• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Pissed_and_messed | Shinji Ikari

aMT, Al-Lad, LSz, 5-meo-dalt, (also AH7921+) BANNED from Jan 7th

Ceres said:
absolute crock of uninformed bullshit. you have no idea what you are talking about and have given zero evidence to back up any of your claims, except anectodal nonsense.

you have lost this argument, the more you post the more ridiculous hyperbole you come out with and nobody is taking you seriously, give it up.
Click to expand...

That's not true. I deliberately referred to FoolsGold real account posted on this forum, as a real reference to back up my claims. If it's true with someone so local that they communicate with you on our forum, surely that says something about the potential dangers of widespread use?

As for "Permanent damage from moderate use", didn't see the need to dig through facts and figures as felt it was pretty well known. If you didn't know this, sure i'll give you some reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogen_persisting_perception_disorder
"These authors noted that they had not encountered it in their evaluation of 500 Native American Church members who had taken the hallucinogenic cactus peyote on at least 100 occasions. In a presentation of preliminary results from ongoing research, Matthew Baggott and colleagues from University of California Berkeley found that HPPD-like symptoms occurred in 4.1% of participants (107 of 2,679) in a web-based survey of hallucinogen users. These people reported visual problems after drug use that were serious enough that they considered seeking professional help"

"As yet, there is no cure available for HPPD. "

HPPD is distinct from flashbacks by reason of its relative permanence; while flashbacks are transient, HPPD is persistent
Click to expand...

[hundred times is prob not considered moderate use, hang on i'll find further link]
EDIT: Aha

Erowid agree's...
https://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/health/hppd/hppd_faq.shtml#tripcount

"However, some people with severe HPPD got it after their first trip. From the evidence so far, it appears that if you are prone to HPPD, then you have a good chance of getting it after only a few experiences. "







is that good enough, or would you like some more?

Shambles said:
The problem with trying to argue a point in that way is that you are essentially relying completely on hearsay. "Well I know this bloke who took acid once and went mental, thought he was a glass of orange juice then chucked himself out of a window to turn himself into a glass of orange squash." Your sample size is minute. Millions of people take acid every week yet the mental wards are not filled with acid casualties. I'd go so far as to say you'd struggle to find more than a handful of such cases worldwide (in terms of longterm rather than acute psychotic incidents which often seem to involve combining LSD with other substances or people with prior psychotic-type illnesses).
Click to expand...

^ as above
 
Last edited:
Raasyvibe said:
Well, you're definitely the first person to give a considered, structured post, rather than blind defence of anything that opposes drugs in anyway. Well done.
Click to expand...

That's a crappy characterisation of the thread and makes you appear arrogant (although si's post was good). There's not much blind defence here, and where there is it's then followed by posting of suggestive evidence, unlike your anecdotal hearsay [no you just added some links to be fair] - which is not to say i don't agree lsd could cause/trigger mental illness, but it's about relative risk, and appropriate minimisation of that risk (see my posts - which you didn't seem to answer). Speaking for myself, i am opposed to criminalisation of recreational drugs use in principle - this has nothing to do with the relative merits of any particular drug, it's about freedom (i can go and buy bleach (or vodka) and drink it till i die - i can grind up glass and inject it).

As for LSD accidents, I only speak from real incidents of moderate use putting people in mental wards, and permanent neurological damage accumulated from moderate use - this just doesn't happen with alcohol, because it's far less dangerous and easier to control.
Click to expand...

For the vast majority of users there are no lasting negative neurological impacts to lsd when used in appropriate fashion - that's the reason it stayed legal when administered by doctors until it got out in the wild and caused 'social' issues.

EDIT - ooh you did an edit: Is HPPD is the best you can get for permanent damage, it's pretty weak next to psychosis isn't it? OK i'll give you that (though i know people who've developed visual noise without the use of drugs). But 4.1% among heavy users (100 times) sounds like some pretty good odds to me of having a few squiggles in my vision. Another quote from your link: "The probability of developing HPPD after consuming a hallucinogen is unknown. In their review article, John Halpern and Harrison Pope write that "the data does not permit us to estimate, even crudely, the prevalence of ‘strict’ HPPD."[5] "
 
Last edited:
Raasyvibe said:
That's not true. I deliberately referred to FoolsGold real account posted on this forum, as a real reference to back up my claims. If it's true with someone so local that they communicate with you on our forum, surely that says something about the potential dangers of widespread use?
Click to expand...

