its science without the morality threaded through it. Psychedelics were demonized because of racism and fear, nothing else. They have been used for millennia for therapeutic benefits - look at every native culture with shamen and you will find them.
I actually have to agree with the parent comment here. I think the message at both ends of the spectrum is bogus.
I've taken my fair share of psychedelics and while I've had good times on them, I've also had some of the most miserable moments in my life on them. The only instances I can think of in my life where I can say without a doubt that I would never want to repeat.
They're certainly not for everybody and there's nothing therapeutic about giving them to people in a fragile mental/emotional state.
> while I've had good times on them, I've also had some of the most miserable moments in my life
Funnily enough I have similar sentiments about my travels in the developing world. Best of times and worst of times. But I would still probably encourage anyone with the slightest curiosity to do that kind of travelling. I'm not sure how far I'd push this metaphor but the general point is that sometimes an experience is worth it even if it has some fairly unpleasant aspects.
Bad experiences happen during traveling, you feel angry/cheated and move on. It's a tale you can retell in parties years later. You are out of that place.
Bad experiences during a trip, though, are frightful because, at the back of your mind, you know that what you experienced was all in your head. Like the parent commenter said, here be demons and here is nowhere else but your head. Hard to imagine getting away from that.
Some people find value in a bad trip. It is usually showing you something your conscience afraid to deal with, you might be better off after confronting reasons why you had those "most miserable moments", they might not be as bad in retrospective
> they're certainly not for everybody and there's nothing therapeutic about giving them to people in a fragile mental/emotional state.
you're right, they might not be for everybody. there are good reasons to believe that people with a genetic risk factor for bipolar disorder or schizophrenia shouldn't take them because it exacerbates that existing risk factor. besides that group though, it's less obvious who should or should not take them.
I actually think psychedelics have amazing potential specifically FOR people with a fragile mental/emotional state (example: PTSD patients) when used as part of a holistic regime of therapy and counseling as well as taking psychedelics under the appropriate circumstances.
The shamanic traditions of many indigenous cultures emphasize exactly this. They aren't using these things as party drugs. Strong medicine, used with spiritual guidance and community support. That is a working model.
Behavior leads to outcomes. If you emulate a people, you'll end up with the outcomes of those people.
Looking at the outcomes of shamanistic native cultures (e.g. a total lack of influence, power, freedom, equality, or prosperity), I'll stick to sobriety and industry, thanks.
Well, you obviously know the history. You can see as well as I that cultures with regular psychedelic use tend to be incapable of defending themselves from even very casual incursions by foreign powers.
I can't for the life of me understand what your point is supposed to be. You're making an observation that the particular civilization that led a campaign of violent global colonization was one that had a hostile attitude towards psychedelics. Yes, that is a correct observation. What kind of generalization are you trying to make from that though?
I'm pretty sure that a nomadic lifestyle, massive technological disadvantage and vulnerability to pathogens played a bigger role in that than psychedelics, but feel free to prove me wrong if you have a credible source on what you are implying.
And cultures without regular psychedelic use tend to initiate casual incursions into foreign lands; practice enslavement, genocide, overpopulation and overuse of resources and industrial pollution; and maintain strict hierarchies that benefit the few at the expense of the many.
If such a dominator culture, indeed now the dominant culture, were to stop repressing the use of psychedelics, there seems to be little danger of it being taken over--it's already all but quashed the competition. It would with any luck help to curb the excesses that are the cause of so much trouble, and help to provide the will to use the fantastic tools we have made to better ends.
depends on which drug you're talking about? Psilocybin and LSD are remarkably non-toxic. There is no known overdose level for either of those, as far as I know, and I've read quite a lot of the research. That's not to say that a huge dose would be psychologically safe or comfortable, just that I don't know of anyone suffering bodily harm as the primary action of taking either psilocybin or LSD.
I'm not one to suggest psychedelics are immoral, but an appeal to antiquity fallacy is hardly warranted. Especially one as fraught with pseudoscience and magical thinking as shamanism.
While I consider microdosing an interesting concept, nobody should miss out on a well planned experience with a normal dose, in your favorite spot in nature, with carefully selected music, in perfect weather conditions. Also, read James Fadiman's classic [0] beforehand and "test before you ingest".
Please don't dictate what 'nobody' should 'miss out' on.
I'm all for the fredom of anyone to ingest whatever strange concoctions take their fancy. Reciprocally, don't lean on those of us who are happy enough about the way our brains work without artificial flavouring.
I'm curious as to what brought you to a thread about LSD if sobriety is such an integral part of your identity. Just as you took offense to someone recommending a psychedelic experience, I take offense at your notion that any state of mind besides the standard-issue one is "artificial flavouring." Anyways, I'll carry on with my weirdo ways.
