Still what I'm trying to say is you are unlikely to know the long term effects, even with decades of exposure to others. I'm looking in to getting some of this myself as it reads quite well and I'll only try it for a bit. There is always, imho, going to be an element of risk, minimise it as much as you can but some risk ill always remain.
Misc If a drug has a long history of traditional use how likely does that mean it's safe?
- Thread starter deruyityn
- Start date
Still what I'm trying to say is you are unlikely to know the long term effects, even with decades of exposure to others. I'm looking in to getting some of this myself as it reads quite well and I'll only try it for a bit. There is always, imho, going to be an element of risk, minimise it as much as you can but some risk ill always remain.
Oakstone
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2015
- Messages
- 232
This is pretty much exactly what I was going to say. Throughout history, there will always be in any given culture and for any given drug, three or four groups of people: those who completely abstain from it, people who try it once or twice/very occasionally, those who use it fairly regularly but still responsively, and those who abuse it. Obviously, the amount of risk posed to the user goes up for each one of those categories, so it's really just a matter of figuring out the sweet spot between enjoying it and being safe.
Cocaine is a fairly good example, too: it was traditionally used for a very long time in Central/South America, for increasing stamina, decreasing hunger, altitude sickness, etc. The amount of people who regularly used it in that way was pretty high (and remains so in certain areas), but the amount of abuse was fairly low, quite possibly due to the fact the onset of the effects is slower and less acute than cocaine as it is taken currently.
This same story can be applied to many, many traditional drugs.
So play it safe, especially as there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of documented research on it. In some ways, I "trust" traditional preparations/uses of drugs a good deal more than modern preparations of drugs. For example, if I were in South America, I'd totally try coca leaves or coca tea, but as it is in my country, I probably wouldn't try cocaine.
(Side note: Thanks to the OP for mentioning this herb. I might see about getting some of my own and trying it out.)
A long history of use means we know something about it. As was said, alcohol is ancient but not exactly "safe" and yet we do know that drinking a glass or two of wine from time to time is pretty safe. So we know about the safety and the dangers and hopefully how to avoid them.
Well sekio did in my previous threads and he is no slouch in this department is he.
Also does it not stand to reason? It is evidence just not rigorous controlled evidence. I qualify it by saying a long history of use without apparent negative reactions of course.
If this weren't true how would we have survived so long using all the traditional medicines before we got modern medicine. Sure some turned out to be less safe than others maybe but if they were extremely toxic then they would have killed us off.
You know, that little thing called darwinisn.
Last edited:
That's what I mean. With alcohol- long history of use but it's well known it isn't safe.
Whereas mulungu- long history of use but no reported documentation on it having any severe reactions. Now the crux of my query is whther this is because it is actually safe or whehter the negative effects may just not have been reported.
And another example- cannabis long history and long history of safe use besides the problems of smoking and some mental health issues in certain subsets of people.
Now with alcohol and cannabis, they've had alot of attention drawn to them by the medical comunity, so it's going to be easy to spot any issues. I'm just wondering if enough attention has been brought to mulungu to point up the majority of the negatives it may have had. It has had scholarly studes done on it in the last 50 years or so and I was able to read back to as far as the late 1800s when botanists were experimenting with it. So that indicates it has been known in the western scientific community for quite a while if not studied rigorously.
Last edited:
Not saying alcohol is good, but we've already adapted to it quite a bit. It takes a lot of drinking do fuck up your health.
As you know OP, I have some of this and will get around to trying it eventually.
Has anyone else here tried it?
And Deruyityn, where SPECIFICALLY did you hear that it works if you just swallow it with water as opposed to making a tea out of it??
Did you just ASSUME this to be the case?
Because as we mentioned before, there are herbs like Cannabis that are inactive if eaten without being heated first.
The reason I ask is that I am lazy as hell and also live with other people so making a tea is annoying for me, but if I can just swallow it and it will work then chances are I may try it soon, especially since I am now out of Kratom so I'll probably be more eager to try something else.
As far as safety, I guess it's odd that I haven't even researched it and feel confident in trying it but that's probably just because I doubt I will ever do much of it.
However, if I really like it and start using it frequently I'll probably become more concerned with figuring out if it's truly safe.
I think the number of drugs which are extremely dangerous to try even once or twice is certainly MUCH lower than those that are unsafe to use repeatedly or on a regular basis, so that's my logic.
Has anyone else here tried it?
And Deruyityn, where SPECIFICALLY did you hear that it works if you just swallow it with water as opposed to making a tea out of it??
Did you just ASSUME this to be the case?