No, no it doesn't. I don't think I was around when this supposed incident took place but given the person in question - as with many here - has longterm issues with stimulant and benzo abuse as well as ongoing mental health issues it hardly seems to be as straightforward a case as you make out. This would be not entirely dissimilar from selecting a chronic alcoholic to form your entire opinion of alcohol use on.

And the study you quoted is bordering on meaningless. It's self-selecting - no controls for biases. I don't doubt HPPD exists but it isn't especially common - anecdotally at least. I don't know anybody who has it so does that mean it doesn't exist? This is essentially the "logic" you have been using after all.
 
^ I said it can cause permanent damage from moderate use, which it does. I never commented or questioned upon how likely it was.

Virtual said:
The probability of developing HPPD after consuming a hallucinogen is unknown. In their review article, John Halpern and Harrison Pope write that "the data does not permit us to estimate, even crudely, the prevalence of ‘strict’ HPPD
Click to expand...

As above. I never claimed it was likely, just that it was possible.

Virtual said:
That's a crappy characterisation of the thread and makes you appear arrogant (although si's post was good). There's not much blind defence here, and where there is it's then followed by posting of suggestive evidence, unlike your anecdotal hearsay - which is not to say i don't agree lsd could cause mental illness, but it's about relative risk, and appropriate minimisation of that risk (see my posts - which you didn't seem to answer).
Click to expand...

Fair point. I apologise to the genuine posts I may well have overlooked. But a lot of posts on this thread seem more interested in getting personal, or taking sides rather than being structured and fair. I've had a poster making fun of my religious beliefs, in absence of a structured opinion. Then there's those who jeer from the sidelines, calling me ignorant without being able to point out where or why. A lot of responses seem predictable just by looking at the usernames. No interest in discussing a point, but taking a side. I was about to give up on the thread until that post, so wanted to show some commendation for the impartial approach.
 
No that's a fair point too - but we both know the best way to deal with people who do stuff to us we don't like (i mean that sort of reference genuinely btw :)). Your approach isn't really impartial either though (and shouldn't be - we're all partial (and we can also be harmonic (acoustics joke ;))
 
Shambles said:
No, no it doesn't. I don't think I was around when this supposed incident took place but given the person in question - as with many here - has longterm issues with stimulant and benzo abuse as well as ongoing mental health issues it hardly seems to be as straightforward a case as you make out. This would be not entirely dissimilar from selecting a chronic alcoholic to form your entire opinion of alcohol use on.
Click to expand...

I will accept quoting from one person with mental health problems isn't a fantastic empirical approach. But it does show how powerful the drug is, and I think we can both assume it's very unlikely he'd be in that mental ward and have such a horrific experience after a few beers. Again, I felt it was quite well known how dangerous acid can be and didn't see the need to dwell on experiences.

I'm sure you're aware of what it can do, but if you want a reminder it's possible to read up on hundreds of similar incidents. Here's a start.

https://www.erowid.org/experiences/subs/exp_LSD_Health_Problems.shtml
 
Vurtual said:
No that's a fair point too - but we both know the best way to deal with people who do stuff to us we don't like (i mean that sort of reference genuinely btw :)). Your approach isn't really impartial either though (and shouldn't be - we're all partial (and we can also be harmonic (acoustics joke ;))
Click to expand...

You.. you rude, mean, square!

Yeah %)
 
Raasyvibe said:
I will accept quoting from one person with mental health problems isn't a fantastic empirical approach. But it does show how powerful the drug is, and I think we can both assume it's very unlikely he'd be in that mental ward and have such a horrific experience after a few beers. Again, I felt it was quite well known how dangerous acid can be and didn't see the need to dwell on experiences.

I'm sure you're aware of what it can do, but if you want a reminder it's possible to read up on hundreds of similar incidents. Here's a start.

https://www.erowid.org/experiences/subs/exp_LSD_Health_Problems.shtml
Click to expand...