Sorry, didn't mean to dictate anything. Having had the opportunity to live the perfect experience thanks to this molecule, I simply wish it upon everybody. I honestly want this planet to step out of the shadow and be happy, that's all.
On the contrary, seems to me the point you made is extremely personal. Your lashing out at someone for suggesting people "should" experiment with this or that expresses an opinion just as strong as that of the original poster.
have you considered that perhaps you don't know what you don't know? or that your current state of happiness is not a limitation or prescription against trying new things?
so then, when you encounter something interesting and mysterious that a large number of people have experimented with and had positive results from, why is your reaction to say "absolutely fucking not"?
Part of the reason may be that I absolutely fucking loathe the never ending evangelisation so many users of various chemical stimulants seem to glory in.
A bigger part may be that I absolutely fucking dislike having my neurochemistry played silly games with, aka being drunk or stoned or tripping or whatever the requisite term may be.
Staying in parent's vernacular idiom, assuming it to have some sort of point.
alright, let me annoy you just one more time than we can part ways amicably. I fully respect everyone's liberty to do, or not do, whatever they want with their mind and body. That said, I believe that there are some experiences that can be massively beneficial and I do advocate for them because I believe it is a worthy cause.
I'll say two things, briefly, so please forgive any necessary lack of detail due to abbreviation.
First, is that absolutely everything you do has a profound impact on your neurochemistry. That's just how the animal brain works. The air you breather impacts it. The food you eat impacts it. Watching a TV show or movie impacts it. Doing your work at the office impacts it. Everything. There is no experience you can possible have that is not also governed by changes in your neurochemistry. It is an illusion to believe there is such a thing as a "pure" state of neurochemistry. The chemistry of your brain is a reflection of your inner and outer environment. Taking a drug that causes sensations inwardly, through neurochemical action, is not particularly different, from a brain chemistry point of view anyway, than doing something else with your body that causes sensations and corresponding changes in brain chemistry.
Second, is that not all drugs are created equal and they shouldn't be lumped together any more than you would lump together, for example, all activities done with your legs. Just as you distinguish between the value of going for a nice walk in the woods, and jumping off a bridge, you ought to distinguish between the different varieties of drug induced experience. There are very very few that I would recommend on their own merits because the sensation that arises from them is inherently worthwhile. Most of them don't cause inherently worthwhile sensations to arise. Alcohol certainly doesn't. Most stimulants don't. There are only two classes of drugs that I think actually do cause worthwhile sensations to arise, on their own merits: entheogens (classic psychedelics like LSD and Psilocybin) and empathogens (MDMA, basically).
Why do I say these drugs create experiences that are worthwhile on their own merits? It is hard to do any justice to it with any amount of words let alone so few. The only thing I can really say is that these experiences are incredibly powerful tools for the exploration of your own mind and soul. That's not something I would say about a thing intended merely for entertainment or stimulation. The psychedelic experience is not about entertainment or stimulation. It's about discovering the nature of your own mind.
This strongly echoes my own personal experience, as well my understanding of how to more accurately think about these substances. Thank you for taking the time to write such an articulate comment.
Mind you, being such powerful tools, they should be used with great care, as they can be used in damaging ways and by those who aren't prepared. And they aren't magic either -- they aren't going to save the world or cure cancer.
But, I think that research done with an open mind reveals the mainstream perspective on psylocybin and LSD to be quite misguided and uninformed. Based off personal experience, as well as recent sciencific studies, it seems they have the potential to bring about much good. I suppose my main concern is that most people aren't interested, at this point in time, in having their perspective and worldviews challenged in the way that serious, introspective use tends to do.
Just to clarify, I'm talking about special occasion, standard dose usage. I don't have any knowledge about the effects or safety of micro-dosing.
Given the current stigma against even very informed, responsible usage of certain substances, I worry that comments like mine above could potentially have a negative impact on efforts to raise money for a company, found a non-profit, run for local office, etc.
I don't know if I'll be doing things like that in the future, but I don't want to shoot myself in the foot. The internet is sometimes a little too good at holding onto information sometimes :/
Perhaps I'm being overly cautious. It's hard to say.
Obviously, yes, any activity or lack thereof induces changes in the state of my brain - I am not a closed system, I am part of existence.
But as you seamlessly go on to acknowledge, there are effects, and then there are effects. Some of these effects, I choose to pursue - I read books, I drink coffee, I comment on HN, at times I even think. And some, I choose not to. There is a silly comment further up, about why I would be reading an article on LSD, seeing as I am not in the market myself. I felt like changing my brain-state by banging my head something when I read it. Of course I can take an interest, as I can in almost anything. In fact, I have taken plenty of interest, and here's my point: Nothing - nothing - I have ever read on psychedelic experience has tickled any desire whatsoever to go and try the stuff. I'm sure there is no particular rationality behind one choice or the other. It just doesn't interest me.
