Re: Eggs, not LSD

[Guest guest]

I realize the point was the eggs, but everyone I've known who has done

much LSD is somewhat psychologically disturbed as a result, and the

advice of most of them is to NOT do LSD for basically that reason. So

I find it odd that it would be suggested for clinical use, although

this isn't the first I've heard of it. There was a cover-page article

in a local alternative paper a few years ago about that.

Chris

" Hofmann attended the first day of a weekend symposium in Basel on

Friday, organized by a non-profit making group which promotes research

into psychedelic drugs and wants to prompt a debate on whether LSD

could have a clinical use again.

Although best known as a recreational drug, LSD was used in the United

States as a psychotherapy treatment in the 1950s before it was banned

by the U.S. government.

Scientists at the U.S.-based Multidisciplinary Association for

Psychedelic Studies are investigating new uses such as LSD's effects

on so-called cluster headaches -- a painful rare condition similar to

a migraine.

" It is still my problem child, " Hofmann said. " But very often they

turn into wonder children. I hope that it can be possible in time for

LSD to find the place in society that it deserves. " "

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

[Guest guest]

Chris-

>I realize the point was the eggs, but everyone I've known who has done

>much LSD is somewhat psychologically disturbed as a result, and the

>advice of most of them is to NOT do LSD for basically that reason. So

>I find it odd that it would be suggested for clinical use, although

>this isn't the first I've heard of it. There was a cover-page article

>in a local alternative paper a few years ago about that.

I'm not in any way endorsing LSD, but my understanding is that the

vast majority of acid available on the street is contaminated, often

with really nasty stuff like PCP. Also, wouldn't most or least least

many acid users have tried other drugs, thus further confounding any

conclusions you could draw from anecdotal data?

-

[Guest guest]

-------------- Original message ----------------------

From: Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@...>

> I realize the point was the eggs, but everyone I've known who has done

> much LSD is somewhat psychologically disturbed as a result, and the

> advice of most of them is to NOT do LSD for basically that reason. So

> I find it odd that it would be suggested for clinical use, although

> this isn't the first I've heard of it. There was a cover-page article

> in a local alternative paper a few years ago about that.

>

> Chris

>

the vast majority of lsd users were not harmed by the experience. Of course, it

depends on what you mean by 'much'. Obviously most people who 'abuse' certain

drugs, i.e. do them in excess, have some issues to begin with.

Have you ever taken an hallucinogen? It is something that, I think, people

should do at least once in a lifetime.

[Guest guest]

On 1/13/06, Idol <paul_idol@...> wrote:

> I'm not in any way endorsing LSD, but my understanding is that the

> vast majority of acid available on the street is contaminated, often

> with really nasty stuff like PCP. Also, wouldn't most or least least

> many acid users have tried other drugs, thus further confounding any

> conclusions you could draw from anecdotal data?

I've never heard of LSD being laced with PCP, but maybe. My

understanding is that it's usually cut with strychnine and other stuff

that's toxic but worthless as a drug, and you can usually tell how

much it was cut by how much your back hurts the next day. If it's

low-quality you can wake up with an enormous back ache the next day.

Anyway, true, effects could be confounded with other drugs, but if the

specific content of one's LSD-induced trips is being repeated in some

cases, isn't it reasonable to assume the flashback is a result of the

LSD? Or, if LSD is the drug that makes you see traces out of the

variety of drugs you use, and you, after having used it 50 times, now

see traces *all the time,* wouldn't it be reasonable to suspect that

the origen of your permanent traces is the same drug that caused them

temporarily?

Also, I would think that a drug that has the possibility of inducing

hospitalizing terror in someone, and that has a greater propensity to

do so if that person has a background of mental instability, would not

be a wise choice as a therapeutic agent for mentally disturbed people.

Not to mention, most people I've known who have used LSD have

reported a tendency to think psychotic thoughts even when not having a

bad trip. And there was a notable association between the group of

people who held to an extreme philosophical relativism that questioned

the reality of reality -- which has obvious sociopathic implications

-- and those who took LSD, the connection between which should be

apparent.

And frankly that there is this group of researchers who think LSD is

of therapeutic value -- laughably because it cures cluster

headaches???? -- one of whom invented the drug and has admittedly used

it until he was 97 years old, makes me suspect all these researchers

are actually users, and that scares me.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

[Guest guest]

-------------- Original message ----------------------

From: Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@...>

> On 1/13/06, Idol <paul_idol@...> wrote:

>

> > I'm not in any way endorsing LSD, but my understanding is that the

> > vast majority of acid available on the street is contaminated, often

> > with really nasty stuff like PCP. Also, wouldn't most or least least

> > many acid users have tried other drugs, thus further confounding any

> > conclusions you could draw from anecdotal data?

