Does /sci/ have a bias against the potential benefits of illicit drug use?
I dont really care, just dont ask for free healthcare if anything bad happens
>heroin
>potential benefits
Pick one and only one, forever.
>>7853421
>illicit
So the million dollar question here is...
>>7853424
heroin isn't the only illicit drug.
>>7853421
>>7853451
The problem here is that most drugs that are considered "illicit" were placed in that category BECAUSE they had major negative effects. Pretty much the only drug that was unreasonably put in that category has been Marijuana, but it's not even illegal in most places any more.
Seriously, name a SPECIFIC illicit drug that you think has benefits that outweigh the risks
Ketamine has proven useful in treating depression. It acts instantly and has an effect lasting 1-2 weeks.
Mushrooms have shown useful in treating bipolar disorder.
Daily microdoses of LSD have shown improve creativity while having no hallucinatory or other negative effects.
Greetings inferior boys!
I graduated from Princeton.
I have a great job.
I never fucked anybody over or was a menace to society.
I am a heroin addict
But I hung up the belt and stashed the needle and am on methadone now. Been going great. I feel between normal and good all day everyday. No more roller coaster.
If anything, I have more energy and acuity now on methadone than I did before getting into drugs. Subjectively I prefer it hands down. I score the same 140 on it tests on methadone that I did on his adhd testing. I could bury everybody up to their skulls in medical literature supporting the fact that opiates do not harm your mind or body either short or long term. Shooting dope is bad for ur circulatory system no doubt. Smoking dope is bad for your lungs. But swallowing a pill or liquid doesn't harm you. It's just medicine. Opiates do exactly the same thing to the body's opioid receptors that endorphins do. Morphine itself is actually one of your body's self made endorphins. Same stuff that's in the poppy fields. If working out for a runners high (endorphin release) is bad for you, then so are opiates. But it's not, so they aren't. I'll be happy to debate any of you edge girls who want a medal for not doing drugs. I'm one of the most notorious internet monsters the web has ever known, and I've probably contributed to more people killing themselves due to forum humiliation than anyone in the history of the Internet.
Drugs are neither good nor bad. They are both, and they are neither. They are drugs.
>>7853476
Quite a few of them do have benefits outweighing the risks. It all comes down to moderation.
Seeing as how marijuana prohibition and misinformation was highly successful due to the efforts of Henry Anslinger, I don't doubt misinformation is rampant regarding other drugs as well.
>>7853476
LSD // Psilocybin // DMT
>>7853476
LSD
Marijuana
Cocaine
Ecstasy
Amphetamines
>>7853421
Wouldn't have passing grades if it weren't for amphetamines
>>7853421
Francis Crick visualizing DNA double helix on acid...
Psilocybin mushrooms only known cure for cluster headaches...
Ibogane best chance of recovering from opiate addiction...
Promising work with MDMA in psychotherapy cut short...
those are some gains, ... also no shortage of losses, and I've known some.
Depends on the user, and the intent
>Synthesise new biologically-active compound
>Looks like it has interesting properties
>Find in trials that it works as a treatment for a range of different conditions
>No side effects besides a few mild issues at high doses
>Oh fuck wait
>Major side effect detected - Feeling really fucking good at moderate dosages
Shit, compound is now on prohibited substances list all across the world.
weed is literally Soma
>>7853664
I would never employ people like you and the rest of this bunch, cheaters, abusers, fraternise with criminals. Fuck !
>>7853423
Healthy people usually costs more than drug addicts
Yearh in the long run the straightedge healthy jogger will costs you way more than some crackhead skank
The more you know
>>7853973
>you can't drink weed
>it doesn't turn you immortal
lolno
>>7853476
KILL ALL DRUGGIES.
allow me to explain the reasoning behind this proclamation.
the only argument for state control over what drugs you choose to consume (for non-medical purposes, ie without a doctor's prescription) is if you are forcing people to pay for your goddamn heart attacks and overdoses.
in that case then yes, i think they should be or highly regulated by the state. im not paying more for your goddamn druggie issues, and id rather not most people (whose hospital and insurance bills i must now help cover) have access to them, because most people cannot control themselves.
however, control is not enough. i don't want you to go to jail either, since that would cost probably even more.
no matter what i choose to happen to you, you end up costing me money, either through health related problems or through incarceration. i suppose the state could exile you from any and all benefits after several warnings or arrests. frankly that would be a waste of police time.
and i could not replace what you cost society through what i could tax from you. and to build entire systems of governance through money obtained by giving to people what is bad for them is immoral in my mind anyways.
so you see there is one option: KILL ALL DRUGGIES. KILL THEM TODAY.
it's the only answer to the problem of druggies and druggie behavior.
>>7854038
You sound like a perfectly irrational, unreasonable, and unintelligent human being. I don't think other people's enjoyment through drug use should be any of your business in all honesty.
>>7853476
LSD
Psylocybin
MDMA
DMT
Ketamine
pretty much every psychadelic senpai
except MDMA should only be used clinically under supervision, its still too easy to abuse and causes severe damage, you cant trust people with it
>>7854027
Can't you drink marijuana tea?
>>7853933
>Francis Crick visualizing DNA double helix on acid...
