 works by sharply dropping serotonin levels in the brain -- serotinin being the "neurotransmitter" mentioned in several posts above.

Interestingly, we now know that Prozac operates by jacking UP your serotonin levels, among other things. Makes me wish it was legal to experiment with LSD again, just to find out what the deal with the serotonin was...

Loopydude
08-20-2004, 10:33 PM
That Wiki link above...ah...

LSD is most certainly NOT a 5-HT antagonist. Rather, it is a 5-HT receptor partial agonist, having a very high affinity for, but low efficacy at, a number of serotonin receptors. Hallucinogenic effects are thought to be mediated by the 5-HT2A and 5-HT2C receptors.

The reson you can't trip shortly after taking a hit of acid is the target neurons, upon massive stimulation of the kind LSD can deliver, are greatly attenuated in function. Often, upon binding their ligand, cell-surface receptors are endocytosed and destroyed, and there are other mechanisms by which signaling can be attenuated after stimulation to maintain homeostasis. Overstimulation of the serotonin system can lead to hyperpyrexia and death (many a raver taking X will warn you to keep cool), and other nasty things, so the CNS has to cope somehow. Given the incredible ED50 of LSD, and its super-high affinity for 5-HT receptors, if it were a full agonist, the stuff would be incredibly lethal. Anyhoo, the post-synaptic neuron remains apathetic both to endogenous and exogenous signals for some period of time after tripping until new receptors are synthesized, and other attenuating mechanisms are also modulated. It's interesting to note that other serotonin agonists or partial agonsists can cause "cross-tolerance" via the same mechanisms. SSRI antidepressants can make a person resistant to LSD. It's also interesting to note that atipsychotics act as 5-HT2 receptor family antagonists (as well as dopamine-receptor antagonists, though it is thought that the atypical antipsychotics can be superior to the classic antipsychotics because their ratio 5-HT2 to domamine D2 binding affinity is greater, and hence they're less likely to cause extrapyramidal side-effects). Yeah, LSD literally makes you nuts.

dougie_monty
08-21-2004, 02:10 AM
dougie_monty, you cannot defend what the schools are selling on a factual basis. And if you dress them up as "pious lies" or "necessary untruths", I'm telling you right now that they aren't working. I interact with high school-age kids on a daily basis and none of them believe the DARE or other school-supported info. This is largely because they have drug experience and know what really happens, and they can smell the bullshit. Kids today are no different from kids in the 1960s-1970s, in other words.
If you believe that schools' drug information is deficient, don't say so on message boards. Take it up with school boards, including this one. (lacoe.edu)
If my friend's brother--who attended the same school I did--had better information than the school, why did he ingest LSD anyway? Because the "better" information is that substance abuse is OK?
One of the things the teacher, within the school curriculum on Alcohol and Narcotics, told us, was that a man found out his son, in his late teens, was addicted to heroin. The man wasted no time: He bought his son a cemetery plot.
I would have preferred that all parents give their kids the same kind of education my parents gave us. Unfortunately, all parents can't do that. Perhaps people wanting to raise kids should attend special parenting classes, which would include how to teach your kids about substance abuse.
Oh--and be sure to tell the DARE and DEA people how ignorant they are, and that substance abuse is enlightenment.

chorpler
08-21-2004, 02:44 AM
If you believe that schools' drug information is deficient, don't say so on message boards. Take it up with school boards, including this one.

Schools' drug information being deficient is not a belief, it's a fact -- especially information you got in 1965. Taking it up with the shool board is not likely to do much good, though. Schools, like the rest of the country, have firmly bought into the "The only way to keep kids off drugs is to exaggerate the dangers hugely" method of drug education. Doesn't seem to be working, alas.



One of the things the teacher, within the school curriculum on Alcohol and Narcotics, told us, was that a man found out his son, in his late teens, was addicted to heroin. The man wasted no time: He bought his son a cemetery plot.

I guess the best treatment for heroin addiction -- methadone maintenance -- wasn't really around in 1965. That's too bad. Opioids themselves are actually quite safe -- people can take methadone (or heroin, really) for their entire lives without suffering any ill effects, as long as it is under controlled medical supervision. The underground culture associated with illegal opioid use is where the danger comes from -- overdosing because the purity is unknown, using dirty needles, spending all your money on drugs and none on food and medical care and the like ... that's what kills people.



Oh--and be sure to tell the DARE and DEA people how ignorant they are, and that substance abuse is enlightenment.

The fact that DARE doesn't seem to be working doesn't imply that "substance abuse is enlightenment." What's that fallacy called ... false dilemma? Yeah, I think that's it.

Heh heh ... does this remind anybody else of that South Park episode "My Future Self and Me"?

dougie_monty
08-21-2004, 02:57 AM
Schools' drug information being deficient is not a belief, it's a fact -- especially information you got in 1965. Taking it up with the shool board is not likely to do much good, though. Schools, like the rest of the country, have firmly bought into the "The only way to keep kids off drugs is to exaggerate the dangers hugely" method of drug education. Doesn't seem to be working, alas.
The fact that DARE doesn't seem to be working doesn't imply that "substance abuse is enlightenment." What's that fallacy called ... false dilemma? Yeah, I think that's it.

Heh heh ... does this remind anybody else of that South Park episode "My Future Self and Me"?
I am sick and tired of people throwing up "South Park" to me. I can find more normal wasy to vent my bladder.
And while you're at it, compose a disquisition on why my parents were wrong to educate me on drugs. and compose an open letter for the woman I mentioned on how she is better off with her brothert dead.
Think of John Belushi, Keith Moon, Anissa Jones, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Glenn Gould, Billie Holliday, Edward R. Murrow, Stymie Beard...

chorpler
08-21-2004, 03:08 AM
I am sick and tired of people throwing up "South Park" to me. I can find more normal wasy to vent my bladder.

Uh huh. That makes sense. Whatever you say, pal.



And while you're at it, compose a disquisition on why my parents were wrong to educate me on drugs. and compose an open letter for the woman I mentioned on how she is better off with her brothert dead.
Think of John Belushi, Keith Moon, Anissa Jones, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Glenn Gould, Billie Holliday, Edward R. Murrow, Stymie Beard...

It doesn't sound like your parents educated you about drugs at all, beyond "Don't do them." While that's good advice, it's not education.

And, you've said that your friend's brother's death was unrelated to his 30-years-previous LSD use, so what are you ranting about?

Clearly, all of the people who have died from drug use would have been much better off either not doing them, or doing them in a more responsible manner. What's your point?

SnakeSpirit
08-21-2004, 03:37 AM
Oh--and be sure to tell the DARE and DEA people how ignorant they are, and that substance abuse is enlightenment.
Have you been neglecting your medications???

dougie_monty
08-21-2004, 03:53 AM
It doesn't sound like your parents educated you about drugs at all, beyond "Don't do them." While that's good advice, it's not education.

And, you've said that your friend's brother's death was unrelated to his 30-years-previous LSD use, so what are you ranting about?

