Hi I'm Nick I am 20 years old and I have used Dxm almost daily for 6 years. It is without a doubt my favorite chemical, nothing compares imo. I have done more Dxm than anyone I have ever encountered. My usual dose is between 1500-1800mgs and I use other ingrediants to potentiate my trip. I have also consumed larges amount of other dissociatives such as Pcp and ketamine. Anyways if the theory that Onley's lesions can occur in the human brain from dissociative drugs including Dxm is true, than if anyone should have them that I surely should. I've recently Had Mulitple brain scans and tests done and the neurologist told me my brain looked fine and had no kind of damage or any kind of problems. I have the evidence that proves my brain is totally fine and no signs of any lesions at all, I also have many people who can vouch that I've consumed this amount of Dxm over the past 6 years at least 5000 bottles of dxm cough medicine. Any advise as what would be the next step to putting this into action to disproving this theory? Any positive feedback is appreciated. thanks
-
PD Moderators: Esperighanto | JackARoe |
Disproving Onleys lesions from years of Dxm use
- Thread starter Nick2012
- Start date
desertshore
Bluelighter
Whether NMDA antagonists (such as dissociatives) cause Olney's lesions in humans or not is still matter of debate, but I think no one showed a clear piece of evidence in support of this theory.
This said, I doubt you can do much to disprove the theory. Even if you're willing to donate your brain to science (post-mortem, of course) it won't be really useful, I think. Besides, I suppose that since brain scans have limited resolution they can't detect Olney's lesion unless the damage is significant (but by that point you could have behavioural/cognitive symptoms as well...)
This said, I doubt you can do much to disprove the theory. Even if you're willing to donate your brain to science (post-mortem, of course) it won't be really useful, I think. Besides, I suppose that since brain scans have limited resolution they can't detect Olney's lesion unless the damage is significant (but by that point you could have behavioural/cognitive symptoms as well...)
Bob Loblaw
Bluelight Crew
Regardless of whether DXM causes Olney's lesions, the fact that you don't have them right now proves nothing.
atara
Bluelighter
There is already a large body of evidence to indicate that Olney's lesions do not [EDIT EDIT EDIT: SEE BOTTOM OF POST] form in primates. This may be "beating a dead horse" as it were, studies of ketamine users have found no evidence of brain lesioning activity even after abuse of this compound. In this study, ketamine is administered to adult humans who are then given an fMRI:
http://journals.lww.com/neuroreport...ne_alters_neural_processing_of_facial.18.aspx
etc:
http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/15100698
http://cercor.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/6/749.short
Long-term use of ketamine is associated with persistent deficits in episodic memory, however. Luckily EM isn't really necessary for most tasks, but it's something to be aware of in any case.
------
Neurotoxicity was observed when large doses of ketamine were administered to perinatal monkeys, i.e. 5 days old:
http://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/98/1/145.short
No neurotoxicity was observed at lower doses. Lesions were not mentioned. Dizocilpine has been found to be neuroprotective against MPTP in adult monkeys:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...nticated=false&deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=
Again, no lesions were observed. Olney's lesions in humans are basically phlostigon at this point. In fact, one of the things that makes it so hard to look up NMDA antagonist neurotoxicity is the wealth of studies that use them to prevent neurotoxicity!
http://journals.lww.com/neuroreport...ne_alters_neural_processing_of_facial.18.aspx
etc:
http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/15100698
http://cercor.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/6/749.short
Long-term use of ketamine is associated with persistent deficits in episodic memory, however. Luckily EM isn't really necessary for most tasks, but it's something to be aware of in any case.
------
Neurotoxicity was observed when large doses of ketamine were administered to perinatal monkeys, i.e. 5 days old:
http://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/98/1/145.short
No neurotoxicity was observed at lower doses. Lesions were not mentioned. Dizocilpine has been found to be neuroprotective against MPTP in adult monkeys:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...nticated=false&deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=
Again, no lesions were observed. Olney's lesions in humans are basically phlostigon at this point. In fact, one of the things that makes it so hard to look up NMDA antagonist neurotoxicity is the wealth of studies that use them to prevent neurotoxicity!
Last edited:
Reverend Random
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2013
- Messages
- 334
^That's what I thought as well. And one case doesn't prove anything indeed. It's akin to saying that smoking tobacco doesn't cause lung cancer because your grandpa died from old age at 95, after having smoked a packet of ciggies a day since he was 14.
Be careful with your DXM use, OP. I doubt that I really need to stress that, but since this is a harm reduction forum, it makes good sense to state it. I've seen a lot of posts from people who have experienced serious neurological (?) problems after heavy DXM abuse in the last few weeks. Can't be all too easy on your body.
Be careful with your DXM use, OP. I doubt that I really need to stress that, but since this is a harm reduction forum, it makes good sense to state it. I've seen a lot of posts from people who have experienced serious neurological (?) problems after heavy DXM abuse in the last few weeks. Can't be all too easy on your body.
thadocta13
Bluelighter
With that much use of cough syrup I'd be more worried about my liver and kidneys than Olney's lesions. I hope you've made the switch to USP grade DXM HBr. Also while it may not cause specifically Olneys lesions you can't rule out that it isn't harming your brain in other ways. I have used DXM at high doses for well over 6 years now (I am also 20 y.o.) and i can definitely admit that it can be harmful in the psychological sense. I have had 2 hospitalizations in the last year due to psychosis brought on by DXM alone. And I was not attempting plateau sigma also. Just be safe. You only get one brain.
First of all, one example contrary to the medical literature is not even close to enough to "disprove" a hypothesis. Secondly, you can't disprove anything other than by demonstrating its impossibility do to a contradiction.
Empirical evidence of someone using DXM and not getting Olneys lesions does not disprove the hypothesis, its just an example contrary evidence. As stated before the only way to conclusively disprove something is to find a contradiction whereby the theory can't possibly be consistent with facts. E.g. if someone said nuclear fission is impossible you can disprove them because fission reactors do indeed exist, and therefor the claim is directly contradicted. On the other hand, you couldn't disprove their claim by saying that nobody has proven nuclear fission to be impossible because their is no way to actually directly verify or disprove such a counterfactual claim.
No matter how many examples you put forth of exceptions to a theory, you can't "disprove" it because of the problem of induction. Your convoluted logic is equivalent to saying that because nobody has created a cure for the flu that doing so is impossible.
Empirical evidence of someone using DXM and not getting Olneys lesions does not disprove the hypothesis, its just an example contrary evidence. As stated before the only way to conclusively disprove something is to find a contradiction whereby the theory can't possibly be consistent with facts. E.g. if someone said nuclear fission is impossible you can disprove them because fission reactors do indeed exist, and therefor the claim is directly contradicted. On the other hand, you couldn't disprove their claim by saying that nobody has proven nuclear fission to be impossible because their is no way to actually directly verify or disprove such a counterfactual claim.
No matter how many examples you put forth of exceptions to a theory, you can't "disprove" it because of the problem of induction. Your convoluted logic is equivalent to saying that because nobody has created a cure for the flu that doing so is impossible.
Last edited:
EarthBounded
Bluelighter
This does not belong in advanced discussion, there are no facts here it is all speculation. I'm sure you know absolutely nothing about the molecular structure or binding sites. Just because the crackhead down my block has been smoking fat rock for 20 years and can still hold a day job doesn't mean it didn't kill the girl who lived above me after one year.