Things that Never Happened for $500 Alex...
>>7854081
clinical supervision would have seriously hampered some of my better trips
>>7854087
it's well documented anon. go read up. and then slowly decide to try LSD. Once you experience it, you'll see how wrong you've been about it, and many other things.
>>7853476
That's not correct. Most of the psychedelics have benefits as they help you see experience in a completely different way. It's really just shit like heroine and meth that have no good effects. Regardless it is a personal choice if you want to be a meth addict. And if you want to do psychedelics and I would recommend it, do it responsibly and I don't advocate living your life on them. You should treat them as a journey.
>>7854141
Yeah but unlike you or me, most people would abuse mdma because they don't have self control
>>7854087
Jeopardy amounts are multiples of 200 for first round and multiples of 400 for the second.
>>7853933
Sounds like bullshit. I doubt psilocybin has a high success rate in curing cluster headaches, do you have any evidence that isn't anecdotal?
I agree that psychedelics may have some potential benefits, but they are often used irresponsibly, overdoses are possible and legalizing them would just put extra burdens on healthcare systems.
Even marijuana has proven negative effects, like increased incidence of schizophrenia and cardiac issues. Thing is that this stuff is all 'safe' in controlled doses, but a lot of people overdo it. I don't have a problem with people who smoke weed occasionally, but you can't tell me that stoners who spend 80% of their time on weed don't hurt society in general.
>>7853476
So I can finally shitpost on Shulgin desu
http://www.maps.org/research-archive/mdma/mithoefer_etal_2012_ltfu.pdf
I would consider psychedelics for medical use, not recreational. In that area Shulgin assumed that they were a source just waiting to be tapped... which he did... for several hundred times after synthesizing them themselves. For science, of course!
But, if you wouldn't mind, could you tell me what you think about that potential application? Link related.
>>7854038
> nitrites + amino acides --> nitrosamines
Oh, I see how it is. Let me guess, you also want to kill all eaters of cooked food because their provoked cancer risk costs you money too? Of course this is hyperbole but you know how most people cannot control themselves so it is guarenteed that reasonable euthanasia (wink wink) will be a great way to keep down taxes.
Illicit drug culture is filled with half-baked ideas and unleavened bread-brains.
The health risks of purity control and dosage should be a concern for any active user. The potential side-effects to the subject, mostly untested and unknown, should give pause for concern.
The real issue I think you'll find is non-existent, as you have created a false dichotomy. Most of /sci/ would have a problem with prescription legal drugs also. Your body after all is governed by complicated tandem biological processes compartmentally understood almost completely unknown as a whole.
Example, how do you build a stronger immune system? Wouldn't it be nice to have a drug or pill to take that would just immune all your shit up.
>Harvard Medical School says:
Adopt healthy-living strategies, Be skeptical of products, Age and immunity (Be young), Eat clean healthy foods, Herbs and other supplements, Get stressed less, Exercise.
wow thanks HMS. Literally something my great grand mother would've told me if I time traveled back to 1895 and talked to her as a little girl. She also would've said to put a sweater on, and that eating the crust on my bread helps my hair grow.
Do you really want these gaggling retards experimenting with your pet recreational drug? They will just fuck it up in some way. So the argument for legalization for research seems super shaky to me.
>>7853421
sleeping pills are good for when you really need to get like 20 hours of sleep
>>7854200
>I doubt psilocybin has a high success rate in curing cluster headaches
You want studies? I doubt there's anything that satisfies your view of "evidence", just go read all those countless anecdotal reports and you'll see it's a very general consensus among those who've tried that it works as a sort of miracle cure for cluster headaches.
>>7853476
Heroin turns you into an immortal, badass zombie like Pic Related, so long as you avoid sleeping on your back and choking on your vomit.
>>7854297
I seriously hope I'm in such good shape when I get to Iggy Pop's age.
>>7854275
http://www.maps.org/news-letters/v23n1/v23n1_p34-35.pdf
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/05/longtime-sufferers-of-cluster-headaches-find-relief-in-psychedelics.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16801660
>>7853476
Mushrooms
LSD
MDMA
research shows they have HUGE potential in therapy.
>>7853963
Weed?
>>7854038
What if you were so inferior to some powerful drug addicts likebthe engineers at apple, that they decided to execute you in order to save money instead of having to carry your weight do to tge fact that your inferior intellect capabilities are not worth the burden you are to society?
Mind u inferior edge girls, steve jobs visionary capabilities came from his illegal drug use desu
>>7853421
>benefits of illicit drug use
"Illicit" meaning that the people using it are doing so illegally. As in they are not medical professionals who have the proper licensing to prescribe it let alone be a legit patient in a medical program or have a prescription for it.
Basically, this is like self-diagnosing yourself with autism then taking illegal drugs/illegally sourced drugs because you think it might help.
All prescription drugs are highly illegal. Did you know that? However, that is only when they are not prescribed properly or not used in a medical program.
You need to reword your bullshit, OP.
>>7853492
>Mushrooms have shown useful in treating bipolar disorder.
>Daily microdoses of LSD have shown improve creativity while having no hallucinatory or other negative effects.