Clearly, all of the people who have died from drug use would have been much better off either not doing them, or doing them in a more responsible manner. What's your point?
"Doing drugs in a responsible manner"? Is that what you're saying? Gimme a break!
I made the allusion to Jenny in the movie Forrest Gump because of her similarity to the man who died at 44--I'll call him Alex Sanders. He had a series of problems and emotional reversals, according to his mother (who died the year before) and his sister. I venture the guess that if Alex hadn't taken LSD, he might not have 'graduated,' in a sense, to more serious indiscretions.
And I'll thank you not to pass pompous judgment on my parents' course of action when they told my brother and sister and me about drugs. It was NOT a 'thou shalt not.' They spent at least one whole evening (complete with blackboard) telling us about things such as heroin and cocaine, addiction, and so on. (This was in 1958.) I must also point out that, although both parents smoked and my father (who died at age 66 from multiple organ failure) drank heavily, the three of us never engaged in drug abuse. I don't smoke or drink, either.
My former stepfather died about two years ago from lung cancer--inoperable by dint of his long history of alcoholism. So I know about the evils of Demon Rum.
I would also venture to say that, given the results of alcohol abuse--quite well documented for millenia--I consider it foolish to aggravate this situation by following the same course with drugs.

SnakeSpirit
08-21-2004, 04:07 AM
"Doing drugs in a responsible manner"? Is that what you're saying? Gimme a break!
(...)
I would also venture to say that, given the results of alcohol abuse--quite well documented for millenia--I consider it foolish to aggravate this situation by following the same course with drugs.
So, you are equating drugs with alcohol? (One of the world's most destructive drugs!)

Please give us your objections to:

Marijuana:

Opioids:

Psylociben:

SSRIs:

Benzodiazapines:

And your alternatives for people who have symptoms relieved by these drugs.

chorpler
08-21-2004, 04:24 AM
"Doing drugs in a responsible manner"? Is that what you're saying? Gimme a break!

Yes, that's what I'm saying. It's perfectly possible to use some drugs responsibly. It's not even a question of opinion. People do it all the time. Methadone clinic patients, chronic pain patients, and even some recreational users (e.g., Ted Binion) can do it fine with opioids. I'm not saying all drugs can be used responsibly -- my research involves opioids specifically -- but certainly there are ways to use most any drug that are less dangerous than other ways.



I venture the guess that if Alex hadn't taken LSD, he might not have 'graduated,' in a sense, to more serious indiscretions.

But that's all it is -- a guess. For that to be true, somehow the LSD would have to have made him graduate to these "more serious indiscretions," whatever they may be. Not knowing the specifics, I can't really comment on this case, but in my experience, the whole gateway drug hypothesis is usually a confusion of correlation with causation.




I would also venture to say that, given the results of alcohol abuse--quite well documented for millenia--I consider it foolish to aggravate this situation by following the same course with drugs.

Well, depending on the drug, alcohol can have different (and potentially more dangerous) immediate and long-term effects. Alcohol is vastly more addictive and toxic than LSD, for instance.

Mr2001
08-21-2004, 05:44 AM
Oh--and be sure to tell the DARE and DEA people how ignorant they are, and that substance abuse is enlightenment.
Ignorant? How about ineffective (http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/dare6.htm)?
To investigate D.A.R.E.'s effectiveness, researchers looked at two similar groups of children: One group takes D.A.R.E.; the other does not. Then, researchers followed the children's behavior for several years. Since 1987, studies -- most funded by law enforcement agencies involved in the program -- have been conducted at 20 North Carolina schools; 31 Kentucky schools; 11 South Carolina schools; 36 Illinois schools; and 11 Canadian schools. The results were similar.

The 1991 Kentucky study, the National Institute on Drug Abuse reported, found "no statistically significant differences between experimental groups and control groups in the percentage of new users of ... cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, alcohol, marijuana."

A 1990 study funded by the Canadian government found "D.A.R.E. had no significant effect on the students' use of any of the substances measured.... They included: tobacco, beer, pop, marijuana, acid, Valium, wine, aspirin, uppers, downers, heroin, crack (cocaine), liquor, candy, glue and PCP."

To make sense of the various studies, the Justice Department hired the Research Triangle Institute of Durham, N.C., to conduct a statistical analysis of all D.A.R.E. research.

A preliminary report from the RTI -- analyzing eight studies involving 9,500 children -- says D.A.R.E. has "a limited to essentially non-existent effect" on drug use.

D.A.R.E. did have a positive effect on children's knowledge and attitudes about drugs, the report says. It also added the social skills needed to say no to drugs.

But even on these measures, D.A.R.E. didn't do as well as other drug programs, including local classes taught by teachers and students.
And seriously, who here has said substance abuse is enlightenment? Can you name one person, quote one post? Or are you just tossing out strawmen?

pool
08-21-2004, 10:05 AM
So I know about the evils of Demon Rum.


MMmmmmmm Demon Rum

dougie_monty
08-21-2004, 05:13 PM
So, you are equating drugs with alcohol? (One of the world's most destructive drugs!)

Please give us your objections to:

Marijuana:

Opioids:

Psylociben:

SSRIs:

Benzodiazapines:

And your alternatives for people who have symptoms relieved by these drugs.
I don't think it's necessary for me to discuss each of these specifically. Suffice it to say that _any_ substance can be abused.
I also refer you to an old book titled Try and Stop Me written by journalist and publisher Bennett Cerf in 1944, specifically the chapter titled "Sweet Are the Uses of Publicity." I mention this because I sense that your argument so far has been a thinly veiled sales pitch to sell ME on drugs. Read the chapter and you'll have at least one answer to why I will not buy your encapsuled snake-oil. (If you can't find the book I'll key up the article on a file and e-mail it to you.)

Master Wang-Ka
08-21-2004, 05:48 PM
You know, school just started up, and I'm starting up with a totally new district. I've been working my butt off, and taking work home every night. I had a really, really rotten week.

Do you know what got me through it? The fact that I have had really, really rotten weeks before. The fact that ALL new jobs suck. The fact that ALL public schools are more or less chaos the first week.

In short, I have come to terms with the fact that sometimes, life sucks. And you deal with it, and in time, it sucks less. Sometimes, if you're doing things right, it does not suck at all.

Teens, in particular, need to learn this lesson, because being a teen is a remarkably rotten experience. Sometimes, it's REALLY, really rotten. Like when your first girl dumps you, or you get pantsed in the lunchroom in front of God and everyone, or... well... general teenage weltschmerz, you know?

This is why drugs are so frickin' great when you're a teenager. One doobie, and you're free of all that. No more weltschmerz, no more problems, no more hurtin'. Life does not suck when you're stoned, no matter how much it sucked when you lit the joint.

...and that is where the bullet meets the bone. Will the child grow up, and learn that when you're stoned, you're really not competent to deal with stuff, and that the weed is no more than a temporary anodyne for your poor hurtin' self? Or will it become a more or less permanent fixture in your life for long enough to damage your short-term memory? Or are you just gonna be a stoner forever?

THIS is my objection to drugs. You can pretty much substitute any chemical you like for "marijuana," and my objection would be the same.

Does this mean that drugs are evil? No, not necessarily. It may well be possible for some of us to do them responsibly. Then again, many of us can't even use alcohol, aspirin, gasoline, automobiles, or chainsaws responsibly, especially in various combinations or all at once.