Nobody is saying LSD is completely harmless. What many have pointed out is that the risks associated with most psychedelics are very much Set & Setting based. Why do people get themselves into a bad way? Most often because they get paranoid because they think they are at risk of being "caught out" by real or imagined (often legal) consequences and/or take unknown doses in unfamiliar settings. These issues can be far better minimised with regulated and controlled use rather than prohibition, pot luck and disinformation.

Raasyvibe said:
... calling me ignorant without being able to point out where or why.
Click to expand...

The "why" has been pointed out repeatedly now by several people. It's because you are extrapolating your entire argument from one BLer incident that none of us know all the details of to make sweeping generalisations whilst refusing to engage on any level with actual evidence.
 
I downloaded one of the various .pdf files earlier and maintain it was penned by perhaps the most sarcastic and cynical arsehole in existence. It read as though the author thought the entire thing was stupid, which it is, but it was his job to write the file. =D
 
^Shambles^
No, I was referring to pages back. Nothing said today. Some people jump in and take sides without being able to give any justification for their claims. *cough, bob funkhouse....cough coltdan...* I don't mind being called ignorant, liar, troll, evil or whatever.... just please show me where and why! otherwise I consider it partial/personal nonsense.

And, as I said earlier, I didn't feel the need to provide documented evidence for the statements, as felt they were quite well known. As soon as Ceres accused me of telling "absolute crock of uninformed bullshit" I was able to verify the statements with links to reputable sites and studies.
 
Raasyvibe said:
And, as I said earlier, I didn't feel the need to provide documented evidence for the statements, as felt they were quite well known. As soon as Ceres accused me of telling "absolute crock of uninformed bullshit" I was able to verify the statements with links to reputable sites and studies.
Click to expand...

No you didn't. You provided a link to a wiki description of a borderline irrelevant and/or pointless study which demonstrates precisely nothing of anything. And beware of "common knowledge" cos it ain' t that common and even less likely to be knowledgable.
 
Shambles said:
No you didn't. You provided a link to a wiki description of a borderline irrelevant and/or pointless study which demonstrates precisely nothing of anything. And beware of "common knowledge" cos it ain' t that common and even less likely to be knowledgable.
Click to expand...

lol, you won't back down will you. What makes it "irrelevant and pointless?"

I said that acid gives lasting neurological damage, ceres asked for evidence to "back up my claims" of "uninformed bullshit"... so I quoted a valid published study, on acid, that proves lasting damage does occur on a percentage of users.


I can't really do much more now can I!?
 
Raasyvibe said:
lol, you won't back down will you. What makes it "irrelevant and pointless?"
Click to expand...

The fact that nobody even knows if the people responding to the internet survey had even taken acid for one. The fact there are no checks for biases because nobody has a clue who took part nor whether they even read the thing or were just clicking things for fun. Internet surveys do not count as "valid, published studies". They are essentially anecdotal at best.
 
There are far too many myths surrounding LSD-25. I speak as someone diagnosed with a Schizoaffective Disorder, among other things and so feel slightly qualified to offer an opinion. The lysergamides I have tried, LSD and LSA, certainly have the capacity to catapult one "down the rabbit hole," and will bring any underlying psychiatric problems to the surface, but they will not turn you into a glass of orange juice/a pineapple/whatever bullshit some stoned kid came up with. But then again, MOST drugs will exacerbate underlying mental health problems. Of the 4 classes of hallucinogens (Lysergamides, Tryptamines, substituted Phenethylamines, Dissociatives) Lysergamides are, in my experience, the most likely to exacerbate underlying psychiatric problems - IF THEY ARE PRESENT.
But compared to alcohol? Not even close. Alcohol is a brutal drug, neurotoxic, cardiotoxic, hepatoxic, carcinogenic and generally awful. And much more likely to cause long-term problems than any psychedelic.
 
.

just leave it raas, shambles is in bully mode again.. be the bigger man raas (not difficult) .. and just walk away. everyone can see you won anyway. lol'd especially hard a ceres being systematically destroyed by your incisive debate skills. it became painful to watch near the end. poor ceres
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top