Hohooo, citation fucking needed
>>7854334
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16801660
>Interview of patients who had used psychedelia for CH
"That thing was too vague to be called proof. Too shitty, too unprecise, too un-controlled and too biased. It was more like a large hunk of anecdote
>>7854750
At the end of the day we are all still just dumb ass apes slinging poop at one another sniffing toxic fumes to get high we are only going to live 70 years so who gives a fuck.
Everyone wants to be gods but we are just animals.
I'm addicted to benzos. They seemingly make my occasional emotional meltdowns worse and closer to suicide, but allow me to be anxiety free for the majority of my life.
My life after obtaining non prescribed valium:
+Attended university classes and gym more regularly
+Engaged in socializing more, though it doesn't make up for my lack of social skills, and made a couple girlfriends/friends although a small circle
+Got several part time jobs and worked well in them
+Lost my virginity
-Spent a lot of money on said drugs
-Am now physically dependent on said drugs
Do the benefits outweigh the negatives?
>>7854766
Anecdotes are evidence.
When pretty much every single anecdotal report from people who've tried treating their CH with mushrooms/other psychedelics has described it as succesful, you're plainly just biased against it when you deny credibility.
I'm waiting for you to vehemently teach me about what the scientific method is, in the classic biased spirit of /sci/
>>7854200
>but you can't tell me that stoners who spend 80% of their time on weed don't hurt society in general
You seem to know very little of drugs. There are people who smoke it daily for medical reasons or smoke it daily just because, and they're more successful and normal than you think.
>>7854243
Legalization stops stigma, can help people cut back on drug use and talk about their experiences, will cut the number of people sent to prison in half, and probably will strip power from drug cartels. There are also many methods to control drug use and prevent overdoses and deaths before they happen so people can still be daily users and function properly.
https://julianbuchanan.wordpress.com/blogs-2/
If anything, not accepting other people's drug use is a far worse idea than embracing it.
>>7854766
>anecdotes, especially large scale ones, aren't important because they don't fit my worldview
Hoooo boy
>>7854275
There are also countless anectodal reports of homeopathy working. There are also countless reports of God curing various diseases. Neither actually work, though. Poor example.
>>7854334
That's a start at least. But the Neurology one is very vague, I didn't read the other ones. Basically they just interviewed a bunch of druggies with cluster headaches, they're pretty biased themselves you know.
I do agree that there should be more research, though. I'd be for prescribing psilocybin to cluster headache sufferers who have not taken psychedelics before, maybe with an initial sample size of 30-50.
That said even if psilocybin happens to be effective against cluster headaches, that still doesn't mean it's a good thing to take regularly, that's a fallacy. Chemotherapy is effective against cancer but nobody takes chemo recreationally.
>>7855260
I'm not talking about daily use, I'm talking about walking around stoned for the majority of the day.
>>7855285
Nueroscience/Biochem here (have UG in both and working on a PhD)
A lot of medical research institutes are having their neuroscience departments search for benefits in illicit/prescription drugs.
Not going to cite since you can dig for 10 seconds and find this:
>some research chems can help depression more than LSD
>certain doses of MDMA in certain settings have shown to be equivalent to years of therapy
>Pscilocyben gets a mixed rap from the community but gets sympathy points since you can trip off it (a lot of people in the neurosceince community recreationally use hallucinogens/drugs)
>>7855325
>a lot of people in the neurosceince community recreationally use hallucinogens/drugs
Which ones in particular?
>>7855359
not a lot of pot smokers, some have never even done it, typically things they are researching
>RCs (25i, 2cb, etc)
>LSD, mushrooms, MDMA (along with MDA, MDE, etc)
>that one guy that abuses hypoxia drugs
>kratom, kavakava
>nootropes of all kinds
>vitamins and supplements etc
these are just off the top of my head.
one guy i know got 500 doses of 250ug LSD and gave it out to people and used it himself for research purposes. He was looking for the perfect 'cocktail'
It ended up being magnesium and potassium supplements and taking a GABA medication (forgot which one) for up to a week before the dosage.
I say recreationally, but the people know these things put you in a fragile state of mind (one guy took a semester off right after went to the hospital after taking 1.5g 25i, was fine but talked about a near death experience) and want to get the most out of their dosage (in terms of using it constructive purposes)
>>7855386
forgot DMT (of all kinds) and salvia
>>7855390
So they don't use anything near what people classify as the hard drugs category?
>>7855435
you mean like meth or heroin? never heard of it desu
>>7854200
>overdoses are possible
and extremely unlikely. The LD50 for LSD is astronomical.
>>7854243
are you seriously saying that research will "fuck up " our understanding of a drug's effects? Why are you on the fucking science board anyway?
>>7855310
psilocybin use isn't a treatment for cluster headaches; it's a cure. You don't need to take mushrooms every time you get a cluster headache because after the first time, you will stop getting cluster headaches. Forever.
>>7855386
>He was looking for the perfect 'cocktail'
did he write this stuff down and publish anywhere?
>>7855521
from what i understand, not the cocktail
just the benefits of LSD itself
>>7855476
I didn't even mention LSD.
