RE: Psylocybin is good for you?

RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Alumbrado -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/2/2008 6:53:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP I remember being offered that in college. One major reason I declined was being told that there's also a period of intense vomiting as a reaction to eating the mushroom. Not my kink, thanks. Sounds more like a common reacton to peyote, not psylocibin.

ResidentSadist -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/2/2008 8:04:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: candystripper O for Gawd's sake. *Who funds this bullsht research? Who even comes up with these bullsht 'theories' to test?* Many Native Americans and most Vietnam Era college students could have answered this question. What a waste of money. candystripper Actually you pay for that research with you taxes. I’m just glad you aren’t in control of their budget or we would be at the mercy of Native American Indians for the sum total of our scientific knowledge.

Alumbrado -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/2/2008 8:05:27 PM)
[:D]

UncleNasty -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 5:35:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: petdave Of course it is... it's natural! [:D] Arsenic and hemlock are natural too but no one seems to clamor about to consume them. Natural isn't the best of measuring sticks without additional qualifiers. Uncle Nasty

candystripper -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 5:43:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist quote: ORIGINAL: candystripper O for Gawd's sake. *Who funds this bullsht research? Who even comes up with these bullsht 'theories' to test?* Many Native Americans and most Vietnam Era college students could have answered this question. What a waste of money. candystripper Actually you pay for that research with you taxes. I’m just glad you aren’t in control of their budget or we would be at the mercy of Native American Indians for the sum total of our scientific knowledge. One way or another, it does come from my taxes. Either the NIH or another gov't agency funds it, some 'non profit' funds it or Pfizer gets a tax deduction for its 'charitable contribution'. *My question is who* at these agencies, non profits and pharmeuctical companies chose this bullsht 'theory' to test...as compared to another, more urgently needed area of scientific inquiry?* Research into obvious and settled scientific facts isn't doing anyone any good, apart from the dipsht scientists who obtained grant money for research into the dipsht 'theory'. The fact is 'psylocybin' is an illegal substance (with a few exceptions) and its properties, like those of LSD, are well-known, if not well-understood. If they want to do research, let them research a cure for herpes, childhood diabetes, or cancer. *I'm not opposed to gathering the knowledge base of indigeous peoples, but that seems to me to be the role of the anthropologist and biologist, not* the research scientist. candystripper**

NumberSix -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 6:11:12 PM)
Hey, I am a child of the seventies, a better life thru chemicals. having said that, what is the chemistry of albumin? (the white of an egg, good for you.....) 2,6-penta, L who knows someone does. is the axial left or right? can't eat chloride but the many salts... there are a lot of them just plain ok and some just bland and some just kill you now. potassium chloride (an uncommon table salt) is better used than potassium nitrate in gunpowder. but at least it is not sodium chloride. be moles, not mopes. a cereal box of post toasties psyllocybin with cream, is prolly not ever day for breakfast, but then neither is salmon with mercury a good source of omega 3s every night. 6

pissthirstysub -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 6:50:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: candystripper quote: ORIGINAL: candystripper O for Gawd's sake. *Who funds this bullsht research? Who even comes up with these bullsht 'theories' to test?* Many Native Americans and most Vietnam Era college students could have answered this question. What a waste of money. candystripper One way or another, it does come from my taxes. Either the NIH or another gov't agency funds it, some 'non profit' funds it or Pfizer gets a tax deduction for its 'charitable contribution'. *My question is who* at these agencies, non profits and pharmeuctical companies chose this bullsht 'theory' to test...as compared to another, more urgently needed area of scientific inquiry?* Research into obvious and settled scientific facts isn't doing anyone any good, apart from the dipsht scientists who obtained grant money for research into the dipsht 'theory'. The fact is 'psylocybin' is an illegal substance (with a few exceptions) and its properties, like those of LSD, are well-known, if not well-understood. If they want to do research, let them research a cure for herpes, childhood diabetes, or cancer. *I'm not opposed to gathering the knowledge base of indigeous peoples, but that seems to me to be the role of the anthropologist and biologist, not* the research scientist. candystripper** I don't understand how interviews of Vietnam era college students and Native Americans can replace controlled scientific experiments. I see how it enhances a study, there must be some sort of basis to the opinion. That is how i see scientific research, because someone is going to use this article in their study, and then someone will use that study. Nothing is obvious and settled, it is rare that anything is so obvious and settled. These experiments aren't bullshit. Research science is not bullshit The article states near the end and underlined that the National Institute of Drug Abuse has partially funded this research. With a little of my own digging, I have found that The National Cancer Society has asked that these experiments on these types of drugs be conducted to relieve suffering of those with cancer. I did enjoy the article, I only wish I had access to the journal article it was based on. (sigh)