>

> I've never heard of LSD being laced with PCP, but maybe. My

> understanding is that it's usually cut with strychnine and other stuff

> that's toxic but worthless as a drug, and you can usually tell how

> much it was cut by how much your back hurts the next day. If it's

> low-quality you can wake up with an enormous back ache the next day.

>

> Anyway, true, effects could be confounded with other drugs, but if the

> specific content of one's LSD-induced trips is being repeated in some

> cases, isn't it reasonable to assume the flashback is a result of the

> LSD? Or, if LSD is the drug that makes you see traces out of the

> variety of drugs you use, and you, after having used it 50 times, now

> see traces *all the time,* wouldn't it be reasonable to suspect that

> the origen of your permanent traces is the same drug that caused them

> temporarily?

>

> Also, I would think that a drug that has the possibility of inducing

> hospitalizing terror in someone, and that has a greater propensity to

> do so if that person has a background of mental instability, would not

> be a wise choice as a therapeutic agent for mentally disturbed people.

> Not to mention, most people I've known who have used LSD have

> reported a tendency to think psychotic thoughts even when not having a

> bad trip. And there was a notable association between the group of

> people who held to an extreme philosophical relativism that questioned

> the reality of reality -- which has obvious sociopathic implications

> -- and those who took LSD, the connection between which should be

> apparent.

>

> And frankly that there is this group of researchers who think LSD is

> of therapeutic value -- laughably because it cures cluster

> headaches???? -- one of whom invented the drug and has admittedly used

> it until he was 97 years old, makes me suspect all these researchers

> are actually users, and that scares me.

>

> Chris

You don't have the slightest clue as to what you're talking about as usual. This

is CRAP.

[Guest guest]

but everyone I've known who has done

> much LSD is somewhat psychologically disturbed as a result, and the

> advice of most of them is to NOT do LSD for basically that reason.

I know a number of people who have done a lot of LSD and they are not

psychologically disturbed--at least no more than anyone else I know, heh.

Wondering how they--or you--know their disturbance(s) resulted from

the LSD use.

My aunt took a lot of LSD as a part of the LSD university studies at

the U of WA--was it in the forties or fifties?--and she is fine. Very

bright and sharp, almost ninety now.

B.

[Guest guest]

Chris-

>I've never heard of LSD being laced with PCP, but maybe.

Supposedly it's been a substantial problem.

Admittedly, though, it's hard to know what to believe when it comes

to drugs since promoters and enforcers both have substantial

incentives to distort reality.

>Anyway, true, effects could be confounded with other drugs, but if the

>specific content of one's LSD-induced trips is being repeated in some

>cases, isn't it reasonable to assume the flashback is a result of the

>LSD?

I don't see why. It could be that some contaminants or contaminants

are responsible for some kind of damage which results in

flashbacks. I'm not saying that's the case, but it certainly could

be, and I don't know that anybody's even attempted a proper study of the issue.

>Or, if LSD is the drug that makes you see traces out of the

>variety of drugs you use, and you, after having used it 50 times, now

>see traces *all the time,* wouldn't it be reasonable to suspect that

>the origen of your permanent traces is the same drug that caused them

>temporarily?

Maybe -- unless you were consistently getting the same contaminants

in your acid, which strikes me as quite possible.

>Also, I would think that a drug that has the possibility of inducing

>hospitalizing terror in someone, and that has a greater propensity to

>do so if that person has a background of mental instability, would not

>be a wise choice as a therapeutic agent for mentally disturbed people.

Maybe. I'm not familiar enough with LSD to comment on this.

>Not to mention, most people I've known who have used LSD have

>reported a tendency to think psychotic thoughts even when not having a

>bad trip.

I wonder whether this is a case of surveyor bias or something

similar, because the people I know who've copped to using acid have

tended to be among the nicer, calmer and more grounded people I've known.

> And there was a notable association between the group of

>people who held to an extreme philosophical relativism that questioned

>the reality of reality -- which has obvious sociopathic implications

>-- and those who took LSD, the connection between which should be

>apparent.

You're assuming your conclusion.

>And frankly that there is this group of researchers who think LSD is

>of therapeutic value -- laughably because it cures cluster

>headaches???? -- one of whom invented the drug and has admittedly used

>it until he was 97 years old, makes me suspect all these researchers

>are actually users, and that scares me.

Scares you?

I don't know whether LSD (pure, uncontaminated LSD) is a good thing

or a bad thing, or whether its goodness or badness is dose- and

usage-dependent, but you seem to be approaching the subject with a

profound bias.

-

[Guest guest]

IMHO, There is the possibility for abuse with all drugs.

<rant>

Ecstacy was designed for couples therapy. Now it is yet another

recreational drug. Look at oxycontin (the cancer pain medication that

was pulled off the market due to abuse). Or how about guafenisen?

That's in cold syrups, including the ones you give to your kids. It

makes me fairly loopy in the cold formulations, but apparently its

pretty easy to make it into something far more powerful. That's why

you can't buy more than 2 packs of cold pills at once in NJ.