That said people on psychedelics can pose a danger to society and themselves. LSD and psilocybin are fine in controlled environments, but who takes either of those things in a controlled environment and under supervision?
>>7855492
That's not what's in the Neurology paper in >>7854334 . There they just use it to stop the events or prophylactically (but definitely not single-dose). The paper even starts by saying that one guy missed a few doses and started getting cluster headaches again.
So I'm going to go with [citation needed]. Point is I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying there's almost no data, and that's the issue I have with a lot of these claims from people saying 'illicit drug X can cure disease Y so we need to legalize it!': they base their statements on a handful of reports, even though there might've been ten times as many people who tried drug X as well with no positive effect. Those people obviously aren't gonna write about their experience. What you need is a randomized controlled trial, although that's difficult since the people who are getting the placebo will obviously know that they aren't hallucinating.
Seriously, you guys are on /sci/ but don't even know the scientific method.
>>7855561
nice false bifurcation, but I'm not saying "psilocybin can cure cluster headaches, so it should be totally recreationally legal." I'm saying "psilocybin probably cures cluster headaches, so we should legalize its use in research."
You didn't specifically mention LSD, but you said:
>I agree that psychedelics may have some potential benefits, but they are often used irresponsibly, overdoses are possible and legalizing them would just put extra burdens on healthcare systems.
First of all, making a general statement about psychedelics, and then saying "I never mentioned LSD though" is extremely disingenuous. Secondly, your argument about possible overdoses, the burden on healthcare systems, and especially irresponsible use, applies soooo much more to alcohol than to any of the other drugs we've been discussing. Should alcohol be illegal?
>>7855561
>who takes either of those things in a controlled environment and under supervision?
a lot of people. thanks to Leary everybody knows about the set and setting stuff. most people also get a sitter through the trip.
>people on psychedelics can pose a danger to society and themselves
so does cars. I'll go out on a limb here and say the grand total of all people killed or harmed by psychedelics is nowhere close to people killed or harmed by psychedelics.
oh wait, I have an article to prove this.
www.sg.unimaas.nl/_old/oudelezingen/dddsd.pdf
>I'm saying there's almost no data
just read this before posting again
>>7855540
>>7855591
>the grand total of all people killed or harmed by psychedelics is nowhere close to people killed or harmed by psychedelics.
kek. I'll assume you meant to say cars the second time around.
>>7855595
yup, gotta be cars. sorry about that.
>>7855574
Honestly, alcohol should be more regulated than it is. I'm not saying ban it completely, but there's no mistaking the fact that it causes a lot of issues.
But that's again this kind of dumb argument that always shows up in discussions like these: 'but thing Y also causes issues, why is Y not banned but X is?' Thing Y has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Same thing when people complain about tobacco being legal but weed not being legal: tobacco is really only legally sold because it's a relic of older times and difficult to phase out, which makes it a tricky point politically.
But anyways if you're just advocating the legality of psilocybin in research I pretty much agree with you. There ought to be more research.
>>7855614
All I'm saying is that for there to be any rationality and consistency in drug laws, alcohol and tobacco should be more tightly controlled, psychedelics should be less strictly controlled, and cannabis is harmless enough that it should probably be totally legal.
>>7853664
If you're abusing drugs like this, to work a lot in a short period, you're going to have some pretty serious long term side effects.
>>7855620
I don't see why drugs should be tightly controlled, it's only a small number of people who can't handle them.
>tobacco should be controlled
Why? It doesn't usually kill you until you're in your seventies. Or are you suggesting that companies change what they put in tobacco?
>marijuana is harmless
>but tobacco should be controlled
I'm sensing a double standard here.
>>7853963
Lyrica?
>>7855310
>There are also countless anectodal reports of homeopathy working. There are also ...
>"Poor example."
No, that's a poor example. You're forcing it based on your bias. Why are you this biased?
Cluster headaches are a seriously debilitating condition, if people commonly have them cease following the usage of psilocybin mushrooms, there's simply no place for placebo or whatever it is you think the claim is based on.
Why the bias?
>>7853530
Um hi. Just here to congratulate you on getting off the poppy, Anon. My bro was on the spoon for a while (might still be idk anymore), so I know how hard it is. I'm proud of you
> inb4 i fucking cry
One time I was 24 and flipping burgers at Mcdonalds. Then I did shrooms. Now I do still do shrooms but now I'm 32 and have a phd in number theory and teach college kids calculus and discrete math.
Shrooms are great.
>>7856327
How often do you do them? I've been doing them as a yearly thing
>>7856333
Depends on my schedule. Generally every weekend. Sometimes when I feel like its fucking with my serotonin levels Ill take a break.
Personally, I smoke weed every now and then. Maybe once a month at the absolute most. I have no desire to try other drugs or smoke weed more often.
I do not look down on people who do other drugs, only those that are slaves to their addictions, including smokers.
I thought about trying shrooms but I have no desire to consume neurotoxin.
>>7856342
>only those that are slaves to their addictions, including smokers.
Some people need to smoke constantly in order to be alert and focused. Why should they be looked down upon?
>>7856342
>I thought about trying shrooms but I have no desire to consume neurotoxin.