I mean, I'm sorry if your brother OD'd on drugs. Really. But I think if MY brother died in a car accident that was his own fault, I'd be asking a lot if I started a crusade to make people quit driving cars. We've been trying for years to make people quit doing drugs, and we have not succeeded. People are doing drugs, and they are GOING to do drugs. It's a reality. Deal with it. All we can do is figure out how to minimize the consequences, to individuals, and to our society.

We can attempt to manage drug use and abuse as best we can, because it isn't going to go away.

I haven't seen the episode of "South Park" in question, so I will not comment on it.

Sometimes, drug education is at fault. Sometimes, it is not. I got lots of drug education when I was a kid. The problem with it was that parts of it seemed pretty far-fetched to me (including parts that turned out to be true), and, most importantly, the people telling me all this stuff about drugs had never tried the drugs in question, and were operating entirely out of secondhand knowledge, often from questionable sources. Especially the Government. I mean, Nixon was the Government back then, and look how HE turned out, right?

I was told that Diane Linkletter ate some bad acid, thought she could fly, and leaped out a window. Several movies I saw seemed to back this up; people always seemed to be getting weird ideas when they used LSD. On the other hand, LSD sure looked like a lot of fun.

Who are you going to believe? The Man, or someone in the drug culture who's been there, has no reason to lie to you, and says it's all harmless? (And yes, don't flame me, I KNOW the Drug Culture Guy has ulterior motives -- he wants to sell you dope, or worse -- but your kids don't necessarily know that. And sometimes stoners DON'T have ulterior motives. They just wanna turn you on, is all...)

There is such a thing as effective education about drugs, sex, birth control, and even adulthood, sure. But "just say no" ain't it.

And neither is "Believe, or die."

I've never seen a drug abuser (that is, an abuser of illegal nonprescription drugs) who didn't get his start by hooking up with the drug culture. I do not believe in the concept of "gateway drugs." Believe me, smoking dope for a while does not suddenly give you the idea that you need to try heroin, or that you suddenly need to score some acid. That's a myth.

But hanging out smoking dope with guys who also like to drop acid, now...

...and if any kind of drug education is going to work, it's going to need to consider the drug CULTURE, in addition to the drugs themselves. And durned if our government has ever had any idea what to do about clashes of culture. Hell, look at our foreign policy. We don't have a friggin' clue.

It starts at home, folks.

II Gyan II
08-21-2004, 06:19 PM
This is why drugs are so frickin' great when you're a teenager. One doobie, and you're free of all that. No more weltschmerz, no more problems, no more hurtin'. Life does not suck when you're stoned, no matter how much it sucked when you lit the joint.

...

THIS is my objection to drugs. You can pretty much substitute any chemical you like for "marijuana," and my objection would be the same.

Fine. I substituted it with 'LSD'. Your motives fall apart. You're already crazy if you think people drop LSD to escape from their problems. If anything, you can't for long.

SnakeSpirit
08-21-2004, 07:59 PM
But that's all it is -- a guess. For that to be true, somehow the LSD would have to have made him graduate to these "more serious indiscretions," whatever they may be. Not knowing the specifics, I can't really comment on this case, but in my experience, the whole gateway drug hypothesis is usually a confusion of correlation with causation.
Strongly Agree.

Why are only illegal drugs considered to be "Gateway Drugs?"

Most drug users (if not all), before they got involved with arbitrarily illegal drugs, were users of the highly addictive and physically and socially destructive drug -- alcohol.
And, most of them were also users of the highly addictive and physically and environmentally destructive drug -- tobacco.
Most all of them also used the highly addictive drug -- caffeine.

So which "Gateway drug" should we blame?

How about..... MILK!

SnakeSpirit
08-21-2004, 08:11 PM
your argument so far has been a thinly veiled sales pitch to sell ME on drugs.
Oh dougie - your paranoia is showing. What benefit would there be for me in that? You think I'm going to start internet drug sales? You been taking LSD and not telling us? Cause you seem to be hallucinating!

I don't care what you believe about drugs, just stop trying to impose your beliefs (instead of facts) on us.

I will not buy your encapsuled snake-oil.
Oh that's cute, sincerely. Generally I'd report ad-hominum attacks, but I'm truly amused!

mangeorge
08-21-2004, 08:22 PM
Strongly Agree.

Why are only illegal drugs considered to be "Gateway Drugs?"

Most drug users (if not all), before they got involved with arbitrarily illegal drugs, were users of the highly addictive and physically and socially destructive drug -- alcohol.
And, most of them were also users of the highly addictive and physically and environmentally destructive drug -- tobacco.
Most all of them also used the highly addictive drug -- caffeine.

So which "Gateway drug" should we blame?

How about..... MILK!
Hello, group. My name is mangeorge, and I can't handle milk.

SnakeSpirit
08-21-2004, 08:48 PM
THIS is my objection to drugs. You can pretty much substitute any chemical you like for "marijuana," and my objection would be the same.

Does this mean that drugs are evil? No, not necessarily. It may well be possible for some of us to do them responsibly. Then again, many of us can't even use alcohol, aspirin, gasoline, automobiles, or chainsaws responsibly, especially in various combinations or all at once.

We can attempt to manage drug use and abuse as best we can, because it isn't going to go away.

Sometimes, drug education is at fault. Sometimes, it is not. I got lots of drug education when I was a kid. The problem with it was that parts of it seemed pretty far-fetched to me (including parts that turned out to be true), and, most importantly, the people telling me all this stuff about drugs had never tried the drugs in question, and were operating entirely out of secondhand knowledge, often from questionable sources. Especially the Government. I mean, Nixon was the Government back then, and look how HE turned out, right?

Who are you going to believe? The Man, or someone in the drug culture who's been there, has no reason to lie to you, and says it's all harmless? (And yes, don't flame me, I KNOW the Drug Culture Guy has ulterior motives -- he wants to sell you dope, or worse -- but your kids don't necessarily know that. And sometimes stoners DON'T have ulterior motives. They just wanna turn you on, is all...)

I've never seen a drug abuser (that is, an abuser of illegal nonprescription drugs) who didn't get his start by hooking up with the drug culture. I do not believe in the concept of "gateway drugs." Believe me, smoking dope for a while does not suddenly give you the idea that you need to try heroin, or that you suddenly need to score some acid. That's a myth.

...and if any kind of drug education is going to work, it's going to need to consider the drug CULTURE, in addition to the drugs themselves. And durned if our government has ever had any idea what to do about clashes of culture.
I love it when people can post to threads like this and be rational. And even think for themselves, uninfluenced by "the drug subculture" or the "anti-drug hystericals."

I remember when I was a kid, and though I was scared shitless, someone finally convinced me to try marijuana. I tried it again, cause none of the things the "antis" told me came true! And I didn't get addicted (cause it's not addicting, unlike cigarettes, which I was hooked on).

Years later, the chances came to try heroin, and I was tempted, because (and this is a biggie): Well, they lied to me about marijuana, so they're probably lying about heroin, too!

Luckily, I was able to observe some long term heroin users, and decided I didn't want to end up that way. I started making my own decisions, first observing casual users, then long time users, heavy users and everything else. I made my decisions based on first-hand evidence.

I don't use drugs now, not even tobacco and alcohol, for the same reasons: observation. But that's me, for my reasons.

I have kids, and I tell them the truth about drugs, and expose the lies of the antis, because I want them to survive, and if they listen to the antis, I think they are more likely to use drugs. Truth works better than fear.