Emperor1956 -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 7:27:26 PM)
FR: 1. The vomiting reaction is to peyote. We can all thank Don Juan for that bit of knowledge (I suspect HK and RS know exactly what I'm talkin' about). 2. The statement that psilocybin is "natural" and therefore good is a common but foolish assertion. Its all just chemicals, folks. Psilocybin (the "natural chemical") is converted by your liver into psilocin. There are about 100 other chemical compounds, related to but by no means identical to, psilocybin, that also become psilocin in the human body. And it is the psilocin that gets you high, regardless of the source. 3. Seeing as so many folks are interested in "psychoactive" substances, I'll post again the link to the Nirvana website of all things mind altering -- Erowid. You'll spend days on this site. Months, actually, if you consume the items discussed. 4. There is no doubt that the use of and research into many possibly healing drugs has been suppressed because of the anti-drug culture. However, I'm not sure psilocybin fits into that category. The problem is that the effect of the drug is wildly variable based upon dozens of factors, including source, age of drug, age of user, and notably environmental factors. It is a drug that lends itself to "guided" experiences -- both good and bad. Unlike marijuana, for example, or cocaine, both of which have pretty predictable pharmacological effects, Psi. just is a wild card. So use in cancer patients, while anecdetotally valuable, has never been reliably studied, and the effects have not been replicated. Use in depressed persons has had wildly variable and sometimes seriously bad outcomes. 5. Because users of Psi are susceptible to guided hallucinations and effects, it has been posited that the drug (like peyote and ergot) may be responsible for religious and spiritual hallucinations. Cool word of the day: a substance ingested for religious or shamanic purposes is an Entheogen. Your job is to use this word 3 times next week in conversation. E.

NumberSix -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 7:35:34 PM)
Emp.............. You are laying in fields of poppies, elegant argument and whatnot... You can grab a little gripe on cannabis kinda eveywhere in Amsterdam, and they still live and run governments and whatnot/ Now, after a hundred years absinthe is coming to the USA............ so, of course I am forced to ask; as with alcohol, as with 'yee ha' as with tobacco; what is the trouble with drugs and why do we care? certainly it is firmly warp and woof or money and not some other sort of evil shit. 6

Emperor1956 -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 7:44:19 PM)
No. 6. : I am not exactly sure WHAT you are saying, as coherence and you seem to rarely inhabit the same postal code. But I think you think I'm anti drug? That is absolutely so far from the truth its almost funny. Try again, strive for coherence, and I'll be glad to reply. E.

NumberSix -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 7:53:02 PM)
Emp, I think we agree by and large, and if we don't .... may I suggest a couple tuuies or seccies, a better life thru chemicals: Ron