As I started out saying, I'm all for anyone's freedom to choose. I actually speak up for lifting of all drug restrictions. Let supermarkets carry the damned stuff, I really am not my brother's keeper. Just leave me out of it. I'm not against as such, I just really, really am not interested.
I do not understand the widespread impulse to prohibit. Likewise, I have no idea why so many users of so many substances have this urgent need to spread the message.
Psychedelics are a tool. Use them or don't. They do have the potential to open and widen one's mind, and also the opposite. Not all are suited for this kind of tool, or even for mind exploration. They can also be very dangerous, it depends on the mind (what doesn't?).
“Artificial flavoring”? Well if this isn’t loaded... You, most of all, should do as he advises and get out of your conditioned shell and constricted perspective. He was trying to share some of the beauty he had experienced. Since you seem to have a hostile view to anything but the one you are normalized to, I suggest you go out there and experiment before you lay dying and wonder at all the joys you may have missed out on.
I am sure you mean well, but you are either to inexperienced or maybe a typical pothead which would like too see whole world happy and stoned/trippin'.
There are probably > 1 billion of people on this planet who wouldn't be better off with strong psychedelics. Even after single dose, many would end up with worst ever nightmare that would take them months or years to shrug off (probably never completely), others could easily have their already-dormant psychosis manifest. You can try all you want with environment and setup, each of us is so unique that you can't cover everybody, in fact far from it.
It's a very powerful experience, too powerful. Just talk to any psychiatric doctor, most insane asylums have at least few patients who didn't come back from various trips (various shrooms, acid, durman, ayahusca, mescalin and so on and on), and probably never will. Not everybody has body and mind resilience of Hunter S. Thompson.
I thought the same thing until a close friend of mine lost his mind after taking lsd one time. Maybe not EVERYONE (people with underlying mental issues) should experiment with drugs
While jokes are a good way to deal with tragedy, the reality of being an acid causality is no laughing matter. My life has been over since my first trip over 20 years ago, about to implode
I think microdosing LSD is 100% placebo and that we should stick to rationalism and science. Taking small doses of hallucinogens without clear proof and long term research is your choice, however, proving it has value seems incredibly difficult as there are so many biases involved.
Fairly similar to the difficulties that surround proving the efficacy of antidepressants.
> I think microdosing LSD is 100% placebo and that we should stick to rationalism and science.
This is an interesting sentence because the first half and the second half of it directly contradict each other. I too believe in sticking to rationalism and science which surely forces me to disregard your opening statement?
Yes it's badly worded, I should say I believe it's nearly impossible to draw conclusions due to the placebo effects, complexity of people's brains and the differences between subjects.
I actually am pretty skeptical about anti-depressants personally and they seem very addictive/dependence inducing. I suppose it's better than people killing themselves but the way they are handed out seems almost abusive.
I have never seen double blind IQ tests with microdosed LSD done.
While hardly a "double blind IQ test", or a microdose, Ken Kesey described an interesting lab experience. Back when there was still academic research being done on psychedelics, he was part of an experiment group. One of the experiments being done on him was measuring his sense of time (the "time dilation" often reported by users). They would ask him to estimate one minute passing by, while they timed it. But before they did the time test, they took his pulse, and wrote the results where he could see them. So when they asked him to time one minute, he simply counted his pulse - presumably hitting his estimate more accurately than a "sober" person could.
I think this particular incident says a lot about the difficulty of doing scientific research around perception, for something that so radically alters perception.
"I think microdosing LSD is 100% placebo and that we should stick to rationalism and science"
Well, according to your own words you are not sticking to rationalism and science, you are actually letting your pre conceived notions about what's right and what's wrong dictate how you act without any scientific support.
Try it. It's definitly not (only) placebo. I did it at work, coding on personal projects and with certain social events. Just a few times but each time was magic, I simply felt and acted like a better human being.
It's all in our head anyway, so if it was a placebo effect, but a noticeable one for that person, with the trigger being that "I took LSD", then why not?
When you're angry, but can calm down or feel happy because of a single thought, that can be called placebo as well, just one thought triggering a whole cascade in your brain.
Sure, for life saving drugs, placebos should have no place, but for anything else - why not?
From what I read, it is harmful because it's illegal. Just like countless other drugs. You can't get a high purity sample from an advanced lab and have to trust random chemists who do it illegally. Pure LSD seems to be quite safe.
Should probably ban alcohol and tobacco, since they're really risky, and refuse to re-legalize them unless everything else is legalized heh.
I did a lot of different stuff in my lifetime. I don't expect anything anymore and let things come as they come. I don't claim to always know a placebo but i am 100% certain this was real.
this is how science is done, actually. James Fadiman is collecting data[0] (that's the plural of anecdote) so the useful knowledge gained by the self-experimenters isn't lost and the rest of us can benefit from it. were you under the impression that new knowledge must only be generated by studies approved by the federal government?
