Solipsis
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2007
- Messages
- 15,509
I think I would agree with the point that we'd have wanted every psychoactive available to be studied as much as say mushrooms, MDMA and LSD. But the simple reality is that not every one of them is or has been studied that much and if you seek something besides the handful of studied classics you're gonna have to settle for less. This is a harm reduction site, Teo, not some sort of place where we comfort each other with the myth that there are no risks involved.
You think you're being realistic and relevant to paint us an ideal world? No what's realistic is to try and determine what we do know and experience considering all these compounds and base our own private actions and decisions on that.
If someone wants to be one of the first to try a synthetic research chemical it's their own responsibility. Has telling everyone that it's dangerous to take and they shouldn't do it ever helped? No, people are still going to do as they like so we better judge this all at face value.
There is a trend where natural drugs are generally not extremely potent and have a self-limiting effect. It's much harder to OD on valerian root than a benzo, and there are many more examples. But on the other hand, the effects are often milder as well. Not to mention that there are enough poisons in nature and enough complex biomolecules we do not understand!
If you really want to say something about it, say that the more research is done and the longer a drug (synthetic or natural!!!!!!) has a history of human use, the more information there is to base an idea of its safety on.
And saying that is nothing new at all. It's a fundamental point of the business of PD-ers and other drug takers but it also seems well-established and is probably in the FAQ we have for 'safer use of research chemicals' by Illuminati Boy.
There are enough people who would not eat a chemical if there were too few others who tried it before. It's a healthy attitude but there is still an urge to pioneer and experiment in many of the people here. It will have to run its course, the only thing important is that we don't give each other a false sense of security. Let's not pretend that we know things about these drugs that we don't. But that goes for enough natural drugs as well, Teo, so don't bring up a point that has been covered ad nauseam.
You think you're being realistic and relevant to paint us an ideal world? No what's realistic is to try and determine what we do know and experience considering all these compounds and base our own private actions and decisions on that.
If someone wants to be one of the first to try a synthetic research chemical it's their own responsibility. Has telling everyone that it's dangerous to take and they shouldn't do it ever helped? No, people are still going to do as they like so we better judge this all at face value.
There is a trend where natural drugs are generally not extremely potent and have a self-limiting effect. It's much harder to OD on valerian root than a benzo, and there are many more examples. But on the other hand, the effects are often milder as well. Not to mention that there are enough poisons in nature and enough complex biomolecules we do not understand!
If you really want to say something about it, say that the more research is done and the longer a drug (synthetic or natural!!!!!!) has a history of human use, the more information there is to base an idea of its safety on.
And saying that is nothing new at all. It's a fundamental point of the business of PD-ers and other drug takers but it also seems well-established and is probably in the FAQ we have for 'safer use of research chemicals' by Illuminati Boy.
There are enough people who would not eat a chemical if there were too few others who tried it before. It's a healthy attitude but there is still an urge to pioneer and experiment in many of the people here. It will have to run its course, the only thing important is that we don't give each other a false sense of security. Let's not pretend that we know things about these drugs that we don't. But that goes for enough natural drugs as well, Teo, so don't bring up a point that has been covered ad nauseam.