The use of drugs is dependent upon a lot of things, personality included. Some people can use drugs responsibly and intelligently, some can't.

Casual use of marijuana isn't harmful. Overuse of marijuana (like alcohol) is. The same laws that apply to one should apply to the other, and I think that would be more successful -- also, marijuana use wouldn't be associated with "other drugs" so one would not necessarily lead to the other.

I have used pot, LSD, mushrooms, peyote, and speed, all long ago, and in moderation. There are two of those that after the first use I decided I'd never use again: speed and peyote. I no longer need to use the others, but I consider them instrumental in my growth and learning, and I would not be upset if my children reported they had tried them.

For the record, I counsel my children that it is not necessary for them to use these drugs, and I teach them how to meditate to get high instead. So far, so good.

I think that LSD and mushrooms could be approved for recreational use with appropriate controls, i.e., legalized, but available after... licensing? in controlled situations? But I know it ain't gonna happen. The government would rather it remain available illegally so more people could abuse it. Legalizing it and monitoring it would dry up the illegal trade, and better control the misuse. I think that is a better way to save lives from going down the road to ruin.

Nonsuch
08-21-2004, 09:10 PM
Bringing this sort of back on topic, this Slate article (http://slate.msn.com/id/2098109) describes the severe decline in LSD use recorded over the last couple of years, apparently stemming from a DEA bust that netted two guys responsible for 95% of the LSD production in the US. They were caught with enough acid to supply from 400 million to 2 billion doses. Yowza. :eek:

SnakeSpirit
08-21-2004, 10:19 PM
a DEA bust that netted two guys responsible for 95% of the LSD production in the US. They were caught with enough acid to supply from 400 million to 2 billion doses.
Thereby driving potential users to other, more available, and often more destructive drugs. Demonstrating the lopsided perspective of our nation's efforts to "help" people.

Here in Hawaii, the ease of manufacture and relative availability of "ice" (crystal methamphetimine) has cause a rise in burgularies, increased traffic deaths/injuries/accidents due to drug use, increases in drug-related violent crime, etc. It is marketed even in f'ing elementary schools!

Fortunately there has been a groundswell of community support for the eradication of this menace, and this has made a dent, but not enough, not yet.
And to think that a few posts agodougie_monty was accusing me....
I sense that your argument so far has been a thinly veiled sales pitch to sell ME on drugs.

Sad. :(

EhhMon
08-21-2004, 10:55 PM
Here where I live, it's a fact that every single psychotic axe murderer ever known has in fact been a life long user of oxygen. It's scary man, I tell you it's fucking scary. I wouldn't even start with that stuff if I were you.

As to the OP, hasn't the question been answered? A pound of LSD will kill you.

mangeorge
08-22-2004, 12:31 AM
Here where I live, it's a fact that every single psychotic axe murderer ever known has in fact been a life long user of oxygen. It's scary man, I tell you it's fucking scary. I wouldn't even start with that stuff if I were you.

As to the OP, hasn't the question been answered? A pound of LSD will kill you.
Acid doesn't kill people, people kill people. You can have mine when you pry it from my cold, dead hands. Otherwise, I see us going down a slippery slope. Next thing you know, they'll ban oxygen.

Mangetout
08-23-2004, 04:26 AM
"A pint's a pound, the world around".
:)
Peace,
mangeorgeOnly for certain values of 'the world' - in the Imperial measure (UK) "A pint of water weighs a pound and a quarter".

dougie_monty
08-23-2004, 03:38 PM
Art Linkletter's daughter very likely did not jump out a window on LSD. I read the article on snopes.com about her (they have a search engine) and it's quite likely Art stretched the truth--which is unfortunate, given his general reputation, especially as I have gleaned it from books he has written (Confessions of a Happy Man, The Secret World of Kids, People Are Funny, etc.)
And I stand by the Dragnet quote I used, concerning the potency of a kilogram of LSD.

Loopydude
08-23-2004, 05:05 PM
Having tripped pretty hard myself, I can easily see how the experience could turn very unpleasant. LSD is not something I would take lightly, and certainly a drug I would never do by myself. Mushrooms gave me a nice little color show, but acid, ho-lee crap, that stuff made the floor melt, the walls breath, the floor breath, the walls melt; it made my CDs jump out of their cases and seem to dance in the air; it made the sun into a burning Alien Mothership in the sky; it turned a plate of spaghetti into some infinite tunnel of molten red weirdness; there was this wild computer-vision graphics stuff flying by in my peripheral vision; I can't even describe what I saw in the mirror...and after what seemed like forever, when I was tired and really quite ready for it all to stop, uh-uh, it just kept going and going and going. I think I slept about twenty hours straight after my first hit of acid, and woke up feeling like someone had taken a Hoover to my brain; not a bad sensation really, like the pipes had all been blown out or something. The second time was equally entertaining and exhausting, and I just never had the desire to do it again. I never had a bad trip, nor did I ever see one, but I'm told, and I have no reason at all to doubt, that a bad trip would be really, really bad. I don't ever want one.

ccwaterback
08-23-2004, 07:00 PM
Only the drugs prescribed (in mass quantities) by your doctor are acceptable. If it comes in a little brownish bottle from the pharmacy, it's perfectly OK, socially and morally. If you don't take massive quantities of prescription medicine, you should see your doctor immediately.

Ludovic
08-24-2004, 12:41 AM
Think of John Belushi, Keith Moon, Anissa Jones, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Glenn Gould, Billie Holliday, Edward R. Murrow, Stymie Beard...And all dead due to overdoses of LSD. Sad, that....

dougie_monty
08-26-2004, 02:59 PM
And all dead due to overdoses of LSD. Sad, that....
Keith Moon, the Who's drummer, drank himself to death; Edward R. Murrow, the host of Person to Person in the 50s and early 60s, died from lung cancer. (So did William Talman and Nat King Cole, for that matter.)
As for the others, even there I wasn't saying they all died from LSD. I was going to add the name of Freddie Mercury, of Queen; but I don't even know that he died from a drug overdose...

mangeorge
08-26-2004, 07:21 PM
Keith Moon, the Who's drummer, drank himself to death; Edward R. Murrow, the host of Person to Person in the 50s and early 60s, died from lung cancer. (So did William Talman and Nat King Cole, for that matter.)
As for the others, even there I wasn't saying they all died from LSD. I was going to add the name of Freddie Mercury, of Queen; but I don't even know that he died from a drug overdose...
Freddie Mercury, one of the most beautiful voices of pop music, died of AIDS.
So what's your point?

mangeorge
08-26-2004, 07:27 PM
Keith Moon, the Who's drummer, drank himself to death; Edward R. Murrow, the host of Person to Person in the 50s and early 60s, died from lung cancer. (So did William Talman and Nat King Cole, for that matter.)
As for the others, even there I wasn't saying they all died from LSD. I was going to add the name of Freddie Mercury, of Queen; but I don't even know that he died from a drug overdose...
Freddie Mercury, one of the most beautiful voices of pop music, died of AIDS.
So what's your point?

Morbo
08-26-2004, 08:16 PM
Whoa, whoa - how did I miss this?

The spelling is "depiction," for your information.