As a young girl I was put on an antidepressant called noramtryptaline

(because I wasn't sleeping well, not because I was depressed). After

getting every side effect in the book, I later found out it is made in

a process remarkably similar to methamphetamine. No wonder I was wide

eyed bouncing off the walls. That is not the kind of stuff I want in

my system!

Drugs are drugs. Always will be. The only difference is " legal " ones

are prescribed and guarenteed to be pure - whatever that is worth.

They're all crap, designed by a money hungry corporation without a

damn about our health.

That's why I try to treat things naturally. And if I do end up using

a pill, its the kind you can buy at the health food store, no

prescription needed.

Why take Ambien or Unisom when you can take Melatonin?

Why take Prozac or Zoloft when you can take 5-HTP?

Oh, that's right... because the multi-million dollar drug companies

don't want you to know they exist because then they wouldn't make

money.

</rant>

-Lana

[Guest guest]

> Drugs are drugs. Always will be. The only difference is " legal " ones

> are prescribed and guarenteed to be pure - whatever that is worth.

> They're all crap, designed by a money hungry corporation without a

> damn about our health.

Say it girl! I'm right with you.

oh except...

> Why take Ambien or Unisom when you can take Melatonin?

> Why take Prozac or Zoloft when you can take 5-HTP?

Why take Melatonin or 5-HTP when you can use food, the ultimate

precursor?

Connie

[Guest guest]

On 1/13/06, implode7@... <implode7@...> wrote:

> the vast majority of lsd users were not harmed by the experience. Of course,

it depends on what you mean by 'much'. Obviously most people who 'abuse' certain

drugs, i.e. do them in excess, have some issues to begin with.

Well I guess it depends what you mean by " harm, " too, because I'm not

saying, or meaning to say, that using LSD will necessarily result in

some kind of mental disorder, but I would definitely consider

flashbacks, for example, as a negative mental side effect, however

easy it may be to cope with them.

And yes, " much, " it depends. What constitutes " excess " LSD use to you?

> Have you ever taken an hallucinogen? It is something that, I think, people

>should do at least once in a lifetime.

Not intentionally. Twice due to some bad luck, and I suppose were it

not for those events I would have.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

[Guest guest]

,

> >I've never heard of LSD being laced with PCP, but maybe.

> Supposedly it's been a substantial problem.

Ok, I didn't know that.

> Admittedly, though, it's hard to know what to believe when it comes

> to drugs since promoters and enforcers both have substantial

> incentives to distort reality.

Agreed.

> >Anyway, true, effects could be confounded with other drugs, but if the

> >specific content of one's LSD-induced trips is being repeated in some

> >cases, isn't it reasonable to assume the flashback is a result of the

> >LSD?

>

> I don't see why. It could be that some contaminants or contaminants

> are responsible for some kind of damage which results in

> flashbacks. I'm not saying that's the case, but it certainly could

> be, and I don't know that anybody's even attempted a proper study of the

issue.

Good point. It still strikes me as reasonable to attribute it to the

LSD in the absence of knowledge either way, but yes you are right

about the uncertainty. (I don't mean reasonable to attribute it in an

academic sense, but reasonable to consider it as one of the risks of

taking LSD.)

> >Or, if LSD is the drug that makes you see traces out of the

> >variety of drugs you use, and you, after having used it 50 times, now

> >see traces *all the time,* wouldn't it be reasonable to suspect that

> >the origen of your permanent traces is the same drug that caused them

> >temporarily?

> Maybe -- unless you were consistently getting the same contaminants

> in your acid, which strikes me as quite possible.

Again, good point. Still, just in terms of probability, that is one

of the desired hallucinogenic effects of the drug; it seems more

probably to attribute it to the drugs itself than some irrelevant

cutting agent, but you are right about the uncertainty.

> >Not to mention, most people I've known who have used LSD have

> >reported a tendency to think psychotic thoughts even when not having a

> >bad trip.

>

> I wonder whether this is a case of surveyor bias or something

> similar, because the people I know who've copped to using acid have

> tended to be among the nicer, calmer and more grounded people I've known.

Well it's not like I've surveyed LSD-users to get information about

the harms of LSD, but maybe I was hanging out with the wrong people I

don't know.

> Scares you?

Well no, I guess I'm emotionally indifferent to it. I don't know why

I said that.

> I don't know whether LSD (pure, uncontaminated LSD) is a good thing

> or a bad thing, or whether its goodness or badness is dose- and

> usage-dependent, but you seem to be approaching the subject with a

> profound bias.

You're probably right.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

[Guest guest]

Chris-

> > I don't see why. It could be that some contaminants or contaminants

> > are responsible for some kind of damage which results in

> > flashbacks. I'm not saying that's the case, but it certainly could

> > be, and I don't know that anybody's even attempted a proper study

> of the issue.