Because as we mentioned before, there are herbs like Cannabis that are inactive if eaten without being heated first.
The reason I ask is that I am lazy as hell and also live with other people so making a tea is annoying for me, but if I can just swallow it and it will work then chances are I may try it soon, especially since I am now out of Kratom so I'll probably be more eager to try something else.
As far as safety, I guess it's odd that I haven't even researched it and feel confident in trying it but that's probably just because I doubt I will ever do much of it.
However, if I really like it and start using it frequently I'll probably become more concerned with figuring out if it's truly safe.
I think the number of drugs which are extremely dangerous to try even once or twice is certainly MUCH lower than those that are unsafe to use repeatedly or on a regular basis, so that's my logic.
I don't see the point in just trying drugs once just for the sake of saying you've done it. When I was younger sure but not these days. My general motto for anything I do is if you aren't going to be doing it regularly then why do it at all.
I am a workaholic so want things which can supercharge my productivity, either to help me relax so Im more raring to go the next day or to stimulate greater work productivity that can be taken regular without interfering with my schedule.
As I'm sure you understand that is why I love kratom
I am a workaholic so want things which can supercharge my productivity, either to help me relax so Im more raring to go the next day or to stimulate greater work productivity that can be taken regular without interfering with my schedule.
As I'm sure you understand that is why I love kratom
Foreigner
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2009
- Messages
- 8,295
I've answered your question twice now, I think maybe you're just not hearing what you want to hear.
You mentioned ethnobotany, but then started talking about cigarettes. Cigarettes and tobacco aren't the same thing. Cigarettes have additives. Raw tobacco, in traditional use, was not known to cause cancer, and was even used as a medicine for lung issues. It has expectorant qualities and it kills infections (as some modern smokers note).
Cigarettes being a cure for things, AFAIK, was industry bullshit, though FWIW they are still prescribed in some countries for respiratory infections.
If you can't find scientific data on your plant, then ethnobotany is your only hope, and they might not have long-term usage data in the format you're requesting. I don't understand why you're asking us if they would have this info or not, instead of simply looking. If you don't find the info then that means they don't have it or it isn't available for the masses. How hard is that?
A couple of pints get into the car and have an accident -all drugs have the potential to be problematic and harm health very easily!
I don't know what makes you guys so casual about the risk of genotoxicity? It isn't like the possible risk of normal toxicity as I understand it in that with the latter its maybe bad for you and if you don't think about it you'll be ok.
From what I read it seems more like radiation poisoning in its effect cuasing hideous mutations of your dna. How can you brush that under the carpet?
It's frustrating I don'r know how to find out more on the subject. It feels like Id have to find some sort of expert in the field who would not be interested in entertaining my questions I expect unless I had the fortune to happen upon them and a dinner party and we got along well.
From what I read it seems more like radiation poisoning in its effect cuasing hideous mutations of your dna. How can you brush that under the carpet?
It's frustrating I don'r know how to find out more on the subject. It feels like Id have to find some sort of expert in the field who would not be interested in entertaining my questions I expect unless I had the fortune to happen upon them and a dinner party and we got along well.
I would doubt if a study has been done on that, maybe best avoid the substance until you get better information. I am ordering some looks like an interesting substance.
I already linked to 4 studies on the very subject on the first page of this thread. That is the whole reason I made these posts in the first place.
I had no idea what genotoxicity was before I read them. I didn't just wake up one day and say hey I better start worrying about mulungu being genotoxic.
Anyhow let us know how you find it. It might encourage me to finally try it, which I still want to do. Part of my hesitation is not having had fellow cohorts to compare notes with since it isn't very popular in the west unlike say kratom.
I had no idea what genotoxicity was before I read them. I didn't just wake up one day and say hey I better start worrying about mulungu being genotoxic.
Anyhow let us know how you find it. It might encourage me to finally try it, which I still want to do. Part of my hesitation is not having had fellow cohorts to compare notes with since it isn't very popular in the west unlike say kratom.
I already linked to 4 studies on the very subject on the first page of this thread. That is the whole reason I made these posts in the first place.
I had no idea what genotoxicity was before I read them. I didn't just wake up one day and say hey I better start worrying about mulungu being genotoxic.
Anyhow let us know how you find it. It might encourage me to finally try it, which I still want to do. Part of my hesitation is not having had fellow cohorts to compare notes with since it isn't very popular in the west unlike say kratom.
Sorry, I forgot the OP.
Am having some problems getting it bought with a shipping issue on ebay. AS soon as I get it I'll do a couple of tests and report on here asap.