Are those independent statements or are you suggesting that psilocybin mushrooms contain neurotoxins?
They don't. The combustion products you inhale once a month are more of a neurotoxin.
>>7856095
I'm not forcing anything, I'm just thinking scientifically. What is 'commonly'? 9/10? 5/10? 3/10? You don't know, because your perception of 'commonly' is 'i heard a bunch of people say this!'.
You say there's no place for placebo, but don't show data on whether psilocybin is actually more effective than placebo.
Honestly, I don't even care if psilocybin actually works against cluster headaches, I just want you to understand the difference between anecdotal reports and scientific evidence.
>>7856690
because every human can do without it for at least half of his life, meaning one should not have been more high than sober over the sum of his life imho.
not implying abstinence but modesty
>>7853530
>I'm one of the most notorious
>internet monsters the web
>has ever known
>>7854150
No its a lie. Have you ever tried acid? I have. Acid makes you hallucinate. You can't do science, which is an exact field based on observing while you're tripping balls and your mind is racing or dreaming away.
wikiquote:
the double helix structure of DNA was first discovered in 1953 by Watson and Crick at the University of Cambridge, using experimental data collected by Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins.
>>7857976
Maybe you tried shitty acid.
>>7857231
Doesn't sound like a fair argument. Different people need different things.
And I was more referring to tobacco rather than weed.
>>7857976
>Have you ever tried acid? I have. Acid makes you hallucinate
Have you ever tried acid at less than 150 micrograms? Do you know what hallucination means?
Visuals are not hallucinations and it could be argued that even visions of "entities" on strong psychedelic experiences aren't hallucinations when you're aware they aren't "real".
Now I'm not saying you can do science when you're deep enough in psychedelia to perceive "entities" or similar phenomena, I'm saying you don't need to dose that high.
You can be entirely functional and logical on 100ug of LSD. You could also take as little as 20ug for a very unique nootropic effect. Ever heard of microdosing? Etc.
Oh and of course it's urban legend that Crick actually discovered the double helix through his LSD experiences. What's true is that he did use the substance.
>>7853997
This is the biggest heap of bullshit I've ever seen on here. My God, how fucking stupid.
>>7853997
Prime example of pulling shit right out of one's ass.
>>7857976
>Francis Crick visualizing DNA double helix on acid...
>Things that Never Happened for $500 Alex...
http://www.samwoolfe.com/2013/06/a-discussion-on-scientific-research.html
http://www.spiritmolecule.com/articles/lsd/2015/03/nobel-prize-genius-crick-was-high-on-lsd-when-he-discovered-the-secret-of-life
I'm aware these are not reliable sources, but David Nutt wrote about Crick visualizing DNA double helix on acid in his book Drugs without the hot air. Go to amazon, and search inside the book for crick, and you will find the reference easily.
Nobel Prize Genius Crick was High on LSD when he Discovered the Secret of Life
http://www.mayanmajix.com/art1699.html
August 8, 2004
BY ALUN REES
2004 Associated Newspapers Ltd. Mail on Sunday (London)
Living in Washington state, I have the wonderful ability to buy legal pot cookies, regulated by the state. They're limited to 10mg, a decent dose. I eat them a few times a month, on the weekends, and have my best ideas and eureka moments while I'm high.
Pot shouldn't be smoked, it should be eaten the way god intended...
>>7858367
While high, specifically while inhaling I think, I discovered the fact that our vision is 2D
I'd be happy to debate it if you disagree
>>7856690
I wasn't clear, I'm sorry. I look down on those whose addictions become their life. For example, a smoker that takes a break from work literally every five minutes to smoke and gets nothing done as a result,or an alcoholic.
>>7857203
I thought magic mushrooms all contained ibotenic acid as the prodrug to the actual hallucinogen.
>>7858547
allow indoor smoking
>>7858619
Some people go apeshit over the smell of smoke. I'm used to the smell so I dunno, but I've heard it smells fucking nasty.
>>7853424
>opiates
>one of the oldest widely used medications in the world
There's like a thousand fucking things opiates are good for.
>>7858550
That's the amanitas, pic related.
Psilocybin mushrooms are a totally different type of mushroom with different psychoactive chemicals.
>>7858652
Ah, gotcha
>>7858619
Are smokers actually this ignorant of the absolutely horrible smell of cigarette smoke? Even if second-hand smoke was beneficial to health, I literally would still not be capable of functioning properly in such a stench. It's debilitating.
>>7858619
>>7858661
Smokers are the most ignorant oblivious faggots in the world. They have absolutely no idea how just god awful they smell. Like... no fucking clue.
One girl in college smoked hardcore all the fucking time even more than the others (graphic design majors all smoke for some reason). Her car reeked of smoke. She brought in cookies and they tasted like cigarettes. No one could eat them.
So yeah, they are that ignorant. Also they are fucking retarded in ever way.
>>7853530
New pasta
>>7858661
Wow, and I can't believe you post on a science board. Amazing.
>>7858672
Tons of things in the environment smell bad. Marijuana also might smell bad to some people but you don't see others combating that. You can't just get rid of something because it smells bad. It's not like a rotten egg smelling leak that causes people to literally get sick within a few minutes.