>

>Good point. It still strikes me as reasonable to attribute it to the

>LSD in the absence of knowledge either way, but yes you are right

>about the uncertainty. (I don't mean reasonable to attribute it in an

>academic sense, but reasonable to consider it as one of the risks of

>taking LSD.)

It's reasonable to consider it a risk of buying and taking LSD, yes,

but not necessarily to attribute it to the LSD itself. I think

that's a meaningful distinction.

>Again, good point. Still, just in terms of probability, that is one

>of the desired hallucinogenic effects of the drug; it seems more

>probably to attribute it to the drugs itself than some irrelevant

>cutting agent, but you are right about the uncertainty.

Traces are considered desirable? I didn't know that, but that

doesn't mean anything, since it's not a subject I'm all that familiar with.

-

[Guest guest]

Connie-

>Why take Melatonin or 5-HTP when you can use food, the ultimate

>precursor?

Possible reasons:

Our soil is bad enough that it's extremely difficult or even

effectively impossible for most people to acquire optimal nutrition

from food only.

Many people suffer from impaired conversion processes and benefit

from supplementing certain links in certain physiological chains.

Some natural substances are beneficial.

-

[Guest guest]

> Why take Melatonin or 5-HTP when you can use food, the ultimate

> precursor?

Very true. Although, for the common pill oriented person, that's a

slightly bigger leap than getting out of the clutches of the

pharmaceutical industry. As much as we'd really like to believe

someone who says they will use food as a cure, with the average

American you know it probably won't happen.

I was using antidepressants and sleeping meds as examples since they

are far overprescribed, addiciting substances which could be easily

replaced with natural suppliments. There is good theory behind

suppliments: sometimes the body forgets how to use food properly.

(Especially when diet has been neglected for so long.) It needs a

little reminding - like by taking Borage Oil (GLA) with food based

Omega 6s. Or by taking 5-HTP with tryptophan containing meals. Or by

taking Schussler's cell salts with high mineral foods like bone stock.

Its a lot like saying, " by the way body, this is what you're supposed

to be doing with this food. " I guess in a way this is applying

Pavlov's behavioristic theories (bell = useless, bell + food =

salivate, bell = salivate) to biology (Omega 6 = useless, Omega-6 +

GLA = GLA, Omega-6 = GLA).

-Lana

[Guest guest]

Re: Eggs, not LSD

On 1/13/06, implode7@... <implode7@...> wrote:

> the vast majority of lsd users were not harmed by the experience. Of

> course, it depends on what you mean by 'much'. Obviously most people

> who 'abuse' certain drugs, i.e. do them in excess, have some issues to

> begin with.

" Well I guess it depends what you mean by " harm, " too, because I'm not

saying, or meaning to say, that using LSD will necessarily result in

some kind of mental disorder, but I would definitely consider

flashbacks, for example, as a negative mental side effect, however easy

it may be to cope with them. "

So there is the issue as to what exactly they are, what causes them,

etc, and whether the chance of having them means definitively that one

shouldn't do any hallucinogens. But you like the sensationalist

approach.

" And yes, " much, " it depends. What constitutes " excess " LSD use to

you? "

Well, it's not like there is some magical threshold, anything over which

represents abuse. But, I think that with most drugs, I'd call it abuse

when the person does it out of dependence, or to excess, i.e. if one

gets falling down drunk then one is abusing alcohol. The great majority

of users, I would imagine, did it a few times, and didn't suffer any

horrible effects. It is an intense experience, and if one is stupid

about it - doing it in an uncomfortable situation, for instance, it can

make things quite nightmarish. If one does it in pleasant, unthreatening

surroundings, then it is a quite wonderful experience....of course, not

for all people, all of the time. But you are quite glib about it, never

having done it at all (I'm assuming).

Basically, it is impossible to take you seriously at all about it.

> Have you ever taken an hallucinogen? It is something that, I think,

> people >should do at least once in a lifetime.

" Not intentionally. Twice due to some bad luck, and I suppose were it

not for those events I would have. "

Well, I don't know the situation, but I think that taking it

unintentionally could be quite a bad situation, just like getting stoned

might be if you were in a situation where you really didn't want that to

happen. I actually had a friend back years ago who had to give up

smoking marijuana because he had 'bad trips' on it. But I wouldn't

extrapolate from that anecdotal evidence to conclude that smoking pot

was very dangerous.

[Guest guest]

On 1/13/06, Idol <paul_idol@...> wrote:

> It's reasonable to consider it a risk of buying and taking LSD, yes,

> but not necessarily to attribute it to the LSD itself. I think

> that's a meaningful distinction.

Agreed. I thought of that after I wrote last.

> >Again, good point. Still, just in terms of probability, that is one

> >of the desired hallucinogenic effects of the drug; it seems more

> >probably to attribute it to the drugs itself than some irrelevant

> >cutting agent, but you are right about the uncertainty.

