• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ
  • PD Moderators: Esperighanto | JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

lets help the government

I'd say send them a collection of testimonials from people who have benefitted from the psychedelic experience (hey, two Nobel lauriates whove in part acknowledged that the psychedelic experience contributed to their work in a significant way isn't what you'd call bad press!).

Just in case though, I'd soak some of the testimonials in a solution of LSD in DMSO!
 
i like the post about good testimonials. if we can grow enough balls to bombard the media newsrooms with incredible experiences and get one or two of them aired you know how the snowball effect works. (maybe im a little too hopefull here)

i also agree with S_S here. ive had that thought about the large doses compared to trace ammounts being a hard argument. it was more to lean it twards the side that it is not harmful to your brain if its found in your brain, because alot of their arguments are that it (the drug) causes brain damage. but definatly use a spiritual religous freedom argument if you can throw that in there without making them think your nuts (which is the problem when were talking with these people here, who are probably more insaine than half the people on this board)


good discussion keep it up people.

can anyone give me a list of key officials or tell me where to find names of people involved in anything funded by the government involving drugs?
 
Personally I feel no need to try to legitimise one class of drugs over another. Other drug catergories tend to do far more harm & if your aim is truly altruistic you'd concentrate on those classes of drugs. Also why bring DMT to the attention of some potential naziesque bastard who will send the local police to tear your house apart.

We like the shit (DMT) - they'll simply see it as a menace that ought to be eradicated.


All drugs ought to be legitimised IMO!
 
can anyone give me a list of key officials or tell me where to find names of people involved in anything funded by the government involving drugs?
Click to expand...

The DEA perhaps? ;)

I think it's that drugs are a danger to our children and that the idea of people enjoying themselves in ways they don't approve of is wrong.
Click to expand...

Well yes, but what I meant was don't they have a little voice inside themselves saying: 'You know this is bullshit; you know there is research into the beneficial effects of these substances; you know how much harm is being done by the Drug War'.

They must be doped to the eyeballs or something to endure that kind of nagging. I could never be a politician (or at least the kind of politician we have today ;)).
 
All drugs ought to be legitimised IMO!
Click to expand...

I used to think this way; but the toxicity of some substances like methamphetamine changed my mind. At the very least, in my utopia they'd be more regulated then the other substances you could buy at 'Mr Blonde's Psychotropic Emporium!'
 
you know on television those programs that allways talk about differend things with some research, and interesting conclusions

i beleive we can get them to research pschydelics and how they may help ppl

i would be suprised if they find that a bad subject
 
Many variables could be at play here.....;)
Click to expand...

you conveniently ignored the other points i made as well as ismene's post. psychedelics being illegal, asbolutely, without question prevents some people from using them.


It never ceases to amaze me how our society absolutely NEEDS science to prove something is of worth or even real. Why are these people the ones that matter? I understand what you are saying, that the illegality of these drugs makes research hard- but its not impossible, thats why there is research on these substances. As I said, I don't believe many in the scientific community care about psychedelics drugs all that much. Whats the profit in marketing a substance like MDMA which could potentially cure PTSD when more money can be made with the ongoing prescription of addictive benzo's and the like?
Click to expand...

i think you're wrong. i work at a large research university and this may come as a shock to you, but there are people here who are actually interested in doing research for the sake of learning and not solely for making money. in fact there are people here who could be making a lot more money if they had chosen a different job.
Reality sucks but its true. Even Sandoz knew at the moment that LSD was discovered that there was no economic value in LSD, and gave it away for free, for reasearch. I wish things were not like that, but they are.
Click to expand...

no ecomonic value? what are you talking about? an LSD trip can last 12 hours. a licensed professional administering the drug to a patient in a psychotherapuetic setting could charge anywhere from 60-100 dollars an hour for that type of thing. and then you have the potential for multiple sessions. if you knew anything about LSD psychotherapy when it was actually tried, you would know that one dose of LSD does not magically solve all of the patients problems. oh no, there were people who returned for as many as 50-60 sessions and still weren't cured.
 
I'm not so sure that this would really accomplish anything besides drawing more attention to psychedelic drugs by the authorities. Theres no way that political people would stand up for legalization for recreational use because it's far too controversial and could possibly hurt their image because of the view that most people hold for psychedelics and all drugs. Legalization for theraputic or medical use is much more realistic however that still seems pretty far off (in the U.S. at least). It doesn't matter if it's against our rights or not, the image that LSD and psychs in the 60's gained is too tainted and the government would never risk another social outburst like that.

Yeah, life is unfair.
 
I quite liked Learys system of legalising drugs and then making people take a test and get a license before they could buy em. LSD would require you to pass a certain test, another drug another test.
 
burn out said:
you conveniently ignored the other points i made as well as ismene's post. psychedelics being illegal, asbolutely, without question prevents some people from using them.
Click to expand...