When plenty of people smoke until they're in their 80's or 90's and are perfectly fine it's unbelievable that secondhand smoke could pose a threat to people.
>>7858723
You truly do not realize how bad Marijuana/tobacco smells.
This thread mon dieu. Strawmen and hyperbole everywhere
>>7858723
This has got to be a deliberate attempt at provocation. Or could this actually be a true example of a vehement cigarette smoker?
Most dugs (meth, krokodil, crack, flakka, pops are the only ones I can think of that are irredeemable) are not inherintly bad, everything in moderation. The socio-economic conditions that creates drug addicts are bad, the stigma that we as a society have against drugs and drug addicts are bad.
>>7858780
It's an honest attempt to find out why people who are against being around cigarette smoke are so irrational. I'm a nonsmoker but I'm not bothered by it. The reasons usually range from dubious health claims to "it stinks" and it doesn't strike me as a big deal if people are exposed to it.
>>7854027
tincture, moron
Are poppy seeds worth the effort? They seem cheap as fuck.
>>7853973
Soma was a mix of ingredients.
>>7859069
The fact that it has an unpleasant smell should be enough. It's also considered impolite to let out sticky farts in a restaurant, after all.
But aside from the smell it also has an immediate effect on the lungs of some people, as well as making their eyes tear up. Even if second-hand smoke had no long-term effects (which it does - it's basically air pollution, and there's plenty of proof that people with asthma as well as kids develop health problems due to second-hand smoke), that should be another good reason. Shit, I don't even have to open Pubmed because this is all explained in the Wikipedia article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_smoking#Evidence
>>7859195
They have zero drug content
>>7859069
>irrational
Wow. It's irrational to be bothered by a very strong unpleasant smell? My body will actually suppress breathing somewhat autonomically when there's strong cigarette smoke around, it's that bad.
>>7853530
>that feel when your entire drive for success is out of a need to justify the stigma you associate with an addiction that consumes your life
>>7859708
Business owners should be able to decide based on rational evidence whether or not they want to allow it. If the bans are based on unscientific opinions or reaching then that isn't very fair.
>asthma
True but it doesn't harm the average, healthy human being any more than faintly smelling smoke from a grill.
>Wikipedia
You should see the talk page of that article. Huge debate about how legitimate the evidence actually is.
>>7859794
>It's irrational to be bothered by a very strong unpleasant smell?
A ton of shit smells unpleasant in public, not just smoking. Honestly you sound like the kind of guy who gets triggered by stuff.
>>7860591
>A ton of shit smells unpleasant in public
This isn't common in civilized countries. Are you Indian?
>>7860682
It's common where I work.
>perfume
>body odor
>person who recently ate smelly food (usually pasta or Asian food)
Besides, people are too often worried by something shortening their life expectancy. Antonin Scalia died at 79 of a heart attack and he was a smoker. Didn't die at an early age of cancer like most negative statistics on smoking would suggest.
I'd like to see a total look at the number of smokers in America versus the ones who actually get sick from either smoking or being around someone's cigarette smoke and the number would probably be much smaller than believed.
>>7860682
have you ever been to america? I swear people are fucking SOAKED in deodorant, antiperspirant, perfume, cologne, etc. It's godawful, much worse than any secondhand smoke I've ever encountered. sometimes perfume is so strong my eyes start watering and its hard to breath.
not saying secondhand smoke is OK, or anything, but just pointing out there are worse things out there. what smells bad is subjective anyway, I dont know why you guys are arguing over what smells bad on a science board.
>>7860903
>I dont know why you guys are arguing over what smells bad on a science board.
I just personally find the alleged 'science' behind secondhand smoke and the health risks of smoking to be ridiculous and overwrought. It's usually more down to "x smells bad so I don't want it near me."
>doing upper level physics/mathematics
>not being what is essentially an autistic (though functional) meth head
Pick 1
Literally could not have completed grad school without meth and nootropics
>>7860710
>I'd like to see a total look at the number of smokers in America versus the ones who actually get sick from either smoking or being around someone's cigarette smoke and the number would probably be much smaller than believed
Ever herd of google faggot?
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/tables/
>>7861095
>x smells bad so I don't want it near me
Absolutely, that's in accordance to natural human instincts. And it's rarely superfluous...
>>7861150
next time just use normal amphetamines so you don't permanently fuck your brain like you did. lol
maybe if you did med school you would know this
>>7853997
Makes perfect sense. Healthy people go to regular check-ups and take their doctor's advice... hence care enough to go see a doctor on a regular basis.
Crackheads smoke crack, and thus don't give a shit about the state of their health both because they're high on crack, and the act of smoking crack.
Also, rehabilitation treatment should be free. Fuck anyone who says otherwise.
Sci and math thread related only, not sci and meth
>>7861150
You mean methamphetamine? That's interesting. I rarely hear positive meth stories.
>>7861218
How do you know he fucked his brain? That's a pretty big assumption.
>>7853421
>Does /sci/ have a bias against the potential benefits of illicit drug use?
No. But I have a bias against the sort of rhetoric most drug users use to justify being shitty people.