While I think LSD is a very interesting drug that can give people valuable insights and improve their (and thereby also others) lives, I would not do microdosing on a daily basis myself.
LSD increases serotonin significantly, and it's plausible that some of the well-being effect of microdosing is caused by this. The problem is that the brain tends to down-regulate its own production of a neurotransmitter when it is induced by a drug over time. Since the brain is plastic it will probably up-regulate the serotonin production once the microdosing is stopped, but there is a theoretical risk that neurotransmitter production and/or functioning is permanently changed.
This makes me think of a long time ago, when I was diagnosed with ADD as an adult. I started medicating with dexadrine, which really did work wonderfully. Changed my life. A couple of years later, I had the worst mental breakdown of my life. I was a wreck. Borderline suicidal. I'm amazed that I didn't lose my spouse or my job over it, and I did lose a number of friends.
Quit taking dexadrine, and it cleared up. Serotonin imbalance is no laughing matter. I technically still have a prescription, but I haven't taken it in years. I've learned to just live with the issues the ADD causes.
On the subject of LSD... personally, I think LSD is a wonderful invention with enormous therapeutic potential. Back when I was just a bum kid in a college town, I probably tripped at least 50 times. I learned a lot about myself and the world, and don't regret a moment of it. With that in context, I find the research into microdosing really fascinating. I can easily imagine the benefits.
But that serotonin thing. I'd want to know more about that.
Not the one you asked, but psychedelics inject a ton of entropy into the system, allowing you to break out of the "bound states" humans tend to get stuck in.
Taking shrooms pretty much rewired my value structure from the ground up. I went from caring about traditional things like a good career (therefore social approval and everything else), to valuing spending time in the sun with good friends more than our usual ego-centric living patrerns.
LSD is great for the visual/aesthetic experience - it's so stimulating and kinesthetic - but it leaves your mind a little more intact.
DMT is a really interesting and profound psychedelic, and one that is massively misunderstood and, IMO, unfairly judged. Doing large amounts of DMT improved my ability to visualize hyperdimensional systems, and gave me (in my subjective opinion) a better understanding of the nature and structure of existence
The trip logic works like this. Your brain-organism evolved in the context of our 4-dimensional universe. Psychedelics tend to alter patterns of perception in a way that releases a flood of images. Your brain itself is a hyperdimensional problem solver so when flipped on its head with DMT you can experience really fascinating hyperdimensional universe-images.
As to revealing anything of the real structure of existence...nothing can be said. They reveal the structure of our brains, which themselves are a micromodel of our universe (compare the branching pattern of the brain's neurons to a zoomed out picture of the universe to the branching pattern of a tree to the lichtenberg patterns of lightning to the branching pattern of mycelia...they all tend to converge to the same fractal).
DMT can never give you "real" knowledge of the universe...but neither can any kind of experiment. All of our observations are really just images formed via some form of interaction. All you can really do is get hunches, and hope that as a prt of the universe, its greater structure is reflected in the microcosm that is you.
If I was forced to guess, I would say we exist in a 4d pocket universe within a fractally infinite hyperdimensional bulk multiverse. Universes are constantly being born and dying, with the net effect that the fundamental nature of reality is timeless (time is a psychological abstraction). But that brings us no closer to true understanding, which is probably an illusion anyway.
This will hopefully be validated by some of the controlled clinical studies that are just springing up after a decades long moratorium.
I think it's helpful to distinguish between the more recreational, or life-boosting user, and those who might use it to alleviate conditions that would normally warrant psychiatric medications. For the former, you're definitely messing with a stable mind.
For the latter, this is totally a new frontier. This mechanism at least on the surface seems to mimic SSRIs, so presumably tuned properly could be a more holistic replacement, considering LSD's ability to allow people of all conditions to also do some soul searching on a personal level. Similar to how the recommended, accepted treatment is medication + therapy.
IMO most "stable minds" should be messed with. Stable is relative. Most minds are "stable" in that they are crystallized into arbitrary activity patterns. This is why deep personality change is extremely difficult without psychedelics (you need a transformative experience, psychedelic or otherwise, to change)
What about those with chronic depression and/or going through a form of depression? I find myself struggling quite a bit at times, often lacking motivation. I would welcome anything to help me sort it out in a controlled fashion so I can become more functional.
have you tried full doses of psychedelics, taken once every 2-3 months or so? the research done by Roland Griffiths et al has shown a lot of promise for this application.
"Some people use microdosing ... arguing it helps with their mental health problems."
Well, there you have it. Self-medication for metal health issues. Advocating self-medication for mental health issues is like recommending people to self-medicate with painkillers to stop that pain, instead of getting proper medical diagnosis and treatment.