>

> Traces are considered desirable? I didn't know that, but that

> doesn't mean anything, since it's not a subject I'm all that familiar with.

Well it is a hallucinogen. That's generally the first thing that

occurs, like if the dose is weak.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

[Guest guest]

> Our soil is bad enough that it's extremely difficult or even

> effectively impossible for most people to acquire optimal nutrition

> from food only.

I'll grant you the poor soil. But I do think our culture of treat-the-

symptom has people reaching not for food first, but for highly

fractionated natural this and that. 5HTP to help the serotonin

situation is an example. People take it for serotonin improvement

before even trying the changes in meal timing and composition, and

sleep, and stress, that affect serotonin.

> Many people suffer from impaired conversion processes and benefit

> from supplementing certain links in certain physiological chains.

Yes, true.

> Some natural substances are beneficial.

Agreed also. This reminds me of the breastfeeding thread sort of...

where people rush to formula before exhausting nutrition options for

the mom? similarly, people rush to highly refined substances eg for

minerals before doing things like super greens?

Connie

>

>

>

> -

>

[Guest guest]

> I realize the point was the eggs, but everyone I've known who

> has done much LSD is somewhat psychologically disturbed as a

> result, and the advice of most of them is to NOT do LSD for

> basically that reason. So I find it odd that it would be

> suggested for clinical use, although this isn't the first

> I've heard of it. There was a cover-page article in a local

> alternative paper a few years ago about that.

Let me start by saying that I've never done LSD although I'm open to it if I

could find a pure, trustworthy source. It's not something I'm actively

looking for.

A lot of the issues surrounding the clinical use of hallucinogens were

written about by Leary and Anton . Years ago I read a

bunch of their work but the only book I can recall was 's _Sex and

Drugs_. Most of the bad LSD trips were caused by a bad set and setting,

according to him. The drug itself is neutral. So, as with much other (most

other?) stuff it's the state of mind that you entered in to the experience

that determined the result that you got.

I'll end with the caution that I personally know several people who were/are

severely damaged by improper use of LSD. But then again I know a lot of

people who used it and are just fine.

Ron

[Guest guest]

> > Why take Ambien or Unisom when you can take Melatonin?

> > Why take Prozac or Zoloft when you can take 5-HTP?

>

> Why take Melatonin or 5-HTP when you can use food, the

> ultimate precursor?

>

Because they work and they work fast.

I have been eating clean for over 4 years now and despite all of that I was

still not feeling right in many ways. Doing 5 months of the _Diet Cure_

protocol last January to May changed my brain in ways that the course of

Prozac I took 10 years ago never did. And it very much altered my wife's

behavior, also. (She did it too.) She would agree with that statement.

It seems as though the supplementation gives your body a jump start and gets

the metabolic pathways that generate neurotransmitters working well again.

After that your body can continue to make the chemicals you need from the

food you give it.

Ron

[Guest guest]

On 1/14/06, RBJR <rbjr@...> wrote:

>

> > I realize the point was the eggs, but everyone I've known who

> > has done much LSD is somewhat psychologically disturbed as a

> > result, and the advice of most of them is to NOT do LSD for

> > basically that reason. So I find it odd that it would be

> > suggested for clinical use, although this isn't the first

> > I've heard of it. There was a cover-page article in a local

> > alternative paper a few years ago about that.

<snip>

> A lot of the issues surrounding the clinical use of hallucinogens were

> written about by Leary and Anton . Years ago I read a

> bunch of their work but the only book I can recall was 's _Sex and

> Drugs_. Most of the bad LSD trips were caused by a bad set and setting,

> according to him. The drug itself is neutral. So, as with much other (most

> other?) stuff it's the state of mind that you entered in to the experience

> that determined the result that you got.

>

> I'll end with the caution that I personally know several people who were/are

> severely damaged by improper use of LSD. But then again I know a lot of

> people who used it and are just fine.

>

> Ron

Ron,

This pretty much agrees with my experience too (though I don't trust

the " drugs are all we need " types at all). The drug's ability to make

one hyper-aware of certain aspects of reality, I think, brings with it

a heightened sensitivity to emotional and mental events. Using it at

a time when you're depressed, scared or otherwise uncomfortable is

just asking for trouble.

I've also found this to be true of ecstasy, especially in the

emotional sense. I've had some of my most profoundly wonderful and

terrible experiences on ecstasy, and the difference between the two

came from how the friends around me felt. When a friend had taken a

load of PCP that he thought was LSD (you're right, this is/was

often a problem) and had intense paranoid delusions that we were all

aliens out to destroy him, his hatred and violence left me absolutely

shattered. On the other hand, when I experienced the love and

friendship of the people around me while on ecstasy, I had

overwhelming feelings of love for and peace with everything and

everyone that I can honestly say have only been rivaled by maybe one

or two natural peak experiences.