Oh, thank you SO much. Do you contract yourself out as a typo man? I'm sure there's some misspellings out there in other posts of mine that could use your eagle-eyed skills. :rolleyes:

Hilarious? I hardly think so. Part of the curriculum in high school when I was a sophomore, in 1965, in CA, involved Alcohol and Narcotics. And I remember a headline from the L. A. Times saying that evidence of brain damage from LSD "Mounts," to quote the paper.
The man who I mentioned as dying at the age of 44--well, that was the third death in that immediate family, to whom I had become quite close, in 12 years. If you would please give me your mailing address I'll tell this woman what you said about hilarious," since what I saw in the news media at the time pretty much matched what Joe Friday said on [Dragnet. She can tell you how hilarious it was to lose her brother. How dare you.

I'm sorry for your loss, but you are WAY out of line to presume that I was in any way belittling your personal tragedy by simply stating that one episode of Dragnet was hilariously bad, especially since I could not have possibly known from your post that this man died as a result of his abusing LSD. If you say in another thread that Mommie Dearest was over-the-top funny, should I reply "my brother and I were abused, can I get your address so I can tell my brother how funny you thought it was, how dare you"? Shame on you.

And FYI it was hilariously bad. That episode was utterly and completely over the top and so absurd that to see it is to laugh. The episode in question was aimed squarely at the level of School Film Scare-tactic nonsense. Blueboy sucking on a paintbrush and painting his face half blue / half yellow and sticking his head in the mud like an ostrich and mumbling "blue...red...blue...my hair's green and I'm a tree!!" and proceeding to eat bark off a tree, indeed. Quote 1965 newspaper articles and classroom discussions and one incident from a 1950's news program of someone OD'ing on "goofballs" (whatever that is) at me all you want, but that episode in NO WAY depicted reality.

Kudos to your parents for steering you clear of drugs, but you are far, far away from fact when you continue to use Dragnet and Classroom Propaganda as your sources.

Cforn
08-27-2004, 12:49 AM
I can find more normal wasy to vent my bladder....
and compose an open letter for the woman I mentioned on how she is better off with her brothert dead....I don't understand rhetoric.

D_M, you have a perfect right to your opinion(s). As does everyone else here.
However, in the interest of "spelling it out" as you put it:
(IMHO), snippy corrections of other posters, particularly when it advances no cause beyond your own pedantry, seems a bit childish. And as I am a very childish person, here is a bit of your own back to you:

1. The spelling, "for your information", is "ways".
2. The expression, "for your information", is "vent my spleen".
Venting one's bladder is, well, something else entirely. And frankly, I don't see what South Park has to do with either one. No need to explain - I will live on in my ignorance.
3. A sentence, "for your information", always starts with a capitol letter.
4. The spelling, "for your information", is "brother".
5. Snake Sprit's comment (at least the one that refered to your earlier post as illustrative of his point), "for your information", does not qualify as "rhetoric". An allusion or even a sort of corollary would be a better term. Therefore claiming to not understand "rhetoric" as a response to SP's post is nearly semantically null.

There is nothing wrong with expressing a vigorous opinion.
But it does not enhance one's credibiilty to to indulge in mean-spirited nitpicking and dubious vocabulary - unless you're very good at it.
(I choose to keep my personal assessment of your skill in this regard a closely guarded secret.)

Since I have no credibility to begin with, I indulge in this pursuit freely (as well as my shamless abuse of parenthetical comments). You however, strike me a as someone who (right or wrong), values thier credibility quite highly.
So perhaps avoiding editorial comments and sticking to solid facts is your strongest strategy.
All this IMHO - of course.

Mr2001
08-27-2004, 01:17 AM
3. A sentence, "for your information", always starts with a capitol letter.
As long as we're being pedantic... it's "capital". A capitol is a legislative building.

Ellis Dee
08-27-2004, 02:03 AM
Having tripped pretty hard myself...that stuff made the floor melt, the walls breath, the floor breath, the walls melt; it made my CDs jump out of their cases and seem to dance in the air; it made the sun into a burning Alien Mothership in the sky...and after what seemed like forever, when I was tired and really quite ready for it all to stop, uh-uh, it just kept going and going and going...woke up feeling like someone had taken a Hoover to my brain; not a bad sensation really...You're making me jones.

Hey, could somebody else please correct Ludovic? I don't think enough people got whooshed yet...

dougie_monty
08-27-2004, 02:59 AM
Whoa, whoa - how did I miss this?



Oh, thank you SO much. Do you contract yourself out as a typo man? I'm sure there's some misspellings out there in other posts of mine that could use your eagle-eyed skills. :rolleyes:



I'm sorry for your loss, but you are WAY out of line to presume that I was in any way belittling your personal tragedy by simply stating that one episode of Dragnet was hilariously bad, especially since I could not have possibly known from your post that this man died as a result of his abusing LSD. If you say in another thread that Mommie Dearest was over-the-top funny, should I reply "my brother and I were abused, can I get your address so I can tell my brother how funny you thought it was, how dare you"? Shame on you.

And FYI it was hilariously bad. That episode was utterly and completely over the top and so absurd that to see it is to laugh. The episode in question was aimed squarely at the level of School Film Scare-tactic nonsense. Blueboy sucking on a paintbrush and painting his face half blue / half yellow and sticking his head in the mud like an ostrich and mumbling "blue...red...blue...my hair's green and I'm a tree!!" and proceeding to eat bark off a tree, indeed. Quote 1965 newspaper articles and classroom discussions and one incident from a 1950's news program of someone OD'ing on "goofballs" (whatever that is) at me all you want, but that episode in NO WAY depicted reality.

Kudos to your parents for steering you clear of drugs, but you are far, far away from fact when you continue to use Dragnet and Classroom Propaganda as your sources.
I freely confess to the typos. I have large fingers and often hit two keys when I aimed at one, and I don't catch all the errors before I hit the Submit button. "Dipiction," however, cannot be excused that way.
As for the Dragnet episode, whose official title is "The LSD Story," I have that on video. The writer credit is "John Randolph," a pseudonym for Jack Webb (born John Randolph Webb).
And I sense that your information on the episode itself is second-hand. I've seen it several times. Blueboy was painted up blue-and-yellow at the start of the episode (he says "Red...red red..red..." I don't think he mentions "blue" other than to say "Blueboy," but I can check...); another man had the brush in his mouth near the end. In fact he told the cops Blueboy was not around: "He split the scene, man."
The bit I saw on the news about goofballs was from the early 1960s, as you'll see if you look at my posting.
That you sneer at school information about drugs as "propaganda" suggest your preferred source is something else; The Medellín cartel, perhaps, eh wot?

chorpler
08-27-2004, 03:01 AM
I'm sorry for your loss, but you are WAY out of line to presume that I was in any way belittling your personal tragedy by simply stating that one episode of Dragnet was hilariously bad, especially since I could not have possibly known from your post that this man died as a result of his abusing LSD.

It would have been especially hard for you to know that since he didn't die as a direct result of abusing LSD. dougie_monty was saying that he thinks the bad trips from LSD the man experienced 30 years before caused (or partially caused, at least) him to go down the path that led to his demise. That it was a gateway, in other words.

chorpler
08-27-2004, 03:13 AM
That you sneer at school information about drugs as "propaganda" suggest your preferred source is something else; The Medellín cartel, perhaps, eh wot?