There are a lot of different things that get absorbed in the dichotomy of "cool with it" and "not cool with it". Things that are a lot bigger and unrelated to drugs. Things like ambition, career advancement, health, hygiene, relationships etc.
When I call people out on their shit (unrelated to drugs), it either sinks in and they make efforts to get their shit together while I'm still there to be a support structure or it gets absorbed by "anon is not cool about it" and everything I say is immediately correlated to some stance they think I have against drugs.
In all honesty a lot of people, probably myself included, are dipshits in general. People will do shitty things and have shitty preconceptions about drug users and those who don't agree with drug use.
>>7861205
>trusting CDC/tobaccofree.gov
I still didn't see the number of smokers who get sick vs the total number of smokers (which is probably really big compared to the number that get sick).
I actually did better in school after smoking weed every weekend.
I'm currently in uni while still smoking weed every few days but I wanna know if this is something that can't last if I actually want to progress.
Any advice? Anyone in or has been in a similar situation to me?
>>7861209
Except smell (or taste) is acquired, instinct is almost non-existant.
>>7861823
That's so stupid that I'm going to assume you're trying to stir deliberate provocation.
>>7861811
>but I wanna know if this is something that can't last if I actually want to progress.
How come you're questioning that? Are you doing fine at the moment?
It's not an obstacle if it isn't.
>>7861998
No, but what if use over time causes damage? It's not exactly a financial issue. Love smoking it, just worries in case it impairs my ability to do what I do.
I'm 19 btw if that means anything.
>>7861221
>It makes perfect sense
...No...
Drug addicts may cost less, but the social and long run economic toll drug addicts have on a society far outweighs any benefits.
>>7862308
If you think statistically, there are cases where people develop mental illness from over-usage. Some more thought needs to be put into researching long term its effects on mental health.
>>7862308
It can also improve your learning. It really depends on how it effects you in particular.
Many describe the effect as lethargic and mentally dulled, but I would describe it as stimulated and mildly psychedelic. For me it's a great nootropic so I can't see it having an adverse effect on my learning.
How does the cannabis affect you?
>>7853421
Vape apvp friends
>>7862418
Sometimes I feel like it doesn't affect me at all. Same with alcohol. Although I prefer my thinking after smoking and I seem to make better decisions.
Can't say that for certain though. I got an A in maths at school while smoking a lot though..
>>7861989
No it's not. People can get used to and even like smells like cigarette or marijuana smoke if they're around it long enough.
>>7862458
>not instinctively liking the smell of Mary Jane's flower
>>7862458
That's about gradually REPLACING the instinctive preset you dumb shit. Instinct for smells is there for good reason.
If you take a large sample of people who've been around cigarette smoke very little and expose them to it, none of them will like it, they're going to be repulsed by it.
Yes, go on /sci/, discuss.
http://hubnet.buffalo.edu:2104/sp-3.18.0b/ovidweb.cgi?&S=FPKGFPALPNDDMDFHNCJKNAGCNIEOAA00&Link+Set=jb.search.31|1|sl_10
>do opiates
>fulfill dream of being a tranny-crossdresser
>take 470x therapeutic dose
>add 5 others drugs
>die in a porta-potty
>not even once
>>7853575
name one benefit of crack.
cracks only benefits are this.
>it makes a buzzing in your ear
>it makes you hate bright lights.. like the sun
>it helps you stay inside
>it helps you want to smoke more crack
>wash rinse repeat
now name a positive benefit of crack.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnxweVAvE5w
Thank me later
If you want to make people believe that illicit drugs are helpful for some ailment, cite your sources (peer-reviewed papers). It isn't a matter of opinion.
>>7864704
But anon, it isn't always the case that there exist any peer-reviewed papers.
That's not a reason to abstain from spreading information about known illicit treatments for various ailments. Sometimes large collections of anecdotes just have to cut it.
>>7864704
1.) you can't just dismiss anecdotes especially if they're common. The media always slants the opinion on drugs by only reporting on horror stories and leaving out a lot of experiences that aren't negative.
2.) it'd be hard to find studied beyond anecdotes die to the illegal nature of these drugs. There are enough experiences however that at least show that drugs like heroin, cocaine, and meth have minimal effects on health overall. Like with Burroughs >>7864699. Mental health effects are likely subjective but a lot of cocaine users in Hollywood and former coke using presidents are still in good shape mentally.
>>7864757
>Auto
The plural of anecdotes is not evidence. You have many people (you'd be surprised) saying things to the effect of: weed cures cancer, and there are very shaky, unverifiable anecdotes in their thousands that 'attest' to this 'fact'. Doesn't make any of it true. Mechanism + epidemiological studies are the way to go
>>7864785
Same goes here. I can definitely dismiss anecdotes because they demonstrate nothing.
>>7864665
>Alertness
>Heightened awareness
>Heightened wellbeing
Wasn't so hard.
>>7864786
>weed cures cancer
There's a science behind how it can help stop cancer cells and inhibit tumor growth.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TXKjRkkoIOU
>>7864800
>youtube link
>'there's a science behind it'
You can do better man, I know it. I want to learn, if there is something to be learned, but VICE videos are not a source of scientific information.
>>7864807
Did you at least get to the 6:32 mark?