But I have to agree with Gene in that I feel almost as if use of some

sort of intense " hallucinogen " (or even something like ecstasy, for

certain people) should be required study for living. I would

personally choose something like mushrooms or peyote or some other

natural form over refined stuff like acid (because acid always felt

ultimately machine-like and cold to me, whereas the others left me

feeling more " connected " to the " living universe, " for lack of terms

that aren't so horribly tainted by the new age). And in fact in just

about every traditional society in the world, some form of intense

drug experience was an important part of reaching adulthood. The

difference was that it wasn't seen as escapism, but rather as

fostering a connection with other facets of reality that were seen as

just as important as the flat world of objects.

Anyway, this " all drugs are bad " malarky seems most often the result

of inexperience or paranoid rumor-mongering or fear of genuinely

worldview-threatening experience, rather than actual knowledge. Yes,

bad things do happen all the time, but I'd argue that 95% of the time

they result not from inherent problems with the drugs (depending on

the drug, of course, and assuming the person has taken the crucial

care to ensure they have a clean and quality source-- after all, the

responsibility for preparation in traditional societies always rested

with those who knew exactly what they were doing) but rather with

societal or personal problems that would manifest anyway in some form

or another. Even those negative experiences can be profoundly

important in bringing such underlying problems to the surface where

they can be dealt with instead of repressed. Psychological growth is

always painful, as old forms are burned away and new (and better,

closer) ones emerge (at least if the growth is actually growth and not

regression). Pain that's not dealt with isn't a problem with the drug

but rather is a problem with a culture that doesn't teach us how the

drug is to be used and how to understand the experience.

For those still reading, a short example from my own life: I am 19,

in my college apartment. I live, at this point, in a boring and flat

world to which I feel no connection at all. There is the TV and the

computer, study leading toward a future of unfulfilling jobs in a

get-money-or-eat-dirt world, social awkwardness stemming from fear of

a sincere relationship with and connection to other feeling beings. I

take acid. All of these feelings are magnified-- I can't even look

people in the face, the world is terrifying and inorganic and

breathing coldly like a machine. I step outside, sit on the grass

next to a tree, and suddenly I can feel again that other possibilities

exist inside of me and everyone else, that old forms are not yet

completely supressed, and that there might be an actual world to be

found and lived. These feelings carry over past that night and are

the start of a reintegration into that world.

This is not regression into some outdated and naïve way of life, this

is integration beginning to take over for forgetfulness and

repression. " Make it new, " as Ezra Pound said of art's relation to

human history. Only now, seven short years later, can I talk about it

with some degree of understanding, but the all-important seed was

planted by the very intensity and world-shaking negativity of the

beginning of that experience.

Anyway, sorry this turned into a novel, but there's much to say, and I

think this is most certainly on-topic for this group, whether some

like it or not.

[Guest guest]

Connie-

>I'll grant you the poor soil. But I do think our culture of treat-the-

>symptom has people reaching not for food first, but for highly

>fractionated natural this and that.

Sure, but that doesn't really mean what I think you think it means.

> 5HTP to help the serotonin

>situation is an example. People take it for serotonin improvement

>before even trying the changes in meal timing and composition, and

>sleep, and stress, that affect serotonin.

Yes, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have a valuable place.

As horrendous as the SAD is and as uneducated as most people's

approaches to both medicine and alternative medicine are, I think

it's almost as unwise to dismiss supplementation and assume that just

because pharmaceutical companies are arguably evil that all refined

supplements and all drugs are bad in all circumstances no matter what.

After all, if you look at the natural world, you'll see many, many

examples of animals medicating themselves by seeking out particular

plants and plant parts. People just take that approach further, and

the fact that they're generally not doing so wisely in no way means

that the approach itself is inescapably flawed.

I recommend Ron's post on his and his wife's experiences to anyone

questioning the validity of supplementation. And if that doesn't

convince you, consider the issue of trace minerals. Many trace

minerals are absolutely required in adequate measure for all sorts of

physiological processes, and yet because of the state of our soil and

food supply, it's all but impossible to get enough of them from

food. Here's one example of

many. <http://www.newswithviews.com/Howenstine/james11.htm>

-

[Guest guest]

> >

> > > I realize the point was the eggs, but everyone I've known who

> > > has done much LSD is somewhat psychologically disturbed as a

> > > result, and the advice of most of them is to NOT do LSD for

> > > basically that reason. So I find it odd that it would be

> > > suggested for clinical use, although this isn't the first

> > > I've heard of it. There was a cover-page article in a local

> > > alternative paper a few years ago about that.

> <snip>

> > A lot of the issues surrounding the clinical use of hallucinogens were

> > written about by Leary and Anton . Years ago

I read a

> > bunch of their work but the only book I can recall was 's

_Sex and

> > Drugs_. Most of the bad LSD trips were caused by a bad set and

setting,

> > according to him. The drug itself is neutral. So, as with much

other (most

> > other?) stuff it's the state of mind that you entered in to the

experience

> > that determined the result that you got.