So, if you don't accept school "information" about drugs as pure truth, you must prefer to get your information from drug dealers, is that it? Talk about your false dilemmas.

dougie_monty
08-27-2004, 03:28 AM
So, if you don't accept school "information" about drugs as pure truth, you must prefer to get your information from drug dealers, is that it? Talk about your false dilemmas.
Well, you tell me! You are dismissing school education (and DARE, for that matter) as "propaganda." Is it too much for me to ask for you to lay your cards on the table? Or shall I get your answer by means of osmosis?

Mr2001
08-27-2004, 07:37 AM
I, for one, prefer to get my information from independent scientists, rather than government pamphlets.

Morbo
08-27-2004, 02:53 PM
I freely confess to the typos. I have large fingers and often hit two keys when I aimed at one, and I don't catch all the errors before I hit the Submit button. "Dipiction," however, cannot be excused that way.

Yes, you got me. I have been misspelling "depiction" for years - YEARS, I TELL YOU!! There's simply no way it could have been a typo - nope, no way whatsoever. Touché, good sir!! :rolleyes:

As for the Dragnet episode, whose official title is "The LSD Story," I have that on video. The writer credit is "John Randolph," a pseudonym for Jack Webb (born John Randolph Webb).
And I sense that your information on the episode itself is second-hand. I've seen it several times. Blueboy was painted up blue-and-yellow at the start of the episode (he says "Red...red red..red..." I don't think he mentions "blue" other than to say "Blueboy," but I can check...); another man had the brush in his mouth near the end. In fact he told the cops Blueboy was not around: "He split the scene, man."
The bit I saw on the news about goofballs was from the early 1960s, as you'll see if you look at my posting.

I haven't seen it in a few years, I'll admit. But I certainly remember the "I'm a tree" and the bark eating scene. Not that your nitpicking has anything to do with anything, of course. Unless you think your description of the episode somehow makes it a more accurate portrayal of tripping. :dubious:

That you sneer at school information about drugs as "propaganda" suggest your preferred source is something else; The Medellín cartel, perhaps, eh wot?

Absolutely, since if I don't believe the information I receive from Dragnet or classroom lessons from 40 years ago, I'm in bed with drug dealers. :rolleyes:

Oh, and the fact that you offer no apology for your little "How dare you" bullshit tells me all I need to know about you. Shine on you, crazy diamond! ::shoots up::

mangeorge
08-27-2004, 03:24 PM
Shaddup, Dooku, and pass me yer rig.
What the fuck ya cookin' up here, anyways? Ferget it, I don't care. Just pass it over, dude.
Anybody got a couple 'ludes for my man d_m over here? Sucker's hurtin'.

dougie_monty
08-27-2004, 04:19 PM
I, for one, prefer to get my information from independent scientists, rather than government pamphlets.
Care to provide some documentation?
Oh...and, Dooku, no, I don't intend to apologize; The man who died at 44 was one of a family of five. Three of the five are dead now--I attended all three funerals and I was even a pallbearer for the mother. That this man--whom I'll call Alex here--had the inclination to try things like LSD was tragic, to my way of thinking. (The fact that my father drank heavily and died at 66, and that my mother smoked for about 40 years until the biopsy and mastectomy, were tragedies to lesser degrees.)
My point is that I was outraged that those posting to this thread after I brought the matter up, and replying thereto, seemed to me to be trivializing the matter.
As for "venting one's bladder," yes, I originally heard that phrase with "spleen," as in "He vented his Spleen at the Lubber." I substituted "bladder" because I intended to make a harsher expression.

Morbo
08-27-2004, 04:59 PM
Oh...and, Dooku, no, I don't intend to apologize;

Thanks for clearing that up. My opinion of you has been solidified.

The man who died at 44 was one of a family of five. Three of the five are dead now--I attended all three funerals and I was even a pallbearer for the mother. That this man--whom I'll call Alex here--had the inclination to try things like LSD was tragic, to my way of thinking. (The fact that my father drank heavily and died at 66, and that my mother smoked for about 40 years until the biopsy and mastectomy, were tragedies to lesser degrees.)
My point is that I was outraged that those posting to this thread after I brought the matter up, and replying thereto, seemed to me to be trivializing the matter.

Not much of a point when you in no way indicated that his death had anything whatsoever to do with drug abuse. (And I'm still not convince that it did). How can we have trivialized the matter when we had no idea what the matter was?

And then you use my innocuous post about an over-the-top, unrealistic freakin' Dragnet episode to shame me into somehow thinking I've belittled this family's tragedy? And you still have no concept of why that's out of line?!

I see no reason why I should continue to respond to you. Wait - let me think. I'm thinking. Tell you what - if I can think of any reason whatsoever why I should regard you any further, this will not the be the last sentence of this post.

dougie_monty
08-27-2004, 05:20 PM
Thanks for clearing that up. My opinion of you has been solidified.



Not much of a point when you in no way indicated that his death had anything whatsoever to do with drug abuse. (And I'm still not convince that it did). How can we have trivialized the matter when we had no idea what the matter was?

And then you use my innocuous post about an over-the-top, unrealistic freakin' Dragnet episode to shame me into somehow thinking I've belittled this family's tragedy? And you still have no concept of why that's out of line?!

I see no reason why I should continue to respond to you. Wait - let me think. I'm thinking. Tell you what - if I can think of any reason whatsoever why I should regard you any further, this will not the be the last sentence of this post.
I'll tell you what. Why don't you muster some of the documentation I requested in my repy to Mr. 2001's post? That would be likely the most objective thing you could do at this point.
"Alexander" was the only person I knew personally who had taken LSD and had bad trips. He provided the best reason I could come up with to avoid LSD and such things, as my father did with liquor and my mother did with smoking. For me to pair Alex's situation with "responsible use of drugs" is pure Doublethink. :(

chorpler
08-27-2004, 07:20 PM
Well, let's see. An excellent, if now somewhat outdated, source is the Consumers Union Report on Licit and Illicit Drugs (http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/cu/cumenu.htm), the complete text of which is available online at that link (I wish I'd known that before I paid $25 for a hardback copy from abebooks.com!).

The site hosting it, the Shaffer Drug Policy Library (http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/index.HTM), is an excellent source of information on drug policy and for basic factual information on drugs as well. For instance, information on the (in)effectiveness of the DARE program can be found here (http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/daremenu.htm).

The Vaults of Erowid (http://erowid.org), mentioned before, is another great resource, including plenty of medical and scientific articles as well as first-person reports of the effects of a wide variety of drugs.

The Lycaeum (http://lycaeum.org) is another good resource similar to Erowid.

In book form, From Chocolate to Morphine: Everything You Need to Know About Mind-Altering Drugs (http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0395911524/104-9544962-4546300?v=glance), by Weil and Rosen, is a pretty thorough guide to the subject, presented in a very readable and entertaining form.

I've heard good things about Solomon H. Snyder's Drugs and the Brain (http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0716760177/qid=1093619638/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-9544962-4546300?v=glance&s=books&n=507846), but I haven't gotten around to reading my copy yet. It looks interesting, from skimming it.