Well, how on earth am I meant to know why you can't obtain mescaline sulphate? Thats all I meant. Its called "joking". :\ Apparently something slightly beyond you at this stage :p

Also, I choser to respond to the bit in your post that seemed funny thats all. Mescaline sulphates availabilty has little to do with its legal status.

i think you're wrong. i work at a large research university and this may come as a shock to you, but there are people here who are actually interested in doing research for the sake of learning and not solely for making money. in fact there are people here who could be making a lot more money if they had chosen a different job.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know that not all people are obsessed with money and blah blah blah, but when it comes time to feed the family, I think most people are going to take the Easy Road. Why wouldn't you? Anyway you example of University attendeeds is irreleveant; of course they would want to research, thus the attendance at Uni ;)

no ecomonic value? what are you talking about? an LSD trip can last 12 hours. a licensed professional administering the drug to a patient in a psychotherapuetic setting could charge anywhere from 60-100 dollars an hour for that type of thing. and then you have the potential for multiple sessions. if you knew anything about LSD psychotherapy when it was actually tried, you would know that one dose of LSD does not magically solve all of the patients problems. oh no, there were people who returned for as many as 50-60 sessions and still weren't cured.
Click to expand...

Whats your point though- that psychedelics will just be exploited as many other medical treatments are (think SSRI's?)- thats not good. Why would you want to legalise a drug so that you have to pay 1200 dollars to ingest it...thats madness and it would never happen. Seriously. If thats what legalising these things will do, fuck that shit.

Burn out- a hint or tip- dont take things personally- you are not all that fond of drugs as is evident by your posting- but try not to let that skew your perspective.
 
i dont think legalizing would raise their prices more than they already are, if anything it would lower them...

ismene's post on leary's idea was cool i like that idea...

i agree on the legalization of all drugs (you cant fight a war on an inanimate object), but i think arguing for psychs would be better than trying to argue all drugs (which can be alot more dificult, and plus why would you want to have to compare psychs with drugs like meth or heroin or crack...and believe me when you argue for all drugs to be legalized they bring up the hardest issues)
im trying to be as realistic as posible here with this.

we hardly have anything on our (civilian) side other than voting, which is pretty much bullshit, and communicating with elected officials, which i think is our best chance even though that is extremly shitty too. we cant complain unless were doing all we can, so in an atempt to sanctify our complaints im going to do all we can, which right now isnt much, and will produce little progress at best, i know.

has anyone writen any letters or done some reaserch are we all still arguing over shit thats irrelevant to the op?
 
Yes, I know that not all people are obsessed with money and blah blah blah, but when it comes time to feed the family, I think most people are going to take the Easy Road. Why wouldn't you? Anyway you example of University attendeeds is irreleveant; of course they would want to research, thus the attendance at Uni ;)
Click to expand...

you seem to be getting off track. as i understand it, you claimed scientists aren't interested in studying psychedelics because other areas are more profitable. i'm telling you that from working with scientists who do research, some of them actually have interests in their research besides simply making as much money as possible. therefore i don't agree with the idea that scientists wouldn't be interested in studying psychedelics because it wouldn't make them as much money as studying other things.

Whats your point though- that psychedelics will just be exploited as many other medical treatments are (think SSRI's?)- thats not good. Why would you want to legalise a drug so that you have to pay 1200 dollars to ingest it...thats madness and it would never happen. Seriously. If thats what legalising these things will do, fuck that shit.
Click to expand...

no, my point was that i don't agree with your claim that there is no way to make money with LSD. that is all.

Burn out- a hint or tip- dont take things personally- you are not all that fond of drugs as is evident by your posting- but try not to let that skew your perspective.
Click to expand...

are you forgetting i'm the one arguing in favor of legalization here?
 
B9 said:
^ I didn't suggest an uncontrolled free for all.
Click to expand...
A controlled free-for-all would be a good compromise.

Oh wait--that's what we have now. Silly Alfred!
 
like a previous poster said, we need the media, and politicians to be aware of how psychedelics have helped people. if there was more and more positive press about people being helped by these drugs, people would have to take a second look at what is going on.

i am a firm believer that LSD and mushrooms can be used to help people. I am living proof, i suffered from a pretty good case of social anxiety and then i began to use psychedelics to analyze my self and the situation. i learned though multiple trips and one bad trip that the anxiety wasn't real and i shouldn't be afraid anymore. the bad trip was the real healer tho. although i am not completely cured yet, i have come very far

i believe that with the help of a consoler, many psychological problems can be healed with psychedelics
 
I think you guys are forgetting one very important thing here. These politicians job (even if some of them don't do it very well) is to represent the views of the majority of their constituents, and for the most part, they are in this case. Most people have the same view, its not just the politicians. If you talk to people about drugs probably 80% of them have a very negative view of drugs in general. So if we want to change the standpoints of the politicians, the first thing we have to do is change the standpoints of the constituents... You need to increase awareness in your community and in the people you are around, just discuss it with them occasionally. Try to explain the benefits of it and that many of the things they have heard about it is simply not true. Only after we change the minds of the people can we change the minds of the people governing the people!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top