Not saying you are wrong. But i thread my depression with occasional drug use (next to other things like travel) which works perfectly well. Instead of taking all the pills that doctors wanted to give me.
A psychedelic experience every year or so really keeps my happy self functioning.
Guess i put that to generalised. But instead of having my yearly depression i spent half a year in SEA. But for me it also contains the flexibility and new experiences that I seeked out in life.
Also living between people with all kind of unique problems made me more happy with my general life
well before i went on to my first real longer travel experience i got diagnosed with a burnout, after refusing to proceed with any therapy against whatever they thought i had.
I guess it is different for anyone, but for me it really helped a lot
It's not like "proper medical diagnosis and treatment" didn't contribute to painkillers dependence problems we are dealing with now. A lot of people self-medicating with cannabis are in quite a good position in comparison.
It's interesting to read about experiences of others and for many people experimentation is a good way to improve their lives.
I agree on some level. However, let's be honest, most doctors don't give a shit really.. Something has to be really wrong otherwise they wont give you anything.
Also, many doctors are persuaded (using a nicer word here) into prescribing certain drugs over the others; basically preference created by.... free lunches and golf events. There is an interesting documentary on this, forgot the name; Google might help.
I think the incidence rate of that is quite low compared to the amount of 'happy customers'. I suspect there are plenty of people that would suggest that you're fear-mongering at worst, and at best seemingly letting a rather rare incident distort your message.
Consider the opposite to your 'don't downplay shit' perspective: 'overblowing shit' can cause issues too. Best to respectfully educate of the risks, and yet ultimately understand that everyone makes their own choice, complete with consequences.
More like being distracted and unproductive all day. Tripping is great when that's what you're trying to do, but it would be quite awful if you had to be at work the whole time.
Roughly anywhere between 5 and 25 micrograms. There's a very thin line between "i'm feeling good and i can get work done" and "that nail in the wall sure looks interesting, lets investigate its origins" as you approach the upper bound of that.
Thanks, I imagine that could be quite a hit-and-miss game to play. I can't see black-market tabs of LSD containing an even distribution of the molecule, at that scale. One day you might feel nothing, then that nail might look very interesting the day after.
That's where liquid comes in. Dissolve your tab(s) in (pure!) water (or alcohol), then divide this liquid into as many parts as you need to get to your 10 or 15 micro-grams.
But you'll learn all this when you do your own careful research, which anyone approaching this domain is supposed to do anyways.
probably not. acid on blotter paper was originally from acid in solution. the blotter is usually made by pre-measuring an amount of solution that contains the target dose (measured by titration), and then using the blotter to soak up all of the measured out solution. capillary action should lead to even distribution of active compounds throughout the blotter.
As far as I know, the concept of homeopathy works on an "information level" (I wouldn't be too surprised if quantum physics are involved), not on the molecular/material level (which microdosing still does).
I don't know, could be. The strange thing however is that there have been cases where animals have shown clear reactions to such a treatment (which wouldn't make sense, given the fact that the "substance" was mixed into their food). Future will tell, I suppose.
Homeopathy is when no single molecule of substance is present in your dose. Put a cup of coffee in ocean. And get a drop of ocean to get homeopathic remedy for sleep.
Microdosing is about taking as much as you can without hallucinations. Still works, still enough active molecules in your dose to make magic in your brain. It is usually like 1/10, not 1/1000000000
you're grossly uninformed. homeopathy is diluting something into a totally ineffective concentration. microdosing is diluting something into a concentration that is just barely below the threshold of easily noticeable effects, but well above the threshold of real but subtle effects.
I'm so happy that LSD Microdosing is hitting maintream, it's no longer niche hippy stuff.
----
EDIT: I read some comments "I think" - have these people actually tried using it? That's a serious ignorance, but I'm not commenting on their posts to avoid adding points to a dogma...
I wouldn't take LSD microdoses periodically. There is no evidence of either the safety nor the benefits of said usage.
We wouldn't be in such a lacking situation if research wasn't halted due to draconian drug laws. Nowadays it seems that research is being done by organizations like MAPS. My advice is to wait until there is evidence of the utility of said usages.
I know people will try whatever they can in order to improve or solve some problem in their lifes. From tDCS to a variety of nootropics, research chemicals, prescription, and illegal drugs. I'd rather not be a lab rat, but that's easy to say when there are no pressing issues.
There are a lot of evidence-based ways to improve our lifes: Exercise, healthy diet, good sleep routine, CBT, mindfulness.. I'd rather do those.
My question is about these Silicon Valley people who spend their days at work and nights in bed: how do they go about sourcing the inventory for their experiments? (Asking for a friend who doesn't want to frequent nightclubs nor attend burning man, but very much wants to try microdosing.)