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 8:34:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Emperor1956 FR: 1. The vomiting reaction is to peyote. We can all thank Don Juan for that bit of knowledge (I suspect HK and RS know exactly what I'm talkin' about). 2. The statement that psilocybin is "natural" and therefore good is a common but foolish assertion. Its all just chemicals, folks. Psilocybin (the "natural chemical") is converted by your liver into psilocin. There are about 100 other chemical compounds, related to but by no means identical to, psilocybin, that also become psilocin in the human body. And it is the psilocin that gets you high, regardless of the source. 3. Seeing as so many folks are interested in "psychoactive" substances, I'll post again the link to the Nirvana website of all things mind altering -- Erowid. You'll spend days on this site. Months, actually, if you consume the items discussed. 4. There is no doubt that the use of and research into many possibly healing drugs has been suppressed because of the anti-drug culture. However, I'm not sure psilocybin fits into that category. The problem is that the effect of the drug is wildly variable based upon dozens of factors, including source, age of drug, age of user, and notably environmental factors. It is a drug that lends itself to "guided" experiences -- both good and bad. Unlike marijuana, for example, or cocaine, both of which have pretty predictable pharmacological effects, Psi. just is a wild card. So use in cancer patients, while anecdetotally valuable, has never been reliably studied, and the effects have not been replicated. Use in depressed persons has had wildly variable and sometimes seriously bad outcomes. 5. Because users of Psi are susceptible to guided hallucinations and effects, it has been posited that the drug (like peyote and ergot) may be responsible for religious and spiritual hallucinations. Cool word of the day: a substance ingested for religious or shamanic purposes is an Entheogen. Your job is to use this word 3 times next week in conversation. E. Good post. 1. San Pedro cactus also contains 3,4,5-trimethoxyphenethylamine, and also causes nausea/emesis. True, there are other phenethylamines in both Trichocereus and Lophophora which contribute, but I think (Shulgin's work confirms) that it's the psychedelic itself which causes the nausea/vomiting. 2. "Natural" is indeed a foolish assertion. Psilocybin is dephosphorylated to psilocin in vivo. Both are very closely related structurally to serotonin. http://newtrier.k12.il.us/academics/science/~goralb/drugs/psilocybin.html So is DMT (ayahuasca), which is produced by the body. Every single American is walking around with a Schedule I drug, DMT, in their body. How stupid is the illegality of that. It's possible some related compounds are metabolized to psilocin; I am not aware of any, though. 3. Erowid is outstanding. So is MAPS, Lycaeum, and Shroomerydotorg. 4. So-called "negative outcomes" are fairly rare with the psychedelics/entheogens. That's a subject in and of itself, though. Some people benefit more from "guided' experiences and group experiences; some benefit more from solo introspection. That's one of the variables. I refer you to Sacred Mushroom of Visions: Teonanacatl, Ralph Metzner, ed. and Higher Wisdom: eminent elders explore the continuing impact of psychedelics, ed. Roger Walsh and Charles Grob. You are correct; research has been completely suppressed because of the hysteria of the 60s. Again, I refer the interested reader to the Multidisciplinary Assoc. for Psychedelic Studies. 5. I would word it differently. The entheogens ARE responsible for spiritual/religious experiences in many people. Peace, Scott

Alumbrado -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 10:36:50 PM)
quote: We can all thank Don Juan for that bit of knowledge Errrmmm.... not really.

candystripper -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/3/2008 11:02:30 PM)
quote: ....Nothing is obvious and settled, it is rare that anything is so obvious and settled. These experiments aren't bullshit. Research science is not bullshit.... pissthirstysub IMO, the effects of psylocybin and other hallocinogenes have been known to the 'modern scientific world' for at least a century. Perhaps there is value in continuing to study the substance's effect on humans....but I don't think there is. The substance is (mainly) illegal and no matter what benefits are shown, no one (generally) will be permitted to ingest it legally, whether to alleviate the suffering of cancer patients or for any other purpose (not already allowed by law). Look at 'medical marijuana'. It is well-known that marijuana counters some of the worst side effects of cancer treatment, but the DEA continues to assert anyone caught using it will be subject to arrest under federal law. When limited resources -- such as funding for scientific research -- are doled out, I'd like the decision-makers to aim for the bigger targets, theories that may improve the quality of someone's life, or 'pure' research that advances us as a race. IMO, this study meets none of those criteria. candystripper