> >

> > I'll end with the caution that I personally know several people

who were/are

> > severely damaged by improper use of LSD. But then again I know a

lot of

> > people who used it and are just fine.

> >

> > Ron

>

> Ron,

>

> This pretty much agrees with my experience too (though I don't trust

> the " drugs are all we need " types at all). The drug's ability to make

> one hyper-aware of certain aspects of reality, I think, brings with it

> a heightened sensitivity to emotional and mental events. Using it at

> a time when you're depressed, scared or otherwise uncomfortable is

> just asking for trouble.

>

> I've also found this to be true of ecstasy, especially in the

> emotional sense. I've had some of my most profoundly wonderful and

> terrible experiences on ecstasy, and the difference between the two

> came from how the friends around me felt. When a friend had taken a

> load of PCP that he thought was LSD (you're right, this is/was

> often a problem) and had intense paranoid delusions that we were all

> aliens out to destroy him, his hatred and violence left me absolutely

> shattered. On the other hand, when I experienced the love and

> friendship of the people around me while on ecstasy, I had

> overwhelming feelings of love for and peace with everything and

> everyone that I can honestly say have only been rivaled by maybe one

> or two natural peak experiences.

>

> But I have to agree with Gene in that I feel almost as if use of some

> sort of intense " hallucinogen " (or even something like ecstasy, for

> certain people) should be required study for living. I would

> personally choose something like mushrooms or peyote or some other

> natural form over refined stuff like acid (because acid always felt

> ultimately machine-like and cold to me, whereas the others left me

> feeling more " connected " to the " living universe, " for lack of terms

> that aren't so horribly tainted by the new age). And in fact in just

> about every traditional society in the world, some form of intense

> drug experience was an important part of reaching adulthood. The

> difference was that it wasn't seen as escapism, but rather as

> fostering a connection with other facets of reality that were seen as

> just as important as the flat world of objects.

>

> Anyway, this " all drugs are bad " malarky seems most often the result

> of inexperience or paranoid rumor-mongering or fear of genuinely

> worldview-threatening experience, rather than actual knowledge. Yes,

> bad things do happen all the time, but I'd argue that 95% of the time

> they result not from inherent problems with the drugs (depending on

> the drug, of course, and assuming the person has taken the crucial

> care to ensure they have a clean and quality source-- after all, the

> responsibility for preparation in traditional societies always rested

> with those who knew exactly what they were doing) but rather with

> societal or personal problems that would manifest anyway in some form

> or another. Even those negative experiences can be profoundly

> important in bringing such underlying problems to the surface where

> they can be dealt with instead of repressed. Psychological growth is

> always painful, as old forms are burned away and new (and better,

> closer) ones emerge (at least if the growth is actually growth and not

> regression). Pain that's not dealt with isn't a problem with the drug

> but rather is a problem with a culture that doesn't teach us how the

> drug is to be used and how to understand the experience.

>

> For those still reading, a short example from my own life: I am 19,

> in my college apartment. I live, at this point, in a boring and flat

> world to which I feel no connection at all. There is the TV and the

> computer, study leading toward a future of unfulfilling jobs in a

> get-money-or-eat-dirt world, social awkwardness stemming from fear of

> a sincere relationship with and connection to other feeling beings. I

> take acid. All of these feelings are magnified-- I can't even look

> people in the face, the world is terrifying and inorganic and

> breathing coldly like a machine. I step outside, sit on the grass

> next to a tree, and suddenly I can feel again that other possibilities

> exist inside of me and everyone else, that old forms are not yet

> completely supressed, and that there might be an actual world to be

> found and lived. These feelings carry over past that night and are

> the start of a reintegration into that world.

>

> This is not regression into some outdated and naïve way of life, this

> is integration beginning to take over for forgetfulness and

> repression. " Make it new, " as Ezra Pound said of art's relation to

> human history. Only now, seven short years later, can I talk about it

> with some degree of understanding, but the all-important seed was

> planted by the very intensity and world-shaking negativity of the

> beginning of that experience.

>

> Anyway, sorry this turned into a novel, but there's much to say, and I

> think this is most certainly on-topic for this group, whether some

> like it or not.

>

>

>

It was nice to read your short story ...Really . The

understanding of such intense experiences does take time, sometimes a

very long time, to integrate into your life and understand.

I too was affected positively by psychedelics. Though it wasn't LSD

or Ectacy, it was a more traditional one, psilocybin mushrooms. I was

very interested in shamanism, and one thing led to another .

The first time I ever ate psilocybin mushrooms, I had a near death

experience where I saw my entire life play before my conciousness and

saw myself die, and it was just so clear and felt more real than

anything I've ever experienced in my life. It was when I was 16 or

17 and it was a perfect rites of initiation ritual for growing up and

accepting responsibility for all of my decisions.