121 comments
[ 4.5 ms ] story [ 179 ms ] threadN=1 though.
going with "both"
I've taken my fair share of psychedelics and while I've had good times on them, I've also had some of the most miserable moments in my life on them. The only instances I can think of in my life where I can say without a doubt that I would never want to repeat.
They're certainly not for everybody and there's nothing therapeutic about giving them to people in a fragile mental/emotional state.
Here be Dragons.
Funnily enough I have similar sentiments about my travels in the developing world. Best of times and worst of times. But I would still probably encourage anyone with the slightest curiosity to do that kind of travelling. I'm not sure how far I'd push this metaphor but the general point is that sometimes an experience is worth it even if it has some fairly unpleasant aspects.
Bad experiences happen during traveling, you feel angry/cheated and move on. It's a tale you can retell in parties years later. You are out of that place.
Bad experiences during a trip, though, are frightful because, at the back of your mind, you know that what you experienced was all in your head. Like the parent commenter said, here be demons and here is nowhere else but your head. Hard to imagine getting away from that.
you're right, they might not be for everybody. there are good reasons to believe that people with a genetic risk factor for bipolar disorder or schizophrenia shouldn't take them because it exacerbates that existing risk factor. besides that group though, it's less obvious who should or should not take them.
I actually think psychedelics have amazing potential specifically FOR people with a fragile mental/emotional state (example: PTSD patients) when used as part of a holistic regime of therapy and counseling as well as taking psychedelics under the appropriate circumstances.
The shamanic traditions of many indigenous cultures emphasize exactly this. They aren't using these things as party drugs. Strong medicine, used with spiritual guidance and community support. That is a working model.
Looking at the outcomes of shamanistic native cultures (e.g. a total lack of influence, power, freedom, equality, or prosperity), I'll stick to sobriety and industry, thanks.
This isn't limited to the Americas.
If such a dominator culture, indeed now the dominant culture, were to stop repressing the use of psychedelics, there seems to be little danger of it being taken over--it's already all but quashed the competition. It would with any luck help to curb the excesses that are the cause of so much trouble, and help to provide the will to use the fantastic tools we have made to better ends.
They can also have adverse side effects like most drugs. I know a few people who have had problems.
[0] http://www.psychedelicexplorersguide.com
I'm all for the fredom of anyone to ingest whatever strange concoctions take their fancy. Reciprocally, don't lean on those of us who are happy enough about the way our brains work without artificial flavouring.
I don't think he was being authoritative.
A bigger part may be that I absolutely fucking dislike having my neurochemistry played silly games with, aka being drunk or stoned or tripping or whatever the requisite term may be.
Staying in parent's vernacular idiom, assuming it to have some sort of point.
I'll say two things, briefly, so please forgive any necessary lack of detail due to abbreviation.
First, is that absolutely everything you do has a profound impact on your neurochemistry. That's just how the animal brain works. The air you breather impacts it. The food you eat impacts it. Watching a TV show or movie impacts it. Doing your work at the office impacts it. Everything. There is no experience you can possible have that is not also governed by changes in your neurochemistry. It is an illusion to believe there is such a thing as a "pure" state of neurochemistry. The chemistry of your brain is a reflection of your inner and outer environment. Taking a drug that causes sensations inwardly, through neurochemical action, is not particularly different, from a brain chemistry point of view anyway, than doing something else with your body that causes sensations and corresponding changes in brain chemistry.
Second, is that not all drugs are created equal and they shouldn't be lumped together any more than you would lump together, for example, all activities done with your legs. Just as you distinguish between the value of going for a nice walk in the woods, and jumping off a bridge, you ought to distinguish between the different varieties of drug induced experience. There are very very few that I would recommend on their own merits because the sensation that arises from them is inherently worthwhile. Most of them don't cause inherently worthwhile sensations to arise. Alcohol certainly doesn't. Most stimulants don't. There are only two classes of drugs that I think actually do cause worthwhile sensations to arise, on their own merits: entheogens (classic psychedelics like LSD and Psilocybin) and empathogens (MDMA, basically).
Why do I say these drugs create experiences that are worthwhile on their own merits? It is hard to do any justice to it with any amount of words let alone so few. The only thing I can really say is that these experiences are incredibly powerful tools for the exploration of your own mind and soul. That's not something I would say about a thing intended merely for entertainment or stimulation. The psychedelic experience is not about entertainment or stimulation. It's about discovering the nature of your own mind.
Mind you, being such powerful tools, they should be used with great care, as they can be used in damaging ways and by those who aren't prepared. And they aren't magic either -- they aren't going to save the world or cure cancer.