HeavansKeeper -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/4/2008 2:52:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP I remember being offered that in college. One major reason I declined was being told that there's also a period of intense vomiting as a reaction to eating the mushroom. Not my kink, thanks. I've never even been nauseous. Cactus, now, that's a different story. Cactus... meaning peyote? Peyote is the raw form of mescaline and a pretty pink cactus flower. I've heard most people get pretty ill when using it, especially first time users. I had heard that as few as one dosage of psylocybin can curb alcoholism for months. I can't re-find the article, so its probably a myth. Many of the illicit drugs in the US (and around the world, as many countries have the same list) are illegal because of racist lawmaking. While Schedule I (The category for drugs that have "zero medical purpose and are a threat to society") includes many drugs that, for lack of a better term, fuck up your brain, they include three of what could be comparably harmless drugs: marijuana, LSD, and psilocybin. Sauce: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/scheduling.html

NormalOutside -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/4/2008 3:06:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: candystripper If they want to do research, let them research a cure for herpes, childhood diabetes, or cancer. Yeah, because EVERY researcher in the world should only be researching the #1 most important thing. Everything else is garbage. :-/ quote: ORIGINAL: Emperor1956 The problem is that the effect of the drug is wildly variable based upon dozens of factors, including source, age of drug, age of user, and notably environmental factors. Psi. just is a wild card. I have to call BullShit on this, although some of the rest of what you said is good imo. Just because the effects vary with source, user, etc doesn't mean it isn't worthy of study. As you said, it's just another chemical, and all chemicals have varying effects with source, user, and so on. This one is like all the rest. Just because humans came along and said "oooh, that's illegal, we're gonna stop each other from eating it!" doesn't mean it has no medical or scientific value. I agree, Erowid is the best site out there for information (anecdotal, scientific, and everything in between).

NormalOutside -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/4/2008 3:11:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper Sauce: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/scheduling.html Mmmmmm, sauce..... Is it mushroom sauce? [;)]

HeavansKeeper -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/4/2008 3:23:50 AM)
On a kink discussion site? I strongly advise against eating any sauce. Although, my mother tells me hash brownies are gross. Any conflicting experience? She doesn't cook well, though.

Emperor1956 -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/4/2008 1:37:37 PM)
quote: NormalOutside: quote: ORIGINAL: Emperor1956 The problem is that the effect of the drug is wildly variable based upon dozens of factors, including source, age of drug, age of user, and notably environmental factors. Psi. just is a wild card. I have to call BullShit on this, although some of the rest of what you said is good imo. Just because the effects vary with source, user, etc doesn't mean it isn't worthy of study. As you said, it's just another chemical, and all chemicals have varying effects with source, user, and so on. This one is like all the rest. Just because humans came along and said "oooh, that's illegal, we're gonna stop each other from eating it!" doesn't mean it has no medical or scientific value. Normal, I think you misunderstood me, or maybe I wasn't clear (I admit some of my posts are made under the influence of an amazing controlled substance known as "Woodford Reserve" -- which I imbibe, but of course never to excess.) My point was that people have been running the old "its the drug companies/government/White Christian morality" that suppresses research into psilocybin effects, and I was suggesting that it may also be -- or even more so, be -- that the effects of the stuff in humans is damn hard to study. If you are a legitimate researcher seeking to study the uses of psychotropics in medicine, for example, you run a much better chance of getting your research approved and funded if you can show some consistency in how the substance you are studying is metabolized. The fact that the substance is illegal also impedes research, of course, but that is true of research into almost all Class 1 drugs. Mushrooms might suffer a bit more of this stigma because of the famous ill-fated Harvard experiments in the early 60s. E.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Psylocybin is good for you? (7/4/2008 10:41:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper On a kink discussion site? I strongly advise against eating any sauce. Although, my mother tells me hash brownies are gross. Any conflicting experience? She doesn't cook well, though. I don't want to disparage your mother, but she's soooo wrong..... she forgot the blueberries, obiously. [8D] Regarding the notion of a "guide"... I prefer "helper" or "Road Chief" or other term reflecting the proper PASSIVE role of that person. SWIM has been thinking about all this and much more tonight.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875