I realized there is something terrible wrong with the way people live

today. This capitalist consumer culture has made our minds and bodies

very sick. This world is incredibly out of balance, and it will get

much worse if people don't soon realize the foolishness of trying to

find happiness through consumerism.

My experience with psychedelics gives me the power to change any part

of me if I feel the need, and this has come in handy immensely when

changing diet.

I feel it is very unfortunate that there is so much negativity

regarding psychedelics, because like someone said earlier they are

neutral, but they can give you a different but very useful view of

your life and the world which isn't very pretty sometimes.

-

[Guest guest]

> Say it girl! I'm right with you.

> oh except...

>

> > Why take Ambien or Unisom when you can take Melatonin?

> > Why take Prozac or Zoloft when you can take 5-HTP?

>

> Why take Melatonin or 5-HTP when you can use food, the ultimate

> precursor?

>

I agree that food is the optimal source, but severe depression is

about survival. The supplements taken on an empty stomach affect

the brain quickly and rely less on a healthy digestive tract than

would regular food sources. But I am biased. A custom amino blend

changed my life and allowed me the time to focus on the

fundamentals. It's not really possible to make drastic lifestyle

changes when you are depressed. It might be possible with other

conditions, but definitely not depression.

Further, supplementation may be warranted in cases of severe

deficiency. My magnesium and B levels are still not what they

should be despite a very good diet for 3 years. My lithium levels

turned around without supplementation.

[Guest guest]

Gene,

> The great majority

> of users, I would imagine, did it a few times, and didn't suffer any

> horrible effects. It is an intense experience, and if one is stupid

> about it - doing it in an uncomfortable situation, for instance, it can

> make things quite nightmarish. If one does it in pleasant, unthreatening

> surroundings, then it is a quite wonderful experience....of course, not

> for all people, all of the time. But you are quite glib about it, never

> having done it at all (I'm assuming).

Fair enough. My approach was simplistic, and as pointed out, I

paid no attention to confounding factors which is especially true if

it's true that LSD is often cut with PCP. And in truth I have no idea

what kind of doses or settings the researchers are considering.

> Basically, it is impossible to take you seriously at all about it.

> > Have you ever taken an hallucinogen? It is something that, I think,

> > people >should do at least once in a lifetime.

>

> " Not intentionally. Twice due to some bad luck, and I suppose were it

> not for those events I would have. "

>

> Well, I don't know the situation, but I think that taking it

> unintentionally could be quite a bad situation, just like getting stoned

> might be if you were in a situation where you really didn't want that to

> happen.

The first time I smoked pot, I was 13, alone, and it was laced with

some unknown hallucinogenic substance. A few people I've talked to

who have done a lot of drugs thought it was a " mega-dose " of PCP,

while at least one person said the experience sounded more like LSD

but some of us have wondered whether LSD survives incineration. The

person I got it from (my step-brother, although our parents were

divorced at that point and living in different apartments of the same

building) told me it was laced with something the next time he saw me

(he was with his dad every other weekend), and that the kid he got it

from was crazy, but he couldn't remember what it was.

I always had mixed feelings about the incident, in a way being glad to

have the experience, but for a large portion of it I thought I was

going to die, so it was somewhat terrifying. I'm guessing that it

played a role in my anxiety disorders that deevloped afterwards,

especially sense for a long time I had an obsessive phobia of my food

being drugged or poisoned. I went to the hospital once because I

thought there was LSD in my gum, for example, and my pulse was

measured at 190. They " tested " it (haha) and found nothing.

There was another time, too, where I think there a group of us smoked

pot laced with something, some of which was stolen.

But anyway, part of my point before was that since the mindset with

which you approach LSD is going to affect your experience, I can't

imagine how it can be therapeutic for someone with mental illness.

Generally it's considered not something to try if you have a problem

with depression or anxiety. But again, I don't really know what they

were recommending.

> I actually had a friend back years ago who had to give up

> smoking marijuana because he had 'bad trips' on it. But I wouldn't

> extrapolate from that anecdotal evidence to conclude that smoking pot

> was very dangerous.

I would think he'd had " bad trips " with acid preceding this, no?

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

[Guest guest]

" But anyway, part of my point before was that since the mindset with

which you approach LSD is going to affect your experience, I can't

imagine how it can be therapeutic for someone with mental illness.

Generally it's considered not something to try if you have a problem

with depression or anxiety. But again, I don't really know what they

were recommending. "

Right - you really know nothing about it. I would imagine that in a

therapeutic situation, the therapist regulates the dosage, and directs

the 'session' so that it is as unthreatening as possible. I would also

imagine that it wouldn't be indicated for all people.

> I actually had a friend back years ago who had to give up smoking

> marijuana because he had 'bad trips' on it. But I wouldn't extrapolate

> from that anecdotal evidence to conclude that smoking pot was very

> dangerous.

" I would think he'd had " bad trips " with acid preceding this, no? "

No.