But, I think that research done with an open mind reveals the mainstream perspective on psylocybin and LSD to be quite misguided and uninformed. Based off personal experience, as well as recent sciencific studies, it seems they have the potential to bring about much good. I suppose my main concern is that most people aren't interested, at this point in time, in having their perspective and worldviews challenged in the way that serious, introspective use tends to do.
Just to clarify, I'm talking about special occasion, standard dose usage. I don't have any knowledge about the effects or safety of micro-dosing.
Throwaway for obvious reasons.
I don't know if I'll be doing things like that in the future, but I don't want to shoot myself in the foot. The internet is sometimes a little too good at holding onto information sometimes :/
Perhaps I'm being overly cautious. It's hard to say.
But as you seamlessly go on to acknowledge, there are effects, and then there are effects. Some of these effects, I choose to pursue - I read books, I drink coffee, I comment on HN, at times I even think. And some, I choose not to. There is a silly comment further up, about why I would be reading an article on LSD, seeing as I am not in the market myself. I felt like changing my brain-state by banging my head something when I read it. Of course I can take an interest, as I can in almost anything. In fact, I have taken plenty of interest, and here's my point: Nothing - nothing - I have ever read on psychedelic experience has tickled any desire whatsoever to go and try the stuff. I'm sure there is no particular rationality behind one choice or the other. It just doesn't interest me.
As I started out saying, I'm all for anyone's freedom to choose. I actually speak up for lifting of all drug restrictions. Let supermarkets carry the damned stuff, I really am not my brother's keeper. Just leave me out of it. I'm not against as such, I just really, really am not interested.
I do not understand the widespread impulse to prohibit. Likewise, I have no idea why so many users of so many substances have this urgent need to spread the message.
And I see no reason not to part amicably :)
There are probably > 1 billion of people on this planet who wouldn't be better off with strong psychedelics. Even after single dose, many would end up with worst ever nightmare that would take them months or years to shrug off (probably never completely), others could easily have their already-dormant psychosis manifest. You can try all you want with environment and setup, each of us is so unique that you can't cover everybody, in fact far from it.
It's a very powerful experience, too powerful. Just talk to any psychiatric doctor, most insane asylums have at least few patients who didn't come back from various trips (various shrooms, acid, durman, ayahusca, mescalin and so on and on), and probably never will. Not everybody has body and mind resilience of Hunter S. Thompson.
> I think microdosing LSD is 100% placebo and that we should stick to rationalism and science.
This is an interesting sentence because the first half and the second half of it directly contradict each other. I too believe in sticking to rationalism and science which surely forces me to disregard your opening statement?
I actually am pretty skeptical about anti-depressants personally and they seem very addictive/dependence inducing. I suppose it's better than people killing themselves but the way they are handed out seems almost abusive.
I have never seen double blind IQ tests with microdosed LSD done.
I think this particular incident says a lot about the difficulty of doing scientific research around perception, for something that so radically alters perception.
Well, according to your own words you are not sticking to rationalism and science, you are actually letting your pre conceived notions about what's right and what's wrong dictate how you act without any scientific support.
It's all in our head anyway, so if it was a placebo effect, but a noticeable one for that person, with the trigger being that "I took LSD", then why not?
When you're angry, but can calm down or feel happy because of a single thought, that can be called placebo as well, just one thought triggering a whole cascade in your brain.
Sure, for life saving drugs, placebos should have no place, but for anything else - why not?
It's a placebo effect that comes with some risk.
Should probably ban alcohol and tobacco, since they're really risky, and refuse to re-legalize them unless everything else is legalized heh.
[0] - https://sites.google.com/view/microdosingpsychedelics/home
LSD increases serotonin significantly, and it's plausible that some of the well-being effect of microdosing is caused by this. The problem is that the brain tends to down-regulate its own production of a neurotransmitter when it is induced by a drug over time. Since the brain is plastic it will probably up-regulate the serotonin production once the microdosing is stopped, but there is a theoretical risk that neurotransmitter production and/or functioning is permanently changed.
Quit taking dexadrine, and it cleared up. Serotonin imbalance is no laughing matter. I technically still have a prescription, but I haven't taken it in years. I've learned to just live with the issues the ADD causes.
On the subject of LSD... personally, I think LSD is a wonderful invention with enormous therapeutic potential. Back when I was just a bum kid in a college town, I probably tripped at least 50 times. I learned a lot about myself and the world, and don't regret a moment of it. With that in context, I find the research into microdosing really fascinating. I can easily imagine the benefits.
But that serotonin thing. I'd want to know more about that.
Taking shrooms pretty much rewired my value structure from the ground up. I went from caring about traditional things like a good career (therefore social approval and everything else), to valuing spending time in the sun with good friends more than our usual ego-centric living patrerns.
LSD is great for the visual/aesthetic experience - it's so stimulating and kinesthetic - but it leaves your mind a little more intact.