This article was also supposed to cite some scientific publications but I couldn't find them immediately in the links they provided.
http://naturalsociety.com/marijuana-kills-cancer-cells-admits-the-u-s-national-cancer-institute/
>>7853421
Usually a lot of drugs are banned because they have negative consequences, which is because they are illegal so people tend to avoid regulations of manufacturing these illicit drugs, which is because someone, unironically the KKK, thought it was immoral at some point of time, and then it was continued because gangs/mafias don't want to give up their monopoly, which turns into secret campaign donors who support politicians who find it conveniently immoral to legalize drugs.
Somehow moonshine manages to be illegal, which I am guessing has more to do with early oil company politics than alcohol since moonshine is essentially ethanol gas.
Basically, it's a huge load of shit.
I wish people would just let me drown myself into oblivion, snort myself into oblivion or do whatever I want with my own body. The only argument I can see against that is my drug use ends up costing you money via hospitals, which is totally understandable why you have a problem with it then.
Idk, call me a hippie but we only get a few years of life and I think you should be able to experience what you want. Ex: you kill a man because you want to, but you have to accept you're gonna generally be regarded as a shitty person by a lot of people and go to jail. You did what you wanna do, but now they're doing what they wanna do.
>>7865039
You see, going to jail should not be a fair trade for someone's life. That dead person really doesn't care what happens to you and if you knowingly broke the law you are probably okay with the retribution that is to follow, be it death or imprisonment.
>>7864954
Unfortunately only marijuana is getting the legalization push. It'll probably be a while before crack/cocaine, heroin, and meth get a similar push.
>>7865045
But your first sentence is subjective. That's my main issue rn, there's no right or wrong inherently so everything's completely arbitrary and no one has any real basis for what they do or why... It just seems so hopelessly confusing
>>7853424
>pain relief
Give me another one
That would only have to be two things, 500x less than you're thousand
>>7853963
synthetic cannabinoids?
Could also be amphetamine.
>>7864954
Isn't it illegal to make moonshine because there's often a lot of methanol in it which can make you blind? That aside, it's not that difficult to get high-proof liquors that won't make you blind, so I don't think many people complain about moonshine being illegal.
>>7865039
You can also do/sell drugs if you want to, but you just have to accept that you're gonna go to jail or pay fines if they catch you. Great analogy, since that's exactly how it works.
>>7864888
>naturalsociety
into the trash it goes
Also just because something kills cancer cells does not mean it's good for you. Chemotherapy kills cancer cells, too, but it's pretty bad for you unless you actually have cancer. I'm all for researching marijuana for conditions such as cancer, and I'm probably okay with legalization if it's still on a prescription-basis (after the necessary trials have been performed).
>>7864786
This guy gets it. It's perfectly fine to dismiss anecdotes. If you there's a lot of anecdotes claiming the same thing this is a good excuse to start doing proper research into whether they're actually true, but not for starting to use them in standard health care or recreational use.
>>7864785
You say that the media always 'slants' opinions by leaving certain things out, but this is exactly the problem with anecdotes - you always only hear one side of things, and it tells you absolutely nothing about the issue at hand because there might be an equal number of people claiming the opposite.
>>7860587
You also don't grill indoors. Also, second-hand smoke also has effects on children, it's not just asthma patients.
>>7853421
>drug use
>benefits
'no'
>people arguing over LSD and the double helix
>ITT people who have never taken LSD
Whenever you focus your vision on a point, everything around that point distorts into fractals and geometric shapes. It's not hard to imagine someone seeing helixes while under the effects of LSD. Theres a fair stretch between "seeing" and scientifically discovering and proving the helix though.
>>7866576
>and I'm probably okay with legalization if it's still on a prescription-basis
Why do you have bias against cannabis on such a level that you wouldn't have it legalized for recreational use?
>>7866576
Pretty sure grilling is different from cigarette smoke. More smoke is released from a grill at once when it's used, for example.
>>7866659
He probably thinks it makes people lazy or some dumb thing.
>>7854078
Unhealthiness is the business of everyone in a society with socialized healthcare.
>>7869009
>associated with schizophrenia
Associated with onset of schizophrenia in those who are predisposed to it. You could say it's bad to have it start "earlier" but then again it could be any event that triggers it.
>unsafe for use while driving
This is a superfluous argument because nearly any recreational drug is unsafe for use while driving. There are stupid people who drive while intoxicated, their numbers wouldn't increase significantly with the legalization of cannabis because those are the same people who would drive while drunk anyway.
>stoners typically do not contribute much to society
This again? The type of "stoner" you're thinking of is an extreme case that is far from the norm, just like alcoholics.
Are you actually delusional enough to think that most people who smoke cannabis aren't actually normal folks who happen to enjoy it every once in a while?
>>7869365
I have severe ADD and marijuana is the only way I can operate properly during uni lectures, I've tried various prescription medications and they all cause me to become so groggy I can barely get out of bed, so far marijuana has been my savior. Also I don't go around screaming "420 blaze it fgts" at everyone, I attend university with a part time job on the side, in fact, none of my friends And family are even aware of my use because frankly, it's not their buisiness. I completely agree anon.