Okay, that's off the top of my head. Obviously there are a lot more resources out there -- the links from the above sites are often good resources as well. All of these resources are much less scare-mongering than the kind of thing you'd hear from a school drug program, but they don't shy away from the dangers. You're not likely to read about chromosomal abnormalities and brain damage from LSD use. On the other hand, you will hear about how, say, ecstasy or PCP can cause the overheating and death of some neurons.

dougie_monty
08-28-2004, 03:34 AM
Oh, and the fact that you offer no apology for your little "How dare you" bullshit tells me all I need to know about you. Shine on you, crazy diamond! ::shoots up::
Dooku, if you are referring in any way to someone you knew who was unfortunate enough to die from using any such drug, I was grossly out of line to refuse an apology. You may accept that as an expression of my contrition if you see fit.
The issue with Alex is another matter. I was close to the family for years and he had a slew of other problems--and I am amazed he survived as long as he did. I might have commented that there were plenty of other things Alex did, and could have avoided; and I would bridle just the same at a third party who questioned my conclusion, as was done in this thread.
Oh--and Chorpler, thanks for your answer. As time allows I will follow links you have given me.

Andrough
08-28-2004, 07:40 AM
Well, as long as nobody becomes an orange. (http://snopes.com/horrors/drugs/orange.htm)

:rolleyes:


A local celebrity in my town is "The Orange". Story says he was at a shindig where many people were doing acid and... acting accordingly. He took off all of his clothing, fell asleep on a sheet of many stamps of LSD(Forgive me if I misused any jargon or am completely off. Blame it on generational differences.), the drug was absorbed through his skin. He now sits on a lawnchair in his watching traffic and intimidating everyone meeting his gaze.

The most widely-known rumor is that he thinks he is an orange, but apple, banana, cod, and many other things are tossed around.

I'd never seen the Snopes article mentioned, but it resembles the story of our local so much it disavows our silly rumors that much more.

I've heard stories of people attempting to query the man and/or his caretakers(his parents, I believe), but always unsuccessfully as he is gone completely and the caretakers aren't willing to dispense with any information.

Excalibre
08-28-2004, 01:29 PM
As for "venting one's bladder," yes, I originally heard that phrase with "spleen," as in "He vented his Spleen at the Lubber." I substituted "bladder" because I intended to make a harsher expression.
It just makes you sound like you don't know the expression you're trying to use - "to vent one's spleen" comes from the medieval medical tradition associating the spleen with anger, since it was thought to produce the humor (I forget which one in particular) that led to anger.

The bladder has no such association, and neither phrase makes sense in the context you used it.

Loopydude
08-28-2004, 02:34 PM
A local celebrity in my town is "The Orange".

I've heard countless variations of this theme, and I'm quite convinced at this point that it's pure UL. You've got your run-of-the-mill villiage nutbar, and eventually rampant speculation about the origins of this person's affliction dredge up the "Orange" story, and voila, another Orange is born.

Probably every college and universty in the US has some version of the story, always opened with the preface "My R.A. knew a kid who knew a guy who talked to this other guy who said that...". My very own school had "a guy" who fell asleep with a sheet of acid tabs in his pocket. He got sweaty in bed, the acid soaked through his clothes into his skin, he had the Mother of All Trips, and now lives his days as the Human Celery Stick in some unnamed mental institution.

mangeorge
08-28-2004, 03:14 PM
When I was a young boy growing up in Bakersfield there was an older woman, called "The BB Gun Lady" who owned a Daisy pump and had lots of cats. She'd shoot birds in her trees for the cats to eat. One shot, every time. This is not a UL, she didn't hide and all us kids saw her a lot of times. She was crazy, though, or put on a very good act to keep us away. She was crotchety but not mean. The county eventually came and took away her cats and her BB gun, so she starved herself to death. Us kids actually missed her, quite a bit.
The reason I mention this is that it was pre-LSD. The only drug she abused was drinking tons of coffee all day.
BTW; she cussed like a sailor. We loved that, of course. :D IIRC, her name was Mrs. Sharron.

dougie_monty
08-28-2004, 03:26 PM
It just makes you sound like you don't know the expression you're trying to use - "to vent one's spleen" comes from the medieval medical tradition associating the spleen with anger, since it was thought to produce the humor (I forget which one in particular) that led to anger.

The bladder has no such association, and neither phrase makes sense in the context you used it.
Excalibur, I read the phrase in a late-eighteenth-century story printed in my junior English reader in high school. The writer, a young woman, said that a man in her party asked for directions; the bystander told them to go by "Uncle Sams Lott." The man in her party "vented his Spleen at the Lubber." (The "Lubber's" remark was as ridiculous as "approach a three-story gray house that burned down" (from H. Allen Smith).
My 'vent-the-bladder' phrasing was meant to be in a similar vein to "poison-pen letter" (complete with inkwell bearing a skull and crossbones).

dougie_monty
08-31-2004, 04:47 PM
Here's the link (http://snopes.com/horrors/drugs/linklttr.htm) to the Snopes article about Diane Linkletter.
In the article, for example, it says that Ms. Linkletter was not on LSD or any other drugs when she jumped to her death.

rfgdxm
08-31-2004, 06:41 PM
A local celebrity in my town is "The Orange". Story says he was at a shindig where many people were doing acid and... acting accordingly. He took off all of his clothing, fell asleep on a sheet of many stamps of LSD(Forgive me if I misused any jargon or am completely off. Blame it on generational differences.), the drug was absorbed through his skin. He now sits on a lawnchair in his watching traffic and intimidating everyone meeting his gaze.
How could you know for sure in such a case LSD did this to such a man? Many people develop schizophrenia and other serious mental illnesses every year who have never used LSD or any other psychedelic drug. Commonly schizophrenia develops in adolescence or young adulthood, which is also when most people who use psychedelics start using them. Correlation doesn't prove causation.

Also, while not well researched there is some evidence that suggests mentally ill people tend to be more likely attracted to psychedelics than average. Might make some sense in that if one's state of mind is normally unpleasant, they'd be drawn to mind altering drugs as a form of escapism. Thus it could logically be possible that it isn't LSD that tends to make people crazy, but instead already crazy people are drawn to using LSD.

dougie_monty
10-21-2004, 05:00 PM
...and quite late, I must confess. :o
On The Channel 2 News in Los Angeles, (kcbs.dayport.com/launcher/2074) in 1984, the late commentator Bill Stout had this to say about Judith Belushi, John's widow, who spoke her mind on the book Wired:
"But even that is topped by the widow of comic actor John Belushi. He died of drugs. [Judith] says the new book about him is unfair because, in her words, it doesn't say that 'drugs can be fun.'
"For an all-time low in widows' tributes, Judith Belushi is an easy winner--it's given with no joy--of our 'Turkey of the Month' for May."
:(

Little Plastic Ninja
10-21-2004, 07:57 PM
Oh, yes. The DARE program.

I remember the DARE program in my school. Did jack-all to prevent kids from smoking, drinking, or doing drugs. I recall we had T-shirts, occasional meetings about I don't even remember what, and we went to a conference in the city where I learned, among other things, that pentacles were sure signs of satanic activity. :rolleyes:

The most information we got out of the people in charge was "Drugs are bad and you shouldn't use them." No actual information, just a value judgment.

Flipshod
10-21-2004, 08:47 PM
[QUOTE=SnakeSpirit] Well, they lied to me about marijuana, so they're probably lying about heroin, too!