DMT is a really interesting and profound psychedelic, and one that is massively misunderstood and, IMO, unfairly judged. Doing large amounts of DMT improved my ability to visualize hyperdimensional systems, and gave me (in my subjective opinion) a better understanding of the nature and structure of existence
The trip logic works like this. Your brain-organism evolved in the context of our 4-dimensional universe. Psychedelics tend to alter patterns of perception in a way that releases a flood of images. Your brain itself is a hyperdimensional problem solver so when flipped on its head with DMT you can experience really fascinating hyperdimensional universe-images.
As to revealing anything of the real structure of existence...nothing can be said. They reveal the structure of our brains, which themselves are a micromodel of our universe (compare the branching pattern of the brain's neurons to a zoomed out picture of the universe to the branching pattern of a tree to the lichtenberg patterns of lightning to the branching pattern of mycelia...they all tend to converge to the same fractal).
DMT can never give you "real" knowledge of the universe...but neither can any kind of experiment. All of our observations are really just images formed via some form of interaction. All you can really do is get hunches, and hope that as a prt of the universe, its greater structure is reflected in the microcosm that is you.
If I was forced to guess, I would say we exist in a 4d pocket universe within a fractally infinite hyperdimensional bulk multiverse. Universes are constantly being born and dying, with the net effect that the fundamental nature of reality is timeless (time is a psychological abstraction). But that brings us no closer to true understanding, which is probably an illusion anyway.
D-amp primarily releases DE and NE so I doubt it was directly related to serotonin
I think it's helpful to distinguish between the more recreational, or life-boosting user, and those who might use it to alleviate conditions that would normally warrant psychiatric medications. For the former, you're definitely messing with a stable mind.
For the latter, this is totally a new frontier. This mechanism at least on the surface seems to mimic SSRIs, so presumably tuned properly could be a more holistic replacement, considering LSD's ability to allow people of all conditions to also do some soul searching on a personal level. Similar to how the recommended, accepted treatment is medication + therapy.
As someone who's microdosed for several months now, with a dose of 5-8ug I haven't experienced any negative mood disturbances.
IMO microdosing is really effective (I went into it thinking it would be bullshit)
Well, there you have it. Self-medication for metal health issues. Advocating self-medication for mental health issues is like recommending people to self-medicate with painkillers to stop that pain, instead of getting proper medical diagnosis and treatment.
A psychedelic experience every year or so really keeps my happy self functioning.
Also living between people with all kind of unique problems made me more happy with my general life
I guess it is different for anyone, but for me it really helped a lot
It's interesting to read about experiences of others and for many people experimentation is a good way to improve their lives.
Also, many doctors are persuaded (using a nicer word here) into prescribing certain drugs over the others; basically preference created by.... free lunches and golf events. There is an interesting documentary on this, forgot the name; Google might help.
You don't say!
I consume the BBC News online fairly compulsively as my go-to news source, but sometimes it really is pretty mind-numbing (no pun intended).
The risk being, one can actually discover something really important.
Please don't downplay shit, if it works for you it is great but its not for everyone.
Consider the opposite to your 'don't downplay shit' perspective: 'overblowing shit' can cause issues too. Best to respectfully educate of the risks, and yet ultimately understand that everyone makes their own choice, complete with consequences.
But you'll learn all this when you do your own careful research, which anyone approaching this domain is supposed to do anyways.
On a related note, watch James Randi swallow an entire bottle of Homeopathic sleeping pills in this talk: https://www.ted.com/talks/james_randi
Microdosing is about taking as much as you can without hallucinations. Still works, still enough active molecules in your dose to make magic in your brain. It is usually like 1/10, not 1/1000000000
Recent book: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01MCQ783Q/ - "A Really Good Day: How Microdosing Made a Mega Difference in My Mood, My Marriage, and My Life"
Here is a very "hacker like" research: https://www.gwern.net/LSD%20microdosing
I'm so happy that LSD Microdosing is hitting maintream, it's no longer niche hippy stuff.
----
EDIT: I read some comments "I think" - have these people actually tried using it? That's a serious ignorance, but I'm not commenting on their posts to avoid adding points to a dogma...
We wouldn't be in such a lacking situation if research wasn't halted due to draconian drug laws. Nowadays it seems that research is being done by organizations like MAPS. My advice is to wait until there is evidence of the utility of said usages.
I know people will try whatever they can in order to improve or solve some problem in their lifes. From tDCS to a variety of nootropics, research chemicals, prescription, and illegal drugs. I'd rather not be a lab rat, but that's easy to say when there are no pressing issues.
There are a lot of evidence-based ways to improve our lifes: Exercise, healthy diet, good sleep routine, CBT, mindfulness.. I'd rather do those.
Check out /r/DarkNetMarkets if you're interested.