So, as a young experimenter, you take the drug, and realize that it's nothing like what you were warned against. At that moment you realize adults have been lying to you, and you also realize that drugs are FUN, and at the same time you get social benefits for being someone willing to stand up and be yourself., i.e. your friends think you are cool.

Drug use is a rite of passage in a large chunk of our society (unintentional as it is), and it's foolish to ignore that, or to try and criminalize the normal behavior of our middle class youth.

Of all of the LSD me and my friends, my fraternity brothers, and all the rest, I only knew 1 guy who ended up working in that homemade dress at a convenience store with a shaved head and the belief that oranges were God. So 1/500th chance of insanity versus social acceptance. That's the math.

dougie_monty
10-22-2004, 04:05 AM
[QUOTE=SnakeSpirit] Well, they lied to me about marijuana, so they're probably lying about heroin, too!

So, as a young experimenter, you take the drug, and realize that it's nothing like what you were warned against. At that moment you realize adults have been lying to you, and you also realize that drugs are FUN, and at the same time you get social benefits for being someone willing to stand up and be yourself., i.e. your friends think you are cool.

Drug use is a rite of passage in a large chunk of our society (unintentional as it is), and it's foolish to ignore that, or to try and criminalize the normal behavior of our middle class youth.

Of all of the LSD me and my friends, my fraternity brothers, and all the rest, I only knew 1 guy who ended up working in that homemade dress at a convenience store with a shaved head and the belief that oranges were God. So 1/500th chance of insanity versus social acceptance. That's the math.
Are you saying that ingestion of LSD and the like is a prerequisite for social acceptance? :eek:
If so, you're welcome to it. Given the choices I would prefer social isolation.

II Gyan II
10-22-2004, 10:15 AM
Are you saying that ingestion of LSD and the like is a prerequisite for social acceptance? :eek:


That's not what he said. He said drug use had benefits, not that it was required.

Anyway, why did you revive this thread? Do you have any new pertinent information to contribute regarding the toxicity of 1 lb. of LSD?

dougie_monty
10-22-2004, 04:47 PM
That's not what he said. He said drug use had benefits, not that it was required.

Anyway, why did you revive this thread? Do you have any new pertinent information to contribute regarding the toxicity of 1 lb. of LSD?
No, I don't. I remembered Bill Stout's commentary and I thought this acerbic statement on drugs--in reference to John Belushi, and to his widow's brainless remark--might perhaps be received more seriously from posters who had it in their craw that the discussions on Dragnet were "hilarious."

II Gyan II
10-22-2004, 05:08 PM
No, I don't. I remembered Bill Stout's commentary and I thought this acerbic statement on drugs--in reference to John Belushi, and to his widow's brainless remark--might perhaps be received more seriously from posters who had it in their craw that the discussions on Dragnet were "hilarious."

What's brainless about her remark? Obviously, drugs can be fun, else no one would do them. From googling, it seems her husband died of an overdose on a combination of cocaine/heroin. That's more a direct result of prohibition (unknown and varying dosages, adulterants) than the drugs (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3592877.stm) themselves.

If you wish to debate about drugs and drug-policy, I (and some others) are ready to do so, but this is not the right thread for it. Open a new thread in Great Debates or IMHO or the Pit.

dougie_monty
10-22-2004, 05:23 PM
What's brainless about her remark? Obviously, drugs can be fun, else no one would do them. From googling, it seems her husband died of an overdose on a combination of cocaine/heroin. That's more a direct result of prohibition (unknown and varying dosages, adulterants) than the drugs (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3592877.stm) themselves.

If you wish to debate about drugs and drug-policy, I (and some others) are ready to do so, but this is not the right thread for it. Open a new thread in Great Debates or IMHO or the Pit.
Be my guest, Gyan. If you intend to show that this is not a one-sided issue, by all means do so. :)

II Gyan II
10-22-2004, 05:41 PM
Be my guest, Gyan. If you intend to show that this is not a one-sided issue, by all means do so. :)

You revived this thread. You start a new one. I've have already said my piece on drug policies within various other threads. You seem to be the one with a need to prove something, given that you revived a thread after 7 weeks.

Mr2001
10-22-2004, 07:25 PM
That's one of the things that really turned me off about DARE. Even as a 5th or 6th grade student, I knew there had to be some reason people actually used drugs other than the dreaded "peer pressure". DARE gave us a ton of information about the downsides of drug use (some of which I now know aren't credible) and didn't mention the perceived upsides, and even then I knew that was dishonest.

pmoseman
12-21-2012, 02:18 AM
You revived this thread. You start a new one. I've have already said my piece on drug policies within various other threads. You seem to be the one with a need to prove something, given that you revived a thread after 7 weeks.

Here it is almost 2013 and I still don't see a reason anyone else should care who revives a thread or when they do it.

Mangetout
12-21-2012, 03:57 AM
Here it is almost 2013 and I still don't see a reason anyone else should care who revives a thread or when they do it.

So this is a pointless resurrection of a zombie thread, apparently to make some pointless point about resurrection of zombie threads?

Whoah. Meta!

Mangetout
12-21-2012, 04:02 AM
But the reason people care is that:

Some of the people who posted when the thread was alive will now have left, been banned, or died since then, but people not realising this is a zombie will try to interact with them.

Even the people who are still active members may have forgotten, lost interest, or changed their whole viewpoint on this topic. You can't really have a proper discussion or debate with 8-year pauses in it.

Colibri
12-21-2012, 10:56 AM
Here it is almost 2013 and I still don't see a reason anyone else should care who revives a thread or when they do it.

Moderator Note

pmoseman, you can check the rules on reviving old threads in the FAQs. We have also have had some very extensive discussions in ATMB on the issue which you can consult.

We permit the resurrection of zombie threads if significant new information is added. Since you apparently only raised this one to ask a question that has already been answered many, many times before on the board, I'm closing it.

Colibri
General Questions Moderator

Best Topics: strut leaking fluid cf stands for bisexual message board superhero football games werewolves meme damen avenue chicago 4e weakened hair turning black stupid looking face purchase chloroform goody powder abuse chiropractor fake k backwards define wiggers freebase pills palm tree killer cardinal commerce newegg midget playing baseball demesne too big black mariah definition collapsed jugular veins still make cheyanne sand bees heisman definition micro nipples ceramic broiler mas spanish bite proof gloves modelo meaning lawn darts ebay pseudoephedrine drowsy adult marvel comics aggressive cuddling entrepreneur fair ideas for school turning a duplex into a single family home hells angels red wings minnesota labor laws for salaried employees what to put on mail that isn't yours plywood larger than 4x8 babies are not cute freezing point of vinegar and water pride in one's country z pack missed dose what does c diff stool smell like what does ss on a boat mean the big bang theory the staircase implementation is el segundo safe dog names in different languages how to turn off car alarm tree nets to catch leaves why am i losing hair on my legs why is benjamin franklin on the 100 dollar bill how to cook beef liver for dogs can worms live in water how rare is too rare steak writing checks with old address what does sortie mean stealing a shopping cart how to make 80s music 1998 honda accord catalytic converter replacement do you have to file a police report if you hit a deer pizza hut not accepting online orders how to answer whats up aspirin 80 mg vs 81 mg soak shower